Cropping the Big Picture: Determining What the New Meta-Analysis Means for your Mentoring Program

Cropping the Big Picture Determining What the New Meta-Analysis Means for Your

Mentoring Program

Collaboration of Education Northwest/National Mentoring Center, Friends for Youth, Mentoring Partnership of Minnesota, and Oregon Mentors

January 2012

2

Research Practice Innovation

Sarah Kremer

Program Director

Friends for Youth’s Mentoring Institute

April Riordan

Director of Training & Partnerships

Mentoring Partnership of Minnesota

Celeste Janssen

Program Director

Oregon Mentors

Michael Garringer

Resource Advisor & Forums Administrator

Education Northwest

2012 Collaborative Mentoring Webinar Series

Date: Third Thursday of every month.

Time: 10-11:15am Pacific/11am-12:15pm Mountain/12-1:15 pm Central/1-2:15pm Eastern

Cost: Free

3

Participate in Today’s Webinar

• All attendees muted for best sound

• Type questions and comments in the question box

• “Raise your hand” to ask question live during webinar

4

Good to Know…

All attendees will receive an email after the webinar that will include: Link to presentation slides Link to an online recording of webinar Resources Contact information

Please help us by taking the time to complete a short 5-question survey as you exit the webinar.

5

Panelists

David DuBois, PhD Tom Keller, PhD

6

What We Learned in 2002 Average youth in a

program experience only a “modest or small benefit”

Effects are “enhanced significantly” when more best-practices are utilized

American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 30, No. 2, April 2002

7

What Do We Know Now?

Psychological Science in the Public Interest,12, 57-91

8

When and How Are Mentoring

Relationships for Youth Beneficial?

9

What Factors Influence Mentoring Program Effectiveness?

10

Good NewsMentoring works in many areas

Programs often have positive impacts in two or more outcome domains

Effect of mentoring is right in line with other youth interventions

Mentoring works at both preventing declines in youth outcomes and promoting improvements

Mentoring is a broad and flexible strategy

No evidence of improved effectiveness over prior generation of programs

Too few studies to evaluate impacts on several key outcomes (e.g., school drop-out, juvenile offending)

Same largely true for longer-term, “follow-up” effects

Targeting “at risk” youth (exception: populations high on both individual and environmental risk)

Matching youth and mentors based on similarity of interests

Utilizing mentors with educational/occupational backgrounds that are a good fit with program goals

Supporting mentors in adopting teaching and advocacy roles

Bad News New News

11

Next Webinar

February 16 - Tips for Mentoring High-Risk Youth

Featuring Dr. Roger Jarjoura, Assistant Professor in the School of Public and Environmental Affairs - IUPUI.  Dr. Jarjoura is the founder of AIM, a mentoring program for incarcerated youth making the transition from corrections to community.

12

Before we go…

All attendees will receive an email after the webinar that will include: Link to presentation slides Link to an online recording of

webinar Resources Contact information

Please help us by taking the time to complete a short 5-question survey as you exit the webinar.

Thank you! Collaboration of Education Northwest/National Mentoring Center, Friends for Youth, Mentoring Partnership of Minnesota, and Oregon Mentors

Michael Garringer, michael.garringer@educationnorthwest.orgCeleste Janssen, celeste@oregonmentors.org

Sarah Kremer, sarah@friendsforyouth.orgApril Riordan, april@mpmn.org

Comparison of Mean Post-Treatment Effect Sizes for Mentoring Programs in the CurrentMeta-Analysis to Effect Sizes Reported in Other Meta-Analyses of School- andCommunity-Based Interventions for Children and Adolescents

Type of outcome Current

Other meta-analyses

Attitudinal/Motivational 0.19 0.23r, 0.25b

Social/Relational 0.17 0.15a, 0.17i, 0.24r, 0.29b, 0.39g

Psychological/Emotional 0.15 0.10a, 0.17p, 0.19d, 0.24r, 0.37b

Conduct problems 0.21 0.02j, 0.07k, 0.14h, 0.15s, 0.21a, 0.21e, 0.22r, 0.30b, 0.30c, 0.41l

Academic/School 0.21 0.11a, 0.23n, 0.27r

School attendance 0.19 0.14b

Grades 0.24 0.22b

Achievement test scores 0.18 0.11a, 0.20b, 0.24f, 0.30c

Physical health 0.06 0.08m, 0.17t, 0.29q, 0.41o

15

Evidence-based Practice

16

Effect Size Guidelines