Mentorship: A Critical Role in a Young Person's Life
Mentorship has always played a substantial role in my life. My parents mentored me first and foremost; my pastor and Sunday school teachers or youth leaders mentored me; my teachers and even my camp counselors mentored me. After high school, I would say that even my peers mentored me in ways an authority figure may never have been able to. But what, perhaps, played the greatest mentorship role in my life was my experience as a camp counselor at a Christian camp. The directors met with us regularly-taught me, guided me, challenged me, and even corrected me. I am who I am today because of those four summers.
Did you have mentors in your young adult life? Who were they? How close to you were they? Are you still close with them? In what ways did they mentor you? Was it a positive experience? Why do you value them?
Take a minute to ponder these questions. Maybe even send a text or make a call to that mentor figure! Feel free to send in a comment as well! I'd love to hear from you.
For my graduate class on research, I essentially had to choose a potential topic that I would (theoretically) legitimately present as a proposal for either my capstone paper (if my graduate program had required it) or if I were to pursue my doctorate. Below you will find my literature review and all the findings assembled into a proposal presentation. Hope you enjoy!
Literature Review: The Effects of a Student-Mentorship Program
Everyone is an unofficial mentor. People are always watching one another, learning and often imitating. While it is better to “learn from other peoples’ mistakes” as the saying goes, the danger of imitating “bad” behavior is always present with unofficial mentorship. Mentors were established in the Ancient World with specific purposes—to positively impact the younger generation and prepare them for adulthood (Irby et. al., 2020). Sometimes this mentorship manifested itself as a scholarly tutor, a religious guide, or an overseer of an apprentice in a specific trade. As an emphasis on the family unit and responsibility of the parents to mentor their children has diminished, school systems now offer more than academic learning (Nokali et. al., 2010). Many middle and high schools now have guidance counselors, college-preparatory advisors, and work-scholarship programs, to name a few. The research on mentorship programs, however, seems to be more focused on college students. If the original purposes of mentors were to impact the younger generation positively and prepare them for adulthood, why is it that more middle and high schools do not implement mentorship programs? Or if middle and high schools do have mentorship programs, how many of them focus on making a positive impact and preparing the students for life? Original mentorship involved an older individual mentoring a younger individual. Today’s youth do not respect authority like they once did. Instead, they look to their peers primarily for guidance and advice about life. So how can educators who know this (since research exists to support the assertion that young people seek their peer’s attention and advice more than adults) design a mentorship program that still meets the original criteria while accommodating the modern participants? It almost seems as though two mentorship programs need to simultaneously exist. Older individuals need to first mentor younger individuals; then they will be equipped to be successful peer mentors.
Key Terms
Mentor
Traditionally, a mentor meant somebody with age and life experience. It was somebody capable of teaching a younger person what to do in certain situations or how to prevent certain situations from happening. Today, the literature uses the term mentor to simply mean anyone who helps another person. Usually the mentor in the research studies has previously experienced what it is they are helping with, but not always.
Mentorship
Mentorship seems to refer to the action of mentoring (or helping) somebody, which according to the literature is something that a person can be trained to do. For instance, the study by Martinez (2017) explains that mentors helped high school students apply for the SAT, ACT, and even college. It is highly unlikely that each of those mentors completed those applications themselves when they were in high school. Most likely, a parent or teacher (or perhaps even another mentor from the same program) completed the applications for them, or at least helped them. So part of the mentor’s training is how to find, gain access, and guide a student through these application processes. The literature asserts that anyone is capable of being a mentor either by sharing in previous experiences or at least learning how to help someone else.
Program
The term “program” refers to an intentional structure in which people can participate as official mentors and practice mentorship. It is true that anyone can be a mentor simply by watching, listening, and helping. Friends, family members, and other authority members are natural examples of mentors. The literature, however, examines how structure can intentionally help others. The program’s structure varies from one school to another dependent on the goal of the school. The literature suggests that mentorship programs are viewed as utility, a means to achieve something intentional. Thus, if a specific desire exists, an intentional plan aids in accomplishing the goal.
Success
This term could be defined in many different ways. An individual who achieves success generally means that they have accomplished something or met a goal, whether personal or standardized. If an original view of mentorship was to positively impact and prepare a young person for adulthood (Irby et. al., 2020), then the measure of success would be how well he or she functioned in society as an adult. The literature, however, does not seem to support anything regarding social success. The literature focuses on academic success. In many cases, the best way to measure academic success is through quantitative research; but even the qualitative research studies that account for how the social interaction with a mentor positively affected an individual conclude that the individual achieved academic success thanks to the interactions with a mentor. Academic success defined by the literature is an increase in test scores, GPA, graduation rates, retention rates, and college-going rates.
Themes
Differences in Age-Range
Although it may seem obvious that a mentorship program consists of two people groups (the mentors and the mentees), it is not so obvious to determine the most appropriate age-range of either group. Mentorship deals directly with humanity and the development of a person. Theorists like Piaget, Erikson and Vygotsky explain how people develop at several stages over of their lives (Reed, 2017). So which stage should education be primarily concerned with mentoring? Most of the literature focuses on mentoring adolescents and young adults, which supports the original purpose and goal of mentoring—to positively impact and prepare a young person for adulthood (Irby et. al., 2020). The age-range that seems to be at conflict is the role of the mentor. Is it always best to support the traditional approach, or are there scenarios in which a different approach is more effective? The literature shows three age-ranges for mentor possibilities and evaluates the effectiveness of each.
Faculty-Student Mentorship
Continuing from the foundation that original mentors were older individuals helping younger individuals prepare for adult life, it only seems natural to discuss faculty-student mentorship programs first. A few defining qualities of a successful adult are the ability to problem-solve, self-awareness of personal flaws or weaknesses, and self-efficacy for personal strengths and capabilities. Even at a young age, it is important to begin developing personal awareness in preparation for adulthood. One study in particular focused on promoting self-efficacy (Mark & Wells, 2019, p. 226). Teachers noticed middle school students struggling with the confidence to complete assignments rather than the lack of intelligence to succeed on the assignments. This study analyzed an after-school mentorship program specifically designed to reassure students’ capabilities in order to increase self-efficacy. Although the quantitative data did not show any increase in the scores (proving the students were not lacking in intelligence) the qualitative data showed the “largest increase in self-efficacy beliefs according to the CHS” (Mark & Wells, 2019, p. 227). If the majority of the class are struggling with self-efficacy, it is almost impossible for a peer-mentorship program to benefit the students. The literature supports the need for faculty mentors to help students increase self-efficacy. Even at the collegiate level, faculty-student mentorship can be more beneficial than peer mentorship, especially in situations with exceptional learners. Students with disabilities require additional assistance. And in many cases, the mentor cannot be the original type of mentor who shares personal experiences. When dealing with disabilities, the mentors almost always have to be trained how to best help the individual (Markle et. al., 2017, p. 388). The study by Markle (2017) is even careful to mention that one structured program cannot best help individuals with disabilities since each student with a specific type of disability faces unique challenges. While literature supports the effectiveness of faculty-student mentorship, recent research is slim.
Peer-peer Mentorship
Only two studies explicitly described a peer-peer mentorship program in which both mentor and mentee are within the same age-range. It is extremely difficult and therefore rare to find any literature on peer-peer mentorship in which both mentor and mentee are in the same exact age or grade level. Therefore, according to the majority of the literature, peer-peer mentorship usually refers to a junior or senior mentor and a freshman mentee (either can refer to high school or college but as a pair). (Clark et. al., 2016, p. 52-53; Asgari, 2016, p. 131).
Near-Peer Mentorship
College is a formative time for most individuals to experience being an adult for the first time and reflect on their own decisions as a middle or high school student. The literature supports that “the roles and perspective of college student mentors” impact high school students in a way that older generations cannot achieve as easily or equally (Martinez et. al., 2017, p. 2, 9). That fresh experience provides more dialogue in which mentors can share their personal experiences from just a few years ago. High school students reported that if the college student had not first approached them, they “wouldn’t have known that [they] needed to do this” (Martinez et. al., 2017, p. 15). Even though these mentors were not considered old like the traditional view of a mentor, they had experienced more of life still than the mentees and were thus able to share their shared experiences. Another example of effective near-peer mentorship is the ability to better explain concepts. It is common knowledge that advanced professors tend to speak at a higher level most freshmen struggle to decipher, much less comprehend. A near-peer mentorship program in which mentors consist of teaching assistants or facilitators, who are usually graduate students, can often better help students. In one particular study, an assistant or facilitator was “available for each first year engineering course, giving students access to immediate help and feedback” (Kuley et. al., 2016, p. 4-5). Help at such close proximity in age and experience proves successful for first year college students in a way that the professors often struggle with. Yes, the professors are the experts and deserve their position; however, the further removed they are from being the student themselves thus inhibits their ability to more effectively break down the material. A qualitative study by Dunn & Moore (2020) for the Journal of Leadership Education further validates the effectiveness of near-peer mentorship programs. It describes second-year undergraduate students who served as mentors to first-year students. This closeness is even more-so than the course facilitator to freshman student age-range. According to Fink’s (2003) theory of integrated learning, individuals learn “beyond the scope of Bloom’s taxonomy” by relating to one another’s life experiences and integrating them with their own (Dunn & Moore, 2020, p. 66). Sometimes, college prepares students for the content they will need for their occupation better than an understanding of the work environment. Near-peer mentorships between undergraduate students and employers in an “apprenticeship” style have proven highly effective to “closing the gap of unqualified workers” (Sams et. al., 2016, p. 2). The literature proves that near-peer mentorship is highly effective and the preferred method of modern mentorship programs.
Program & Research Purpose
Most of the research analyzed focuses on the student’s academic success in some capacity. It appears that most mentorship programs exist solely to assist students’ academic success. This purpose has certainly deviated from the original intent of mentorship. The literature supports this claim since some track the increase of their GPA over the course of at least a year (Clark et. al., 2016, p. 60; Collier. 2017, p. 10), while others only track an increase in test scores during a designated period of time within a school year (Mark et.al., 2019, p. 227; Asagi & Carter, 2016, p. 133). Some studies may have focused more on the increase in graduation rates (Markle et. al., 2017, p. 386; Clark et. al., 2016 p. 56, 60; Kuley et. al., 2016, p. 5) or college applications (Martinez et. al., 2017, p. 12-13) due to mentorship programs, but those two categories still address academic success.
Some of the qualitative studies did address mentor and mentee perceptions as well as satisfaction with the program (Martinez et. al., 2017, p. 14-15; Dunn & Moore, 2020, p. 69-71; Tenenbaum et. al., 2017, p. 8) or an increase in self-efficacy that then resulted in a higher academic success rate (Asagi & Carter, 2016, p. 134; Collier, 2017, p. 15; Sams et. al., 2016, p. 6-7; Tenenbaum et. al., 2017, p. 8). Even with special attention given to how the mentor-mentee relationships are formed and fostered, the focus of all the research was still on the academic success achieved due to participation in the program. Since qualitative studies focus more on human experience, it was a little surprising that more studies did not exist that focused on how a mentor simply improved a person’s character. All research studies, whether quantitative or qualitative or even mixed-methods, focus on documenting student’s academic success.
Further Research Suggestions
Every research study present in this literature review expressed a desire to conduct further research of the same study except in a broader scope. The literature seems to support the general concept that it is easier to first test a hypothesis in a smaller, more specific setting. One school at a time may be analyzed (Martinez et. al., 2017, p. 20-21; Markle et. al., 2017, p. 389; Clark et. al., 2016, p. 69; Dunn & Moore, 2020, p. 72-73; Tenenbaum et. al., 2017, p. 10) to accomplish testing a theory, or in many cases even one discipline at a university (Asgari & Carter, 2016, p. 134-135; Sams et. al., 2016, p. 9; Markle et. al., 2017, p. 389). Other common suggestions in mentorship literature are cross-referencing the data conducted in one research study with data from other existing studies or studies that have yet to be conducted. The most popular, and perhaps most effective, cross-reference would be longitudinal studies—testing if something found to be true in one specific scenario holds true over time (Sams et. al., 2016, p. 9; Martinez et. al., 2017, p. 20-21; Mark et. al., 2019, p. 230-231 ; Dunn & Moore, 2020, p. 72-73; Clark et. al., 2016, p. 69). Anytime something lasts, its credibility and desirability increases. So if more studies existed to prove the lasting effects, perhaps more schools would implement those programs or aspects of programs.
Conclusion
The literature clearly supports the assertion that mentorship leaves a positive impact on students and contributes to their academic success. Formal mentorship programs have such high success rates that all schools should be implementing some form of a program. While the literature supports success in faculty-student and peer-peer mentorship programs (and both have been proven to be the better choice in specific scenarios), the predominate mentorship method that most schools have chosen and that most research has been conducted about is the near-peer mentorship programs. There seems to be no research about mentorship on the elementary level; however, educators do offer tutoring and “buddy” systems at the elementary level. So perhaps research about mentorship needs to be conducted on the elementary level, or there is simply a discrepancy amongst researchers in the terminology across the age levels. The near-peer mentor fulfills the original qualifications of a mentor in that the mentor is older than the mentee in such a way that the mentor has enough life experience to best help the mentee. The literature is still extremely lacking in long-term effects and broader capacities such that researchers struggle to generalize findings. The literature also proves that mentorship in school settings focuses solely on academic success. The literature addresses that even within these structured mentorship programs, mentors can instigate relationships that develop into mentoring other areas of life; however, the literature does not show any schools that have a mentorship program concerned about helping students succeed in all areas of life. None of the research addresses how a mentorship program at a school impacts the overall student culture of the school. It would seem that if a large number of students were receiving intentional, structured mentorship, the exposure to correctly modeled mentoring would impact the mentees ability to then naturally mentor those he or she comes into contact with. This natural mentoring predicts a positive student culture in which students are willing to help one another. Several recommendations have been made to not only improve existing programs but to also improve the research of mentorship programs. The mixed-methods studies seemed to be the closest to determining a student’s academic success as well as personal response to mentorship; but even those studies did not address specifically how a mentor helped a mentee in areas other than their academics.
Reference List
Asgari, S., & Carter, F. Jr. (2016). Peer Mentors Can Improve Academic Performance: A Quasi-
Experimental Study of Peer Mentorship in Introductory Courses. Society for the Teaching of
Psychology, Teaching of Psychology Vol. 43(2).
Clark, N. C., Heilmann, S. G., Johnson, A., & Taylor, R. (2016). Impact of Formal Mentoring on Freshmen
Expectations, Graduation Rates, and GPAs. Leadership and Research in Education. The Journal of
the Ohio Council of Professors of Educational Administration (OCPEA), Vol. 3(1). Retrieved from
Collier, P. J. (2017). Why Peer Mentoring is an Effective Approach for Promoting College Student
Success. Metropolitan Universities: Student Peer Mentoring, Vol. 28(3). Retrieved from
Dunn, A. L., & Moore, L. L. (2020). Significant Learning of Peer-Mentors Within a Leadership Living-
Learning Community: A Basic Qualitative Study. Journal of Leadership Education. Retrieved from
Irby, Beverly J., Abdelrahman, Nahed., Lara-Alecio, Rafael., Allen, Tammy. (2020). The Wiley International
Handbook of Mentoring: Paradigms, Practices, Programs and Possibilities: “Epistemological
Beginnings of Mentorship” (Ch. 2). John Wiley & Sons Inc. Retrieved from
Kuley, E. A., Maw, S., & Fonstad, T. (2016). Understanding Barriers to Student Success: What Students
Have to Say. Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA16) Paper 027. Retrieved from
Mark, A. D., & Wells, S. (2019). Evaluation of an Afterschool Mentorship Program for Self-Efficacy.
Journal of Educational Research and Practice, Vol. 9(1), 224-233. Retrieved from
Markle, L., Wessel, R. D., & Desmond, J. (2017). Faculty Mentorship Program for Students with
Disabilities: Academic Success Outcomes (Practice Brief). Journal of Postsecondary Education and
Disability Vol. 30 (4), 383-390 385. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1172790.pdf
Martinez, M. A., Everman, D., & Haber-Curran, P. (2017). A College Outreach Mentorship Program for
High School Students: Considering College Student Mentors’ Roles and Perspectives.
Collaborations: A Journal of Community-based Research and Practice, Vol. 1(1), 8. Retrieved from:
Nokali, Nermeen E. El., Bachman, Heather J., & Votruba-Drzal, Elizabeth. (2010). Parent Involvement and
Children’s Academic and Social Development in Elementary School. Child Development Vol. 81(3).
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01447.x
Reed, M. (2017). Gathering Stones: The Problems of Modern Cultural and Activity Research.
International Scientific Journal: Cultural-Historical Psychology Vol. 13(1). Retrieved from
Sams, D., Richards, R., Lewis, R., McMullen, R., Hammack, J., Bacnik, L., & Powell, C. (2016). Empirical
Study: Mentorship as a Value Proposition (MVP). International Journal for the Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning: Vol. 10(2), Article 7. Retrieved from:
Tenenbaum, L. S., Anderson, M., Ramadorai, S.B., & Yourick, D. L. (2017). High School Students’
Experience with Near-Peer Mentorship and Laboratory-Based Learning: In Their Own Words.
Journal of STEM Education, Vol. 18(3). Retrieved from
Recent Posts
See AllI decided to share what writing expectations I use for my personal classroom along with some research behind each chosen writing...
Comments