1. Mentoring teenagers in an uncertain world Big Brothers Big Sisters International Jean Rhodes Professor University of Massachusetts, Boston, USA April 16, 2007

2. Overview Overview research and scholarship Recommendations for practice and research

3. Recent Scholarship Authored Books Stand By Me: The Risks and Rewards of Mentoring Today’s Youth (Rhodes, 2002) Other People’s Kids (Scales, 2003) Mentoring for Social Inclusion (Colley, 2003) Edited Volumes A Critical View of Youth Mentoring (Rhodes, 2002) Handbook of Youth Mentoring (DuBois & Karcher, 2005) Special Journal Issues American Journal of Community Psychology (2002), Journal of Primary Prevention (2005), Journal of Community Psychology (2006), Journal of Vocational Behavior (in progress) Comprehensive Reviews Hall, 2003; Hansen, 2007; Jekielek, 2002; Brady, 2007; Roberts et al., 2004; Buote, 2007;Liabo et al., 2005

4. Comprehensive Reviews Comprehensive reviews Moves readers beyond piecemeal Identifies gaps Programs vary on many dimensions Contain flawed studies Research different conclusions

5. So…. “Robust research does indicate benefits from mentoring for some young people, for some programmes, in some circumstances, in relation to some outcomes.” Roberts et al.,(2004) British Medical Journal

6. Program Evaluations Mentoring highly variable Sample sizes/significance Other problems Self-reports (homegrown) Absence of control or comparisons Single time point (or compressed) Communication gaps

7. Making (a little) a Difference “After 18 months, Little Brothers and Sisters were: 47% less likely to begin using illegal drugs 27% less likely to begin using alcohol 51% less likely to skip school 37% less likely to skip a class more confident of their performance in schoolwork one-third less likely to hit someone getting along better with their families” www.bbbsa.org

8. Evaluation of BBBSA Average pre-post and post-program difference effect size estimates were small (.02 and.05 respectively). Behavior“Net Impact” Control Mean Treatment Mean Skip class 51%1.39.68 Skip day 47%.90.47 Initiate Drug Use 45.8%11.47%6.2% Initiate Alcohol Use 27.4%26.72%19.39%

9. On second glance

10. Meta-analysis DuBois et al., 2002 55 program evaluations Effect sizes Small (.10-.23), med(.24-.36), large (.37 higher) Overall.14 Eby, in progress 40 youth mentoring, 53 adult, 23 college Youth:.03-.14 Academic:.11-.36 Workplace:.03-.19

12. Effect sizes increase with greater use of theory- and empirically-based practices -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 01234567891011 Number of Practices Size of Effect on Youth Outcomes Empirically- Based Practices Theory-Based Practices Small Effect Medium Effect

13. Stronger effects Youth with moderate environmental risk Mentors with skills for working with youth prior experience in helping roles or occupations sensitivity to socioeconomic & cultural influences sense of efficacy for mentoring young people

14. Stronger effects Relationships characterized by consistency closeness structure duration

15. The role of duration Grossman & Rhodes ( 2001). American Journal of Community Psychology

16. Length of Relationship

17. Stronger effects Programs characterized by ongoing training and monitoring Structured activities expectations for frequent contact parental involvement

19. Pathways of mentor influence (Regression coefficients from LISREL analysis) Child Development, (2000), 1662-1671 Quality of Parental relationship Skipping School Grades Self-worth School value Scholastic Competence.26.08 -.28.25.26.25.18.19.09.29.11.22 Mentoring

20. Pathways of mentor influence ( Regression coefficients from LISREL analysis ) Rhodes, Reddy, & Grossman (2004) Applied Development Science Quality of Parental relationship Substance Use Self-worth -.46.18.10.14.23 Mentoring Quality of Peer relationships -.04 -.08

21. Promising Developments Expansion of infastructure Attention to quality/duration Exemplary programs and models Growing interest among scholars/practitioners Attention to evaluation Several large-scale random assignment of mentoring are currently underway School-based evaluations (P/PV, Abt, Karcher) Youth ChalleNGe (MDRC) DeWit et al. (BBBSC), Friends of the Children, Experience Corps

22. Implications for Practice Improve mentor training and match support Improve mentor retention Promote measured replication and dissemination Reward sustainability and quality over growth Export mentoring into youth-serving settings

23. Implications for Research Conduct evaluations to test and compare practices Understand “added-value” of integration with other services Understand the role of gender, age, ethnicity, special needs, risk status Conduct cost-benefit analyses of various levels of service Leverage and extend ongoing evaluations Understand new types of programs (groups, school) And for whom they are best suited

24. Achieve a better alignment of research and practice Practice Research