II. Importance and Theory of Mentorship Programs for Disengaged Youth: Anecdotal reports of the beneficial outcomes of mentoring relationships for youth are verified by a continually growing body of research (Rhodes, 2005). Via ethnographic research Anderson describes the vital role of respected authority figures in urban communities as a “kind of guidance counselor and moral cheerleader” (Anderson, 2000). Mentoring programs for disengaged youth creates a caring and supportive relationship between a youth and a non-guardian adult (Rhodes et. al, 2006). The positive effects of mentoring are largely due to the support and role modeling that these relationships offer, but also the structure and system in which this mentorship program creates
…show more content…
Fostering resilience and self-determination: Resilience is an individual’s ability to adjust to change and stressful situations in flexible and healthy ways. Self-determination is one’s ability to think independently and take action on that thought. As many of the targeted youth in the PYD programs are a part of at-risk communities, resilience and self-determination are essential for their growth and development (Catalano et. al, 2004).
4. Fostering self-efficacy and belief in the future: Self-efficacy is defined as the perception that one is able to accomplish one’s goals via individual actions. One major tool to developing self-efficacy in youth is either realistic or ambitious goal setting, dependent on a case-by-case basis (Bandura, 2004). The creation of long term goal setting as well as a strong sense of self-efficacy in turn lends to an internalization of optimism about the youth’s future (Catalano et. al, …show more content…
Promotion of positive identity development
4. Evaluation of the program successes and failures
Dr. Rhodes highlights how there is a lack of research performed on how mentorship programs directly influence youth in different ways then other programs and set social and educational organizations (Rhodes et. al, 2006). Nonetheless, her research proves that the most beneficial mentorship programs utilize the four steps written above (Rhodes et. al, 2006). In practice, there are four traditional structures of mentorship programs: one-to-one mentoring pair, group mentoring, team mentoring, and peer mentoring. The traditional one-to-one mentoring involves one older mentor matched with one youth meeting regularly for a minimum of a year (Mentor, 2016). Group mentoring involves one older mentor joining a group of up to four youths and the mentor generally initiates group-based activities (Mentor, 2016). Team mentoring is when several older mentors work with several younger youth mentees (Mentor, 2016). Peer mentoring happens when someone mentors another person of similar age and community; often peer mentoring is school-based (Mentor, 2016). Another relatively new type of mentoring is e-mentoring (online mentoring) (Mentor,
Fostering resilience and self-determination: Resilience is an individual’s ability to adjust to change and stressful situations in flexible and healthy ways. Self-determination is one’s ability to think independently and take action on that thought. As many of the targeted youth in the PYD programs are a part of at-risk communities, resilience and self-determination are essential for their growth and development (Catalano et. al, 2004).
4. Fostering self-efficacy and belief in the future: Self-efficacy is defined as the perception that one is able to accomplish one’s goals via individual actions. One major tool to developing self-efficacy in youth is either realistic or ambitious goal setting, dependent on a case-by-case basis (Bandura, 2004). The creation of long term goal setting as well as a strong sense of self-efficacy in turn lends to an internalization of optimism about the youth’s future (Catalano et. al, …show more content…
Promotion of positive identity development
4. Evaluation of the program successes and failures
Dr. Rhodes highlights how there is a lack of research performed on how mentorship programs directly influence youth in different ways then other programs and set social and educational organizations (Rhodes et. al, 2006). Nonetheless, her research proves that the most beneficial mentorship programs utilize the four steps written above (Rhodes et. al, 2006). In practice, there are four traditional structures of mentorship programs: one-to-one mentoring pair, group mentoring, team mentoring, and peer mentoring. The traditional one-to-one mentoring involves one older mentor matched with one youth meeting regularly for a minimum of a year (Mentor, 2016). Group mentoring involves one older mentor joining a group of up to four youths and the mentor generally initiates group-based activities (Mentor, 2016). Team mentoring is when several older mentors work with several younger youth mentees (Mentor, 2016). Peer mentoring happens when someone mentors another person of similar age and community; often peer mentoring is school-based (Mentor, 2016). Another relatively new type of mentoring is e-mentoring (online mentoring) (Mentor,