Improving Mentoring in Higher Education PDF

Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 2020-04-06 Improving Mentoring in Higher Education Camey Lei Andersen Brigham Young University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Educational Psychology Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Andersen, Camey Lei, "Improving Mentoring in Higher Education" (2020). Theses and Dissertations. 8288. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/8288 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Improving Mentoring in Higher Education Camey Lei Andersen A dissertation submitted to the faculty of Brigham Young University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Dr. Richard E. West, Chair Dr. Charles R. Graham Dr. Heather M. Leary Dr. Eva M. Witesman Department of Instructional Psychology and Technology Brigham Young University Copyright © 2020 Camey Lei Andersen All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Improving Mentoring in Higher Education Camey Lei Andersen Department of Instructional Psychology and Technology, BYU Doctor of Philosophy As universities and institutions of higher education seek to improve retention, persistence, well-being, and overall college experience satisfaction for their students, there is an increased emphasis on mentoring in higher education. Improving mentoring in higher education—the specific tools, training, and practices that develop effective mentors—remains an often-elusive goal for college administrators and university mentoring programs and in research. This research examined available research on effective mentoring and provided recommendations for how to create successful mentors and mentoring programs in higher education. This dissertation is a three-article format presentation of information about mentoring in higher education. The first article is a literature review of mentoring and higher education literature analyzing what makes an effective mentor and implications for practice. The review of 34 articles examined themes of impact of mentoring, role of mentor, and mentoring programs, as well as implications for practice for each theme. The review showed that more research is needed on mentoring and higher education, mentor training, and the perspective of mentors. The second article investigated mentoring in online learning environments. The survey research study analyzed responses from 143 online mentors from around the world in a global higher education initiative. Four mentoring domains were used for analysis. Online mentors reported they were most effective at providing emotional and psychological support for students. Study results showed mentor support for individual students outside the virtual classroom, strategies for student goal setting, characteristics of online role modeling, and mentor confidence in technology skills. The study also contributed findings to the literature about online mentoring benefits for nontraditional students, technology challenges, and online mentoring role adoption. The third article examined ongoing mentoring training. The qualitative study analyzed interview responses from 20 international in-person mentors in a global higher education initiative to discover how ongoing training affects mentors’ abilities to assist higher education students in achieving their educational goals. Study results showed the benefits from ongoing mentoring training, the importance of volunteer mentoring needs in ongoing mentoring training, and the effects of mentoring training creativity. The study also showed that ongoing training positively impacts mentors, volunteers may need more training, and that ongoing training advanced effective mentoring practices. Successful mentoring can make a meaningful difference in students’ lives. This research showed the impact of mentoring and its potential benefits in in-person and online learning environments. This research also showed the significance of effective mentoring programs and ongoing mentor training in mentoring. Keywords: higher education, mentor, mentoring, online education, training, volunteer ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The six years of my doctoral journey have felt like, in the words of President Russell M. Nelson (2016), “God [has enabled me] to accomplish the impossible.” I could not have accomplished this goal without tremendous Heavenly help, and without the support from my family and academic colleagues. I am thankful for all those whose encouragement has helped me reach this meaningful achievement in my life. I will always be grateful for the incredible support of my family through my PhD experience. I am particularly grateful for the support of my parents, Kathy and Neil Andersen, and my sister, Kristen Andersen Ebert, who have provided constant encouragement and the help I needed as I commuted more than an hour back and forth to Provo for classes for many years. My parents were the first to encourage me to return to school for a PhD and they have always helped me feel confident in myself and reminded me that I could be successful in achieving my goals, especially in very challenging times. I am thankful that my children, Clayton, Christian, Caroline, and Claire, have been so supportive of my returning to school for a PhD. We often did homework together through the years and I am so grateful for their sacrifice and encouragement as I worked towards my degree. I hope they will always remember how much I value learning and education. Having researched mentoring in this dissertation, I am particularly grateful for the excellent mentors I have had in the Brigham Young University Instructional Psychology and Technology doctoral program. Dr. Richard West, my dissertation chair, has been a wonderful mentor since my first doctoral class and I appreciate all of his help and guidance through my program and in writing my dissertation. I am grateful to my dissertation committee, Dr. West, Dr. Charles Graham, Dr. Heather Leary, and Dr. Eva Witesman, for their instructive mentoring through my program and for their invaluable assistance with my dissertation. I also appreciate other academic mentors I have had who, as the mentoring literature describes, have made such a difference in my doctoral program and have positively impacted my life, including Dr. Russell Osguthorpe, who introduced me to the program, Dr. Andrew Gibbons, Dr. Graham, and Dr. David Williams. I also express my appreciation to my academic colleagues, Bohdana Allman, Carolyn Andrews, and Dr. DeLaina Tonks, for their helpful contribution to this dissertation review. I am grateful to BYU-Pathway Worldwide for providing me with the opportunity to study mentoring with their organization. I have been inspired by their mission to help students succeed and by their volunteers who make such a difference in the lives of students through mentoring. A final expression of gratitude is to my grandparents, Martha and Bernard Williams, who were both always so supportive of my educational pursuits. When I was growing up in Florida, my grandfather would often say to me, “Camey, you are going to get a PhD.” I am thankful for his and my grandmother’s faith in me, that continues to motivate me to reach my highest potential. To quote a favorite BYU Devotional address by Dr. Witesman (2017), a PhD was “a future only God could see for me.” I am thankful for the many people whose support has made it possible for me to achieve the goal of a doctorate degree in Instructional Psychology and Technology at Brigham Young University. v TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE................................................................................................................................... i ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................................... iii TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................ v LIST OF TABLES......................................................................................................................... xi Article 1 Tables.................................................................................................................. xi Article 2 Tables.................................................................................................................. xi Article 3 Tables.................................................................................................................. xi DESCRIPTION OF RESEARCH AGENDA AND STRUCTURE OF DISSERTATION......... xii ARTICLE 1: Improving Mentoring in Higher Education in the Age of Online Learning............. 1 Abstract........................................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 3 What is Mentoring in Higher Education?........................................................................... 3 Theoretical Approaches...................................................................................................... 5 Developing Effective Mentors............................................................................................ 8 The Challenges of Mentoring............................................................................................. 9 Research Question............................................................................................................ 12 Methods......................................................................................................................................... 12 Search Strategy................................................................................................................. 12 Study Screening and Data Extraction............................................................................... 13 Study Selection................................................................................................................. 13 Abstract Analysis.......................................................................................................................... 15 vi Impact of Mentoring..................................................................................................................... 16 Student Retention.............................................................................................................. 16 Student Persistence........................................................................................................... 17 Long-Term Benefits of Mentoring.................................................................................... 18 Implications for Practice................................................................................................... 19 Role of Mentor.............................................................................................................................. 20 Student Interaction............................................................................................................ 20 Student Support................................................................................................................. 21 Role Models...................................................................................................................... 22 Implications for Practice................................................................................................... 23 Mentoring Programs..................................................................................................................... 24 Types of Mentoring Programs.......................................................................................... 25 Platforms for Mentoring................................................................................................... 27 Mentoring Training........................................................................................................... 29 Implications for Practice................................................................................................... 30 Implications for Future Research...................................................................................... 31 Conclusion.................................................................................................................................... 32 References..................................................................................................................................... 34 ARTICLE 2: “We Overwhelm Them with Hope": How Online Mentors Can Support Online Learners........................................................................................ 43 Abstract......................................................................................................................................... 44 Introduction................................................................................................................................... 45 Benefits of Online Mentoring........................................................................................... 47 vii Challenges of Online Mentoring....................................................................................... 48 Lessons Learned from Research....................................................................................... 50 Implications for Current Research and Research Questions............................................. 52 Methods......................................................................................................................................... 53 Research Context and Study Design................................................................................. 53 Participants........................................................................................................................ 55 Data Collection................................................................................................................. 56 Data Analysis.................................................................................................................... 57 Trustworthiness................................................................................................................. 57 Limitations........................................................................................................................ 58 Results........................................................................................................................................... 59 Support for Individual Students Outside the Virtual Classroom...................................... 60 Strategies for Student Goal Setting................................................................................... 63 Characteristics of Online Role Modeling......................................................................... 65 Confidence in Technology Skills...................................................................................... 67 Discussion..................................................................................................................................... 69 Comparison and Interpretation of Findings...................................................................... 69 Creating student connection.................................................................................. 70 Personalizing goal setting for the online student.................................................. 71 Differentiating online role modeling.................................................................... 73 Overcoming technology challenges...................................................................... 74 Contributions of Findings to Literature............................................................................ 75 Online mentoring benefits for the nontraditional student..................................... 75 viii Technology challenges influence mentoring challenges...................................... 76 Online mentoring role adoption............................................................................ 77 Implications for Future Research...................................................................................... 78 Implications for Practitioners............................................................................................ 78 Conclusion.................................................................................................................................... 79 References..................................................................................................................................... 83 ARTICLE 3: “We Are Teaching and Learning with Each Other”: Improving Mentoring in Higher Education through Ongoing Training.................................................... 90 Abstract......................................................................................................................................... 91 Introduction................................................................................................................................... 92 Mentor Training – The Key to Success............................................................................ 93 Mentoring and Ongoing Training..................................................................................... 94 The Value of Ongoing Mentoring Training...................................................................... 95 Types of Mentors and Ongoing Training.......................................................................... 96 Challenges of Ongoing Training....................................................................................... 97 Implications for the Current Research and Research Question........................................ 98 Methods......................................................................................................................................... 99 Research Context and Study Design................................................................................. 99 Participants...................................................................................................................... 101 Data Collection............................................................................................................... 103 Data Analysis.................................................................................................................. 103 Trustworthiness............................................................................................................... 104 Limitations...................................................................................................................... 105 ix Results......................................................................................................................................... 106 Benefits from Ongoing Mentoring Training................................................................... 107 Mentors better understood their roles and responsibilities................................. 107 Mentors gained knowledge................................................................................. 107 Mentors received ongoing support...................................................................... 108 Volunteer Mentoring Needs............................................................................................ 109 Mentoring Training Creativity........................................................................................ 112 Discussion................................................................................................................................... 113 Comparison and Interpretation of Findings.................................................................... 114 Ongoing training positively impacts mentors..................................................... 114 Identifying contributing mentor volunteers........................................................ 116 Ongoing training advances effective mentoring practices.................................. 117 Contributions of Findings to the Literature.................................................................... 118 Mentors contribute to best training practices...................................................... 119 Volunteer mentors may need more training........................................................ 119 The transferability of mentoring training across the world................................ 120 Implications for Future Research.................................................................................... 120 Implications for Practitioners.......................................................................................... 121 Conclusion.................................................................................................................................. 122 References................................................................................................................................... 124 DISSERTATION CONCLUSION............................................................................................. 133 DISSERTATION REFERENCES.............................................................................................. 136 x APPENDIX A: Survey Instrument............................................................................................. 137 APPENDIX B: Interview Questions........................................................................................... 141 APPENDIX C: IRB Study Approval.......................................................................................... 142 xi LIST OF TABLES Article 1 Tables Table 1 Developing Search Terms................................................................................................ 14 Table 2 Key Phrases in Article Abstracts..................................................................................... 15 Article 2 Tables Table 1 Rate (1-5) Your Ability to Provide Emotional Support for Students in the Virtual PathwayConnect Program.................................................................................. 61 Table 2 Rate (1-5) Your Ability to Help Students Set Goals and See After-Pathway Options............................................................................................. 63 Table 3 Rate (1-5) Your Ability to Be a Role Model for Students in the Virtual PathwayConnect Program.................................................................................. 65 Table 4 Rate (1-5) Your Ability to Use Technology Effectively in the Virtual PathwayConnect Program.................................................................................. 67 Article 3 Tables Table 1 Study Mentors................................................................................................................ 102 xii DESCRIPTION OF RESEARCH AGENDA AND STRUCTURE OF DISSERTATION This dissertation, Improving Mentoring in Higher Education, is written in a three-article format. The format meets traditional dissertation requirements while also presenting articles that can be published. The first dissertation pages conform with university requirements for dissertation submission. The dissertation chapters are in journal article format and meet the stylistic requirements for submission to education journals. In the first section, I provide an extended literature review, Improving Mentoring in Higher Education in the Age of Online Learning, which synthesizes research findings related to mentoring and higher education. The review analyzed what makes an effective mentor and strategies for mentoring in literature from 2008- 2018. The review was eventually narrowed to 34 articles from keyword and exclusion search criteria. Results from the analysis showed themes of impact of mentors, role of mentors, and mentoring programs, as well as implications for practice for each theme. In the second section, I provided the first research article, “We Overwhelm Them with Hope": How Online Mentors Can Support Online Learners. This survey research study analyzed responses from 143 online mentors from across the world in a global higher education initiative. For the study, online mentors were emailed a 19-question open-ended/closed-ended survey to complete and return. The purpose of the survey was to understand online mentoring practices in the online educational program and how mentors help students achieve their educational goals. The study used three Nora & Crisp (2007) mentoring domains for analysis, (a) psychological or emotional support, (b) support for setting goals and choosing a career path, and (c) specification of a role model, and added an additional domain of (d) technology challenges. Of the four mentoring domains studied, online mentors reported being most successful at providing xiii emotional and psychological support for students. The study results showed mentor support for individual students outside the virtual classroom, strategies for effective mentoring in student goal setting, characteristics of an online role model, and mentor confidence in technology skills. The study also contributed findings to the literature about online mentoring benefits for nontraditional students, technology challenges influence mentoring challenges, and online mentoring role adoption. In the third section, I include the second research article, “We Are Teaching and Learning with Each Other”: Improving Mentoring in Higher Education through Ongoing Training. This qualitative study analyzed interview responses from 20 mentors from 13 international locations in a global higher education initiative. The study investigated how ongoing training impacted mentors helping higher education students achieve their educational goals. Mentors were interviewed for approximately 45 minutes by the researcher in a Zoom (Version 3.6.5; Zoom Video Communications, Inc., 2019) online interview and were asked a series of semi-structured questions related to mentoring training received. The study results showed the benefits from ongoing mentoring training, including mentors better understanding their roles and responsibilities, mentors gaining knowledge, and mentors receiving ongoing support. Results also provided data about volunteer mentoring needs and mentoring training creativity. The study also showed that ongoing training positively impacted mentors, ongoing training identified contributing mentor volunteers, and that ongoing training advanced effective mentoring practices. Contributions to the literature include findings that mentors themselves contributed to best training practices, volunteer mentors may need more mentoring training, and ongoing mentoring training showed global transferability. xiv Each article provided the references cited at the end of the submission, in addition to a Dissertation Reference. The Appendices at the conclusion of the dissertation contain the survey instrument, the interview questions, and the Brigham Young University Institutional Review Board for Human Subjects study approval. Article 1 has already been submitted to a journal for review; it is expected that Articles 2 and 3 will be submitted to journals in the near future. 1 ARTICLE 1 Improving Mentoring in Higher Education in the Age of Online Learning Camey L. Andersen Richard E. West Brigham Young University 2 Abstract This article is a literature review of mentoring and higher education academic literature from 2008- 2018. The review analyzed what makes an effective mentor and what are the implications of practice for those strategies. This article is for higher education leaders, mentoring programs, and mentors who want to improve their traditional and online mentoring programs and mentoring practices. After narrowing the search terms, the researcher searched EBSCO and ERIC databases and this search produced a combined total of 256 results. These articles were further narrowed to 34 articles that met the keyword search and exclusion criteria. The remaining articles are the focus of the literature review analysis for mentoring and higher education literature. The review produced three major themes of impact of mentoring, role of mentor, and mentoring programs, as well as implications for practice for each theme. The researcher further examined the themes in detail and provided information about retention, persistence, long-term benefits of mentoring, student interaction, student support, role models, types of mentoring programs, platforms for mentoring, and mentor training. The review concludes with suggestions for further research, including recommendations for mentor training and online mentoring. Keywords: higher education, mentor, online education, retention, role model, training 3 Introduction There is a greater awareness of the emotional needs of today’s higher education students as universities seek to increase student retention and persistence and minimize attrition. Mentoring supports students in their academic and emotional well-being as they work towards their educational goals. Providing student access to quality mentors is regarded as a responsibility of higher education institutions. Ragins and Kram (2007) described the impact of such effective mentoring: “At its best, mentoring can be a life-altering relationship that inspires mutual growth, learning, and development. Its effects can be remarkable, profound, and enduring; mentoring relationships have the capacity to transform individuals, groups, organizations, and communities” (p. 3). The potential for transformative growth in individuals is one of the defining characteristics of mentoring and one reason it is a valuable field of study today. In addition, mentoring has been shown to have long-lasting benefits for students for up to two years after mentoring has ended (Bettinger & Baker, 2014). This article is for higher education leaders, mentoring programs, and mentors who want to improve their mentoring program and practices. In this literature review first, we will frame the general mentoring context and field of mentoring in higher education. Then we will review the latest findings from the literature (2008-2018) about prominent themes within mentoring in higher education and implications for practice. We will also discuss future implications for research in mentoring and higher education. What is Mentoring in Higher Education? Mentoring can have multiple purposes and objectives and can achieve those through various methods (Hobson, Ashby, Malderez, & Tomlinson, 2009). A mentoring definition by Lev, Kolassa, and Bakken (2010) clarifies the approach used for evaluating mentoring literature in this 4 literature review, “Mentoring occurs when a senior person or mentor provides information, advice, and emotional support to a junior person or student over a period of time” (p. 1). Definitions for mentoring often depend on the field of literature being cited. In higher education, one of the most descriptive assessments of mentoring is provided by Shandley (1989): First, it is an intentional process of interaction between at least two individuals.... Second, mentoring is a nurturing process that fosters the growth and development of the protégé.... Third, mentoring is an insightful process in which the wisdom of the mentor is acquired and applied by the protege.... Fourth, mentoring is a supportive, often protective process. The mentor can serve as an important guide or reality checker in introducing the protege to the environment he or she is preparing for. Finally... an essential component of serving as a mentor is role modeling. (as cited in Jacobi, 1991, p. 507). Mentoring is a process, not an event. The Council of Graduate Schools provided additional insight into how these mentors assist students, using a definition by Zelditch (1990): Mentors are advisors, people with career experience willing to share their knowledge; supporters, people who give emotional and moral encouragement; tutors, people who give specific feedback on one's performance; masters, in the sense of employers to whom one is apprenticed; sponsors, sources of information about and aid in obtaining opportunities; models, of identity, of the kind of person one should be to be an academic. (as cited in Gaffney, 1995, p. 1) Mentors fill many roles and their ultimate success depends on how those roles are understood and applied in a mentoring program and more importantly, by mentors in the lives of individual students. 5 Nora and Crisp (2007) further expand these definitions to better explain the depth of support mentors can provide to students: [Mentoring] must include a sense of a support system provided by the mentor and... this support system focuses on creating an emotional safety net as well as a psychological perspective. Students perceived that words of encouragement and support provided a sense of attentiveness and nurturing that encompassed a mentoring experience. Undergraduates also perceived mentoring involved a sense of exploration and focus on goal setting. (p. 350) To be successful, both mentoring participants need to show trust and respect for each other, understand expectations, be committed to the partnership, and interact regularly (Bierema & Merriam, 2002). Sponsoring organizations also need to support the mentoring relationship, its process, and ongoing training. Theoretical Approaches Theoretical approaches to mentoring have traditionally been more focused on different characteristics of mentoring than on all-inclusive theories or approaches (Jacobi, 1991). There were three significant reviews of undergraduate mentoring programs from 1991-2012 (Crisp & Cruz, 2009; Gershenfeld, 2014; Jacobi, 1991). In over 20 years of research, use of theoretical foundations for studies have increased in the literature and 70% of undergraduate mentoring program articles in the latest literature review (2008-2012) cited a theoretical framework (Gershenfeld, 2014). While some mentoring studies cited classic theories as a foundation for mentoring such as Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory or Vygotsky’s (1978) zone of proximal development, these principles or other classic theories cannot fully explain the many dimensions of mentoring (Jacobi, 1991; Kramer-Simpson, 2018; Renn, Steinbauer, Taylor, & Detwiler, 2014). 6 Without a classic theoretical foundation, mentoring studies often refer to established or original mentoring models. Mentoring models are the foundation for all structured mentoring programs in determining academic achievement (Jacobi, 1991). Jacobi (1991) cited four categories of mentoring models: “(a) involvement in learning, (b) academic and social integration, (c) social support, and (d) developmental support” (pp. 523-525). What is the mentor role in each of these models? For “involvement in learning,” the mentor recommends that the student identify ways to increase their learning and suggests specific ways that learning could be applied (e.g., internship) (Jacobi, 1991). The mentor role in “academic and social integration” is to consider student behavior with the perspective of student feelings and combine these concepts to determine mentoring outcomes. For “social support,” mentors provide different types of support to students to improve their learning experience, including emotional and knowledge support, and this support helps students manage stress in their college experience. Mentors facilitate “developmental support” for students as they help them go beyond information sharing to improving skills in mentoring areas such as study skills or persistence. These models need to be considered in relation to how mentoring interfaces with academic achievement. Tinto’s (1975, 1993) social integration theory is the most often cited theory in undergraduate mentoring studies in the Gershenfeld (2014) review. This theory suggested that as students are assimilated into the campus environment, they are more likely to be persistent in their academic studies and ultimately graduate from the university. Other theories cited in the Gershenfeld (2014) review represented a range of outcomes from social networks to social supports to methods of learning. Because mentoring studies have so many differences in focus, from better understanding student mentoring benefits (Baier, Markman, & Pernice-Duca, 2016; Hu & Ma, 2010; Liu, Xu, & Weitz, 2011) to mentor quality assessment (Bowser, Hux, McBride, 7 Nichols, & Nichols, 2014; Shaffer, Zalewski, & Leveille, 2010) to how mentoring is affected by demographic and cultural issues (Castellanos, Gloria, Besson, & Harvey, 2016; Cox, Yang, & Dicke-Bohmann, 2014; Villaseñor, Reyes, & Muñoz, 2013) they are unlikely to be unified in a theoretical position in the near future. Another theoretical classification is mentoring domains cited by Nora and Crisp (2007): 1. Psychological or emotional support 2. Support for setting goals and choosing a career path 3. Academic subject knowledge support aimed at advancing a student’s knowledge relevant to their chosen field 4. Specification of a role model (p. 342) These mentoring domains are further examined in literature reviews by Crisp and Cruz (2009) and Gershenfeld (2014). In the studies reviewed by Gershenfeld, it is significant that 60% had mentors who acted in multiple roles for student support, showing that mentoring programs can use this framework to better outline mentor responsibilities. Other studies also used this model to show how mentoring helps students achieve success (Henry, Bruland, & Sano-Franchini, 2011; Hu & Ma, 2010). For mentoring studies and mentoring programs, selecting a theory is not automatic and required understanding different mentoring models and student dynamics, and then choosing the best approach for the designated mentoring. Research remains limited on which theoretical approaches are most effective for online mentoring in distance education. Differences in online-only and blended mentoring programs will impact the theoretical approach used (Neely, Cotton, & Neely, 2017). Research has shown that traditional models can be adapted for online use. For example, Hamilton and Scandura (2003) 8 configured four mentoring models—network mentoring, multiple mentoring, team mentoring, and mentoring and learning—to internet-conducive versions that take into account online affordances and constraints (p. 398). Other research has provided potential online models for use, such as Lenear’s (2007) Mentor Initiation Model and Protégé Collaboration Model, which provide recommendations for online mentor/protégé interaction, but generally, online mentoring theory has been insufficient to keep up with the expanding field of online learning. The available online mentoring research has struggled to show effective online mentoring process and its impact on students (Gravel, 2012; Sanyal & Rigby, 2017). Developing Effective Mentors In addition to the gaps in the theoretical framework, the path to developing effective mentors remains somewhat elusive. A student’s enrollment in a college mentoring program should not automatically equate with the student being mentored (Lunsford, 2011). Mentors need to learn how to mentor effectively or have mentoring skills reinforced through training. Training is often cited as an important requirement for effective mentoring, but the characteristics of those trainings are often vague (Anderson, Motto, & Bourdeaux, 2014; Neely et al., 2017). In a review of mentoring programs, Ehrich, Hansford, and Tennent (2004) explained, “Administrators must... consider the issue of training, commonly cited in the literature as a key to the success of mentor programs” (p. 535). Who trains the mentors, what training they receive, and how often they receive training, including follow up training, are important aspects of mentor development, but are personalized to individual programs and could be difficult to generalize. Putsche, Storrs, Lewis, & Haylett, (2008) gave an example of how mentor training was facilitated in one program: Training sessions were held separately for mentors and mentees, during which the coordinator discussed the purposes of the program; the benefits of mentoring related to 9 psychosocial support, academic and career planning, and student retention and graduation rates; the various roles mentors take (i.e. friend, advocate, advisor, supporter, role model, sponsor, listener, and coach).... Participants were also asked to express their mentoring expectations through metaphor. (p. 519) The purpose of this metaphor exercise was to help mentors think about and share their mentoring expectations before beginning a mentoring relationship. Depending on the students mentored, training may need to incorporate additional cultural, ethnicity, or gender-related training (Jensen, 2017; Putsche et al., 2008). In a 2017 study, a student shared how their mentor had helped them, “[My mentor] has really helped me break down professional barriers and if I’m having a meltdown, I know I can call [my mentor] and [my mentor] is usually pretty good to talk to and has been flexible” (Jensen, 2017, p. 642). While programs may have provided basic mentor training on how to assist students in similar situations, many mentors are left on their own to self-train through the mentor process, learning as they go along. The Challenges of Mentoring For the many benefits of mentoring, there are challenges in addition to training challenges. In higher education, it can be difficult to find and provide mentoring for all students who need mentoring, including identifying available or volunteer mentors and what methods will be most successful in establishing a quality mentoring relationship (Johnson, 2015). How to select the most effective mentor is disputed. Some research showed a higher degree of satisfaction with the mentoring relationship from students who found their own mentors, as opposed to being assigned a mentor (Bear & Jones, 2017). However, without help from mentoring program matching, students may lack information on how to find a mentor or may be complacent in finding a mentor on their 10 own. Other studies reported that mentoring relationships were more successful when mentors and students were matched based on common perspectives (Allen & Eby, 2003; Hernandez, Estrada, Woodcock, & Schultz, 2017). Mentors need to have specialization in specific educational or professional fields or be of a specific demographic category to provide the best mentorship opportunities for certain groups of students (Poor & Brown, 2013). Mentors may or may not have a long-term commitment to students or to the mentorship organization. Mentor time or flexibility and availability to meet with mentees may be limited. A 2004 review of more than 300 mentoring articles from the education, business, and medical fields from 1986-2002 showed challenges that are consistent with challenges still being faced in mentoring (Ehrich et al., 2004). The review explained, “The difficulties associated with mentoring were similar for both mentors and mentees.... The two most frequently cited outcomes were (a) lack of time and (b) professional expertise and/or personality mismatch” (Ehrich et al., 2004, p. 525). There are many different types of and criteria for mentoring programs. Formal mentoring programs are generally not standardized in goals and objectives, so it is difficult to categorize them or accurately compare them (Ehrich et al., 2004; Gershenfeld, 2014; Jacobi, 1991; Nora & Crisp, 2007). Since many mentoring programs assist specialty groups (a certain demographic or particular field), they may also have unique characteristics that are more challenging to generalize to a less- specialized mentoring programs (Butz, Spencer, Thayer-Hart, Cabrera, & Byars-Winston, 2018; Castellanos et al., 2016; Putsche et al., 2008; Shultz, Colton, & Colton, 2001). Also, while many mentoring programs are assumed to lead to improved student outcomes, these programs lack evaluations to show how the program works (Ehrich et al., 2004; Gershenfeld, 2014; Jacobi, 1991; Rees Lewis, Easterday, Harburg, Gerber, & Riesbeck, 2018). In addition, mentoring programs that 11 are not volunteer-based may face funding issues that affect that number of mentors available or how the program functions. Even the best mentor programs can face challenges from mentee students. Students may not understand what mentor opportunities are available to them (Black & Taylor, 2018; Ehrich et al., 2004). They may not feel a connection with their mentor, they may prefer a different mentoring style than is offered to them, or they may want more time with the mentor than the mentor has available and consequently become dissatisfied with the relationship. Many mentors are now connecting with students online, instead of, or in addition to in-person contacts, and that interface can create potential challenges with student interaction. Online mentoring provides benefits to students who may not otherwise have had access to mentors, but it also creates mentoring challenges. Only interacting online can make it more difficult to develop an effective mentoring relationship between mentors and students (Bear & Jones, 2017; Purcell, 2004). Without face-to-face, in-person communication between mentors and students, the mentor relationship may seem impersonal and other tools may need to be used to keep the mentor/student relationship progressing forward (Purcell, 2004; Rees Lewis, Harburg, Gerber, & Easterday, 2015; Sanyal & Rigby, 2017). We use the term in-person, rather than face- to-face, to be more accurate since online synchronous video discussion technically provides some of the benefits of non-verbal communications present in in-person communication. Online mentoring interaction also means it can be difficult to interpret physical gestures and mannerisms which are normal parts of an in-person encounter. Also, effective in-person mentors may struggle with mentoring online (Shrestha, May, Edirisingha, Burke, & Linsey, 2009). Training, practice, and other accommodations may need to be made to match the quality of in-person mentoring. 12 Lack of training for mentors and support and evaluation of mentoring programs can also be problematic (Ehrich et al., 2004; Henry et al., 2011). The literature is also limited in perspectives on how to develop effective mentors. We need to understand what makes a successful mentor. We need to know more about the experience of becoming a mentor. We need to better understand mentor concerns and what best practices will help them better fulfill their roles as mentors and support students, particularly underrepresented and nontraditional students. Research Question Mentoring in higher education is still a developing field where there are many questions to be answered that will strengthen the quality of mentors and improve the student experience with mentoring. In this literature review, we were guided by the research question: What makes an effective mentor in higher education? Methods Search Strategy Two databases were searched, ERIC and PsycINFO, to identify articles that examined the effects of mentoring students in higher education environments (see Table 1). Topics for inclusion when selecting articles included “mentoring” and “higher education.” Keywords from these topics included “college, adult education, tertiary education, e-learning, distance learning, coach or advisor.” Other keywords were used for exclusion terms, including K-12, peer mentoring, graduate mentoring, graduate student mentoring, teacher mentoring, sports coaching, disability research, and specialty fields. Topics for inclusion and exclusion were selected based on the criteria that a senior (nonacademic) mentor provides mentoring support for a junior mentee (undergraduate student) over time (Lev et al., 2010). The search included peer-reviewed journals, but excluded books, reports and dissertations. All searches were limited to English publications and to the 13 timeframe of 2008-2018. This timeframe was examined because the last decade has seen advances in the Internet that affect mentoring practices (Dawson, 2014; Sanyal & Rigby, 2017; Xu & Jaggars, 2013). Also, this review updates our understanding or mentoring practices in higher education since Gershenfeld’s (2014) literature review. Study Screening and Data Extraction The search process allowed for a review of both databases simultaneously, so any duplicate articles were eliminated in the search. From the search results, a two-part screening further narrowed the search for articles. First, citation titles and abstracts were examined for inclusion keyword matches. Articles that did not meet inclusion keyword criteria of search terms or included exclusionary keyword terms were eliminated from the search. Second, in reviewing the remaining articles, full texts of the articles were read and reviewed based on exclusion criteria. For articles that met both screening requirements, data was excerpted for additional review based on the combined search topics. Study Selection The search provided 256 records. After screening titles and abstracts, 88 eligible full-text articles were evaluated for inclusion search terms (“mentoring” and “higher education” keywords), and those that contained exclusionary terms were eliminated from the search. Fifty-four articles were ultimately excluded based on additional screening for articles about mentoring and higher education. I excluded articles that did not meet inclusion keyword criteria, including articles about students who were not undergraduates, or articles about peer mentoring, faculty mentoring of students, graduate student mentoring, graduate student-to-undergraduate student mentoring, and nonstudent mentoring. After this process, 34 articles remained that were examined as part of this analysis. 14 Table 1 Developing Search Terms Subject Keywords “mentor” or (“coach” not “sports”) or Mentoring “advisor” “higher education” or “college student” or “adult education” or and Higher Education “tertiary education” or “postsecondary” or “post secondary” or “undergraduate” “K-12” or “K12” or “primary” or not K-12 “secondary” or “children” or “elementary” or “youth” not Peer Mentoring “peer” not Graduate Mentoring graduate or doctoral or postgraduate “graduate student*” or “doctoral not Graduate Student Mentoring student*” or “master* student*” or “postgraduate student*” faculty or instructor or professor or not Teacher Mentoring “college teacher” or teacher or principal athlete or sport* or athletic* or not Sports Coaching “physically active” Note. The summary of initial results was: ERIC 156 articles; PsycINFO 100 articles for a total of 256 articles. The articles were further reviewed and narrowed to 34 articles. (continued on next page) 15 Subject Keywords disability or disabilities or disabled or Not Disability Research impairment or impaired or special or special needs Not Specialty Fields nursing or medical or veteran Note. The summary of initial results was: ERIC 156 articles; PsycINFO 100 articles for a total of 256 articles. The articles were further reviewed and narrowed to 34 articles. Abstract Analysis The abstract analysis consisted of identifying the most common two-word combinations in the article abstracts using an online tool, WriteWords. Abstract combinations that were not descriptive such as “of the” or “this study” were eliminated. Categories were sorted and combined based on the most common two-word combinations (see Table 2). Table 2 Key Phrases in Article Abstracts Phrase Times Listed higher education 28 mentoring program/s 18 academic advising 13 mentoring relationship/s 10 This abstract analysis emphasized higher education and showed that much of this mentoring research was targeted towards increasing mentoring for undergraduate students in college and university settings, particularly as online education becomes more widespread in higher education. The subsequent theme of mentoring programs shows there is also a research contribution of these articles to mentoring program practice and the expected use of study findings to improve mentoring skills. Another abstract theme was academic advising as mentoring for 16 students. While scholastic focus has long been an important part of mentoring, this theme only identified a primary mentoring skill. The final abstract analysis finding shows the significance of the mentoring relationship between mentors and students and the value of that connection for mentoring to have a lasting impact. Improving the mentoring relationship and going beyond academic advising was an emphasis the literature highlighted in mentoring practice. The abstract analysis of this literature review illustrated a focus towards mentors and higher education administrators identifying mentoring research that will provide increased understanding, the most effective mentoring opportunities for students and mentors, and the most impactful mentoring practices in mentoring programs moving into the next decade. Impact of Mentoring While mentoring generally presumes positive effects for the mentored student from the relationship with the mentor, the literature shows that there are tangible benefits that go beyond the relationship itself. One reason mentoring is so valuable in higher education is the lasting advantages to students who participate in mentoring relationships. Benefits include improved student retention, student persistence, and long-term benefits that reach beyond the college experience. Student Retention One of the most frequently cited areas of mentoring benefits was student retention. In these review studies, retention was generally increased by student participation in mentoring or in a mentoring program (Allen & Lester, 2012; Gravel, 2012; Letkiewicz et al., 2014; Poor & Brown, 2013; Villaseñor et al., 2013), and often significantly improved. Mentoring provided both long- term and short-term retention benefits. One study showed student retention rates of 94% from students involved in a mentoring program (Poor & Brown, 2013). Another study found that 17 semester completion retention rates were improved by students’ participation in a mentoring program after previous semesters of poor retention without the program (Allen & Lester, 2012). The most significant lack of retention was in the first two college semesters (freshman year), which has further implications for the importance of encouraging and providing mentoring from the beginning of the college experience. Retention was particularly important for online students, who are more likely to drop out of college than students who attend in-person classes (Gravel, 2012). Student retention provides significant challenges for mentors. It can be impacted by lack of mentoring opportunities or a mismatch with mentors. Retention could be negatively affected from struggles faced by minority students, and unless the mentoring is effective mentoring, one study showed no impact from mentors for these or any students studied (Schultz et al., 2011). Online students have increased higher education retention challenges and while developmental advising is recommended for these students, mentors may not be aware of the need for specialized attention for them (Gravel, 2012). There are also educational obstacles that affect retention such as lack of family support and financial struggles (Letkiewicz et al., 2014; Villaseñor et al., 2013). A study by Baier et al. (2016) showed that dropout rates could be minimized by incorporating mentoring with an approach for student self-efficacy. Mentors can overcome retention difficulties through increased awareness and training. Student Persistence Closely related to retention are mentoring benefits to student persistence. Participation in a field-specific mentoring program can increase student persistence in that program through a semester as well as through the entirety of the college years (Allen & Lester, 2012; Butz et al., 2018; Hinds & Shultz, 2018; Poor & Brown, 2013). As students near the end of their college 18 experience, mentoring has been shown to also help persistence in job searches (Renn et al., 2014). Mentors were able to help empower students with the ability to overcome negative employment- seeking behaviors, such as procrastination, unpredictable job searches, and lack of networking, through support and by providing them with tools to overcome these self-destructive behaviors for finding a job. One study contradicted the majority of findings on student persistence and mentoring by claiming that student persistence in a given field was not affected by mentoring interaction (Schultz et al., 2011). These results may be more indicative of quality of mentoring instead of the role of the mentor (Hernandez et al., 2017). A more representative study showed that all students with mentor relationships showed increased persistence in college studies, with the probability for persistence associated with student interaction and perceived value of the mentor relationship (Hu & Ma, 2010). Hu and Ma (2010) further explained the impact of quality mentoring, “The frequency of contact with college mentors does not affect student persistence whereas the extent to which students turn to their mentors for support does” (p. 338). Effective mentors play an important role as cheerleaders for students as they move ahead in their studies. Long-Term Benefits of Mentoring Mentoring benefits have the potential to be long-lasting and impact students beyond their time in higher education. Mentor programs that foster social connections increase their possibility to have long-term impact on students. Programs could encourage and plan alumni interaction that connects students with future opportunities, sponsor online social networks where participation connects students to possible support, and plan activities that engage student spouses or significant others where additional contact and social interaction is created that extended past the mentoring opportunity (Liu et al., 2011; Mondisa & McComb, 2018). Mentoring programs also strengthened students’ future opportunities by helping them see a vision for their careers and post-college plans 19 (Barbuto, Story, Fritz, & Schinstock, 2011; Poor & Brown, 2013; Smith-Ruig, 2014). As student talents and potential are validated by mentors, they are able to envision a successful future in their career beyond their college experience. One mentoring study on engineering students explained how this happens, “The mentoring program may help those students that have the technical capability to be an engineer but are just not sure of their choice. Having a mentor can reinforce the confidence a student already has about her capabilities in engineering” (Poor & Brown, 2013, p. 426). Effective mentors help students see beyond their college experience to a successful future where what they are doing now has benefitted them. Implications for Practice Mentors can have a lasting effect on students in retention, persistence, and long-term outcomes. Quality mentoring for students impacts how they view the sponsoring organization or the mentor’s career field (Liu et al., 2011). With this understanding, mentors can frame mentoring experiences to emphasize retention and persistence at the university or possibilities in a job field and provide encouragement for students to achieve their own ambitions in those areas. Recognizing that undergraduate mentoring relationships tend to be shorter than graduate school or professional mentoring relationships, mentors should aim for quality rather than quantity mentoring interactions (Hernandez et al., 2017). Mentors can recognize that they do not have to make a significant time commitment to make a difference for students if they will invest in the quality of the mentoring relationship (Poor & Brown, 2013). Mentors can further extend the benefits of mentoring by emphasizing the social community and promoting connections in the mentoring relationship and helping students find others who can also offer support (Mondisa & McComb, 2018). Effective mentors look to broaden the scope of mentoring. 20 Role of Mentor The role of mentor and how it is applied was the most-often cited mentoring characteristic in this literature review. A mentor’s responsibilities and impact or lack of impact on students is shaped by a variety of factors, including mentoring program objectives and constraints, how he or she defines her role, mentor knowledge or expertise, the amount of time spent mentoring a student and for what duration, perceived quality of mentorship, and how a mentor connects with student mentoring goals (Bear & Jones, 2017; Bowser et al., 2014; Hernandez et al., 2017; Kramer- Simpson, 2018). Healy, Lancaster, Liddell, and Stewart (2012) argued that mentors do not need to know everything or answer all student questions. Instead, the mentor’s objective should be to help students discover the most effective learning path and have a meaningful university experience, guided by a trusted advisor. While expertise in an area can strengthen mentoring capabilities, for some students their mentor’s professional skill was not as critical as their commitment to mentoring and helping the student to achieve their academic and professional goals (Kramer- Simpson, 2018; Luckett & Luckett, 2009). The literature showed three main areas of focus for the role of mentor: student interaction, student support, and the mentor as a role model. Student Interaction How a mentor interacts with their mentee student is fundamental to the mentorship relationship. Interaction may be prescriptive, where the mentor provides help in specific areas or developmental, where advice on a broader spectrum of topics is offered (Anderson et al., 2014; Braun & Zolfagharian, 2016; Kramer-Simpson, 2018; Rees Lewis et al., 2018). Kramer-Simpson (2018) explained how a personalized mentoring interaction can empower students, “Students were given tasks that they felt very independent in completing, but were closely monitored, albeit unobtrusively. Most importantly, these industry mentors gave [students] the opportunities to learn, 21 and even make mistakes in the course of making decisions” (p. 92). In the most effective student interactions, mentors offered ongoing suggestions or assignments, provided corrective help as needed, and assisted the student in staying focused on and meeting their goals. Mentor contact and frequency of interaction is another important element of the mentor student interaction. In one study, student registration improved with advisor contact, and if the student received email and phone contact, their registration was greater than with only one contact (McClure, 2017). The frequency of mentoring contact as the mentoring relationship developed and evolved may also reflect the quality or design of the mentoring relationship (Braun & Zolfagharian, 2016; Sanyal & Rigby, 2017). As the mentoring relationship matured, the specific number of interactions may be less important than the quality of the interaction (Hu & Ma, 2010). These interactions could have occurred in-person, by telephone, by email, or by online medium (e.g., Skype [Version 8.37.0.98; Microsoft, Inc., 2019]). A mentor’s ease in using the designated communication method could have affected mentoring interactions. Additional training may be needed if the mentor had technology concerns that affected the mentoring interactions. Student Support Another important role mentors provided is that of student support. Mentors often provided social and emotional support for undergraduate students who may have been new to college experiences, entering young adulthood, living on their own and away from home and their support network for the first time, and dealing with the increased academic pressures of higher education (Baier et al., 2016; Barbuto et al., 2011; Hu & Ma, 2010; Letkiewicz et al., 2014). The need for mentor student support increased when the student demographic expanded (Bear & Jones, 2017; Hernandez et al., 2017; Mondisa & McComb, 2018). Mentors needed to provide additional support to students in different demographics, including students of different racial and ethnic 22 backgrounds, economically disadvantaged students, and older students beginning school for the first time or returning to school after an absence. In one study, even students who did not want mentor support were positively influenced by it, possibly due to low expectations for mentoring (Cox et al., 2014). Supportive mentors look for opportunities to build trust with mentees. For example, Bear and Jones (2017) studied undergraduate students’ relationships with online advisors and found “a positive relationship between the level of protege trust in a mentor and the protege’s satisfaction with the mentoring relationship” (p. 158). Particularly where there are racial, ethnic, cultural, or gender differences, mentors who were willing to acknowledge and discuss these topics with students created more open and honest mentoring relationships where students feel comfortable discussing questions or concerns (Butz et al., 2018; Villaseñor et al., 2013). The literature showed that mentors need to create a supportive connection with the individual student, regardless of mentoring program format or individual circumstances. Another study reporting the top three mentor activities listed “feeling respected as an individual,” was the most frequent mentor activity, followed closely by “being a role model,” and “providing empathy for the concerns and feeling of the students” (Castellanos et al., 2016, p. 93). Mentors’ support skills are clearly important student concerns but may be more challenging to provide training for or develop and in the expected time frame of both mentors and mentees (Shaffer et al., 2010). Role Models In the literature, mentors served as role models, both formally and informally, for the students they mentored. Simply described, role modeling in mentoring is “everyday habits demonstrated through the example of... behavior that [provides] guidance to students” (Healy et al., 2012, p. 89). Most mentoring programs expected some degree of role modeling by mentors for 23 their student proteges (Bear & Jones, 2017; Bowser et al., 2014; Healy et al., 2012; Poor & Brown, 2013). How explicitly this expectation is stated or reinforced varied by program. In several studies, effective mentor role models positively affected the how the students viewed mentoring (Bear & Jones, 2017; Castellanos et al., 2016; Smith-Ruig, 2014). The mentor role model also positively influenced how the student viewed the higher education institution or the sponsoring organization of the mentor (Allen & Lester, 2012; Castellanos et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2011; Poor & Brown, 2013). This positive influence can encourage student persistence and retention in education or may point a student towards a company or career where the mentor has affiliation. One study suggested that undergraduate students may appreciate role modeling and its related impact more than graduate students since they are generally younger, and because of the stage of life and level of academics they are pursuing (Smith-Ruig, 2014). Having a role model also provides a vision for students of what they can become. In a Washington State University study on women in engineering, having professional volunteer female engineers who had graduated from the program as mentors and role models for students “[provided] a direct role model and example of how a woman can succeed in her field of study” (Poor & Brown, 2013, p. 426). In multiple studies, mentors who helped students gain a clearer perspective of their academic and professional future fostered a positive mentoring relationship with students (Barbuto et al., 2011; Poor & Brown, 2013). Implications for Practice In considering implications for practice, the role of mentor could be strengthened in the following ways: First, mentors should establish a personal connection with mentee students as a highest priority (Luckett & Luckett, 2009). Luckett and Luckett’s (2009) analysis concluded, “Most undergraduate first generation students... are in the process of developing their personal 24 and social identities. This may explain why the majority of students responded better to those mentors who could offer them recognition, affirmation and some intimacy, as opposed to those who offered only professional expertise” (p. 480). Second, mentor roles can be strengthened as mentors better understand who is being advised. With improved feedback from students on the role they want mentors to play, mentors will know who wants prescriptive feedback and who wants developmental feedback (Braun & Zolfagharian, 2016). Anderson et al. (2014) explain, “Advisors should be equipped to provide either developmental or prescriptive advising based on student needs” (p. 36). Better insights on demographics and cultural needs will also assist mentors in meeting mentoring objectives and fulfilling mentor roles. Mentors can also seek to improve trust with mentees by being direct in discussing racial or ethnic issues (Bear & Jones, 2017; Butz et al., 2018). Being upfront in addressing protegee background can show understanding and respect and lead to improved communication. As mentors catch the vision of their role as mentor and understand their responsibilities, they will be better able to help students. Mentoring Programs As the literature shows, one of the challenges in defining mentoring is the variety in mentoring programs and how they are applied in higher education settings. Some mentoring programs have an organized structure and recruit students for mentoring assistance. Other mentoring takes place informally or as part of a larger educational benefit within the higher education context. Ambrose and Williamson Ambrose (2013) explained additional differences: “All methods of advising involve two elements: space and time. Students and advisors interact either synchronously (same time) or asynchronously (different time). Similarly, students might engage with their advisors on campus (same place) or online (different place)” (p. 79). These differences in mentoring models result in many different mentoring examples and possibilities. 25 Types of Mentoring Programs Mentoring programs can be classified into structured and unstructured programs. Structured mentoring programs may be focused on general students or around a specific college major, internship or career path, gender, or racial or ethnic group. These programs may have a formal mentoring selection process, specific guidance on how mentors and mentees should interact, and follow up at the end of the program. Structured programs can help lessen concerns for mentors and mentees as new partnerships begin because expectations are established based on the program outline (Ambrose & Williamson Ambrose, 2013; Halupa & Henry, 2015). Particularly when there may be racial or cultural differences, these structured programs such as featured in the Dahlvig (2010) study, could facilitate a positive meeting experience and as one study participant described, “force people to get uncomfortable” (p. 39). In the research, structured programs also provided a standard for mentoring that is useful in working with unknown backgrounds and beliefs of mentors (Martin & Bok, 2015). One aspect of establishing a mentoring program standard is clearly identifying the roles of the individuals involved in the program, including mentors, students, administrators, and other volunteers (Black & Taylor, 2018). In a Black and Taylor (2018) study that reviewed 187 higher education mentoring program websites at Texas four-year public colleges and universities, only approximately one-third of programs (37%) identified these roles. More explanation of responsibilities in a mentoring program can improve the experience for all involved by establishing expectations for program participation and benefits. The structured mentoring program provides additional benefits to mentors by assisting them in the mentoring process. The program could provide guidelines of how the mentor assists the mentee in their academic or career-planning process. These guidelines may take the form of 26 mentor discussion, interaction, or written communication with students. For example, some programs provided suggestions about setting goals. How the mentor and mentee chose to follow the mentoring program determined the satisfaction of the mentoring relationship. According to Halupa and Henry (2015), in a small study of four mentor teams, “Only one mentee/mentor pair established formal goals; the remainder did not even though this was outlined in the mentor guide all participants received. It is interesting to note the group that established the goals were more satisfied overall with the mentor/mentee relationship” (p. 110). Without formal mentoring goals in place, mentors and mentees may agree to different types of interaction (e.g., in person meetings or online contact) but lack of structure may keep them from consistently following through on mentoring plans (Rees Lewis et al., 2018). Another study described how “regulation tools” such as a system to read mentee email reports benefitted mentors: In interviews, coaches described how reading the stand-reports [a structured report written by students about their daily and weekly goals] helped them gain awareness of team actions. All coaches reported that they regularly (minimum every 2 days) read the emails with the stand-reports.... All coaches reported that reviewing stand-reports helped them gain awareness of team behavior and cognition. (Rees Lewis et al., 2018, p. 12) In this study, prior to the communication regulation, mentors may have not read student messages (Rees Lewis et al., 2018). This research showed that formalizing the mentoring communication process improved mentors’ understanding of student issues and their ability to support students. Structured mentoring programs provided confidence to mentors and students of roles and expectations for mentoring relationships. 27 Unstructured mentoring or mentoring programs provide mentoring services but may be part of a larger collection of student services or may provide more limited mentoring services than a structured mentoring program. Unstructured mentoring could also be mentors self-selected by students to help them academically or professionally and students could benefit from the informality of this process and what it provided (Hernandez et al., 2017). In one study where students met with a financial mentor in an unstructured mentoring program, “the predicted odds of taking more than 4 years to complete the undergraduate degree is 17% lower for students who have met with a financial counselor or advisor” (Letkiewicz et al., 2014, p. 365). Without a formal plan, unstructured mentoring programs could require more effort on the part of mentors and students to achieve desired results. Effective mentors become familiar with their designated mentoring program and learn how to use it for the student’s benefit. Platforms for Mentoring The literature discussed three platforms for mentoring: in-person, online, and blended. While in-person has been the traditional mentoring approach, with the increase in online communication, there has been a trend towards online and blended mentoring approaches. Even predominantly in-person approaches are still frequently influenced by online contact through email or other electronic communication. In-person mentoring allows mentors and students to connect in person. Unless otherwise stated, most articles in this review examined a face-to-face mentoring approach (Allen & Lester, 2012; Braun & Zolfagharian, 2016; Hernandez et al., 2017; Luckett & Luckett, 2009; Shaffer et al., 2010). In-person mentoring requires the mentor and mentee to identify a mutually agreeable time and place to visit with each other and a location to meet, and may be limited to school or working hours. Because in-person interaction has been the mentoring standard, the literature 28 generally has not focused on it as a separate method. However, the method highlights particular mentoring skills discovered in studies and manifested in in-person mentoring (Cox et al., 2014; Healy et al., 2012; Hu & Ma, 2010; Poor & Brown, 2013). Many of these skills are discussed in the previous section on Role of Mentor. The in-person interaction with internship students provided additional details about how that mentoring that took place in work environments. For internship students, the mentor worked in person with them in connection with their job to help them understand protocol and perspectives of an employment environment (Smith-Ruig, 2014). Other mentors for student interns served in supervision and collaboration roles as they interacted together (Bowser et al., 2014). The characteristics of in-person mentoring are more fully understood when considered in relationship to online and blended mentoring. Online mentoring allows for mentoring to extend beyond location and time constraints and provides greater access to a variety of mentorship traits and skills. It also provides flexibility for scheduling mentoring opportunities that may not be available with in person mentoring. If a mentor or student is able to provide these mentoring requests for an online mentoring program, there could be greater likelihood for success for the relationship. Online mentoring articles referenced two scenarios. First was the online interaction between mentors and mentees. Most online mentoring interactions required minimal or no additional cost from mentors and students (Halupa & Henry, 2015). Online mentoring could occur through email, texting, free web services such as Zoom (Version 3.6.5; Zoom Video Communications, Inc, 2019) or Skype, and document sharing such as Google Docs. Second, online mentoring referred to organized online mentoring platforms that provided information about mentors and mentees and arguably provided more effective mentoring matches than random selection. These programs could require fees from the higher education organizations, 29 students, or both. In one study of an online mentoring program, “all mentors agreed it was better to do mentor/mentee matches based on a system that actually looks at personal and professional characteristics” (Halupa & Henry, 2015, p. 111). Other studies also showed a positive effect from using an online tool to match mentor and student characteristics (Martin & Bok, 2015; Rees Lewis et al., 2015). In another study, mentors were not persuaded of the benefits of the specific online mentoring platform they were using but were in favor of a similar mentoring matching process through another site such as LinkedIn, Skype, or a university-created mentoring program (Halupa & Henry, 2015). A blended platform combines both in-person and online mentoring components. In the literature several programs that are defined as online programs are actually blended programs (Rees Lewis et al., 2018; Sanyal & Rigby, 2017). Ambrose and Williamson Ambrose (2013) argued that the blended format combines the best of all mentoring practices: [From] the benefits of synchronous, on campus advising—"same time, same place” experiences that enable human connection and spontaneity—while simultaneously taking advantage of the asynchronicity and computer-mediated environment of online advising— or “different time, different place” experiences that afford more opportunities for flexibility and accessibility, thereby leaving out any weaknesses from either method. (p. 79) With the increase of online education in higher education, online and blended mentoring has become increasingly prevalent. The most effective mentors will understand the benefits and constraints of each platform and be able to mentor in any of them. Mentoring Training Mentoring programs and mentors’ ability to be effective will be significantly impacted by how training is incorporated into the mentoring program. These literature review articles show that 30 mentor training is lacking (Bear & Jones, 2017; Bowser et al., 2014; Kramer-Simpson, 2018). For mentors to be most effective, they need training in how to best interact and communicate with students. Mentors need to be trained that from the beginning of the mentoring relationship, they should clearly express goals for students and what they can anticipate accomplishing with the guidance of the mentor and the mentoring program (Mondisa & McComb, 2018). They also need training on how to personalize the mentoring experience for individual students within that framework of program goals (Gravel, 2012). Mentors need to convey why the mentoring program activities are valuable to student learning. Mentors may need diversity and cultural training to improve understanding of issues facing minority students (Butz et al., 2018; Castellanos et al., 2016; Dahlvig, 2010). Mentors also need training in how to best assist students in career planning (Renn et al., 2014). Empowering students with career-planning skills can give them confidence that they can find and succeed in future employment. Effective mentors seek out initial and ongoing training to increase their learning and mentoring skills. Implications for Practice This review shows that mentoring programs can be improved by better organization to their structure and format. First, unstructured or less structured mentoring organizations can add more structure to their programs. Higher education institutions can refer to literature reviews such as this for recommendations on which mentoring approach is right for their organization. For structured programs, mentoring programs can improve contact and website information to provide better information to both students and possible mentor candidates. One study in the review showed that almost 10 percent of mentoring program websites did not provide a method of contact (Black & Taylor, 2018). Without current website information, students may not seek further mentoring help 31 and mentors may not find it worth their time to make a call to an organization seeking additional information about mentoring. Organizations can better identify program mentoring expectations and goals to both mentors and students (Cox et al., 2014; Martin & Bok, 2015). These goals cans be discussed in the first meetings between mentor and mentee and should be incorporated with mentee and mentor goals in the mentoring relationship. Mentoring programs can also be improved by more evaluation. As mentors and students provide more feedback on the program itself and their mentoring relationships they invest in the organization and contribute to its long-term success. Creating an evaluation plan to assess student perceptions of advising can improve mentoring services (Anderson et al., 2014). Evaluations will also help mentors and mentees feel valued and let mentoring programs know what areas need improvement (Black & Taylor, 2018). Mentoring program structure creates the foundation of mentoring that students receive. Evaluation of the program structure can lead to improved mentoring. Implications for Future Research This review shows that more research on mentoring and higher education is needed and is not keeping pace with the increase in students enrolled in higher education institutions, particularly online. More studies are needed on the long-term effects of mentoring and how students benefit after their college graduation (Mondisa & McComb, 2018). Such studies would encourage institutions to place a higher priority on mentoring programs, as well as business who hire their graduates. It would be helpful to better understand how much mentoring do students need to maximize their academic potential and what is the role of mentors in this process? Do students need all four years of college mentoring or is quality mentoring by mentors the first year or two adequate to set students on the path of persistence and long-term success (Hernandez et al., 2017)? 32 The literature is significantly lacking in studies on mentor training. What training methods are most beneficial for mentor learning (Martin & Bok, 2015)? What follow up mentor training is needed to maintain quality mentoring over time? What are the mentor concerns? There is very little provided in the literature on the perspective of mentors. Additional studies might include: With the increase in online mentors, what additional training do they need? How is mentor technology training impacting ability to mentor online (Gravel, 2012; Sanyal & Rigby, 2017)? How can institutions maximize volunteer mentoring to minimize mentoring costs to their organizations (Coles, 2011)? How can colleges and universities minimize mentor attrition to maximize training benefits? How can mentors best understand and maximize their role as mentors to impact students (Healy et al., 2012)? An updated comprehensive review of mentoring literature that includes an examination of traditional and online mentoring methods would extend the research of Jacobi (1991), Crisp and Cruz (2009), and Gershenfeld (2014), and would be helpful for mentoring scholars and provide additional insight into effective mentoring. Conclusion Mentors have the opportunity to make a meaningful difference in student lives at a critical learning moment that can change their futures for the better. This research can help those who want to improve their mentoring program and practices, and their mentor skills professionally or personally. This review of mentoring and higher education literature has added to the academic discussion by providing research insights into mentoring while showing gaps in missing information. This literature review shows that effective mentoring occurs as mentors recognize their contribution to long-term student success and the impact of mentoring, understand their role as mentors, and have the benefit of an organized mentoring program design to assist them in their 33 mentoring. The literature analysis showed the impact of mentoring through student retention, student persistence and long-term benefits for students that extend beyond the college experience. The analysis also showed how mentors come to better understand their role as mentors through student interaction, supporting students, and serving as role models. In addition, the review presented characteristics of effective mentoring programs and emphasized the importance of mentor training. More research in all of these areas is needed in academic studies, but research is particularly needed regarding online mentoring, the design of mentoring programs, and mentor training. Mentoring is a key factor in undergraduate students’ potential for academic success (Baier et al., 2016; de Janasz & Godshalk, 2013). Institutions of higher education can lead the way in providing mentoring services, particularly for first year students and students with underrepresented demographic and cultural backgrounds, but all students can benefit from mentoring. Training mentors in quality mentoring practices for students can improve the academic outcomes higher education desires and can give mentors the tools they need to feel confident in helping students succeed. 34 References Allen, I. H., & Lester, S. M., Jr. (2012). The impact of a college survival skills course and a success coach on retention and academic performance. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 27(1), 8–14. Allen, T. D., & Eby, L. T. (2003). Relationship effectiveness for mentors: Factors associated with learning and quality. Journal of Management, 29(4), 469–86. doi: 10.1016/S0149- 2063(03)00021-7 Ambrose, G. A., & Williamson Ambrose, L. (2013). The blended advising model: transforming advising with ePortfolios. International Journal of ePortfolio, 3(1), 75–89. Anderson, W., Motto, J. S., & Bourdeaux, R. (2014). Getting what they want: Aligning student expectations of advising with perceived advisor behaviors. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 26(1), 27–51. Baier, S. T., Markman, B. S., & Pernice-Duca, F. M. (2016). Intent to persist in college freshmen: The role of self-efficacy and mentorship. Journal of College Student Development,

Improving Mentoring in Higher Education PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue