Introduction

A brief look at the career-based programs will offer a context for the co-curricular mentoring offerings at the University of Minnesota. Using the Mentor Connection committee as a central communication point, these career-based programs operate independently by utilizing some common training and social events. The co-curricular programs offer university student mentoring for high school students, mentoring for students in various culturally diverse clubs, and programs centering on leadership with a mentoring component. Serving as a resource for all these programs, a yearlong, part time research effort has linked specific University defined Student Development Outcomes with mentoring, providing real substance for the possible extension and expansion of these programs. Surveys conducted with mentoring as one of the subject areas provide quantitative data supporting not only the Outcomes, but also the findings of recent research.

Career Based Mentoring Programs Within the University of Minnesota

Programs centered in the individual colleges emphasize career based mentoring utilizing a mentor database situated primarily within the individual colleges. Currently, there are 14 different programs with more than 2,090 students and 2,035 alumni and friends participating in the various college programs (Alumni Association Web Site).

The College Programs

The colleges involved with mentoring programs are listed in Table 1. For the most part, each of these programs develops its own recruiting, matching and some training, with additional training and recruiting provided by workshops and events hosted by Mentor Connection, which is organized within the University Alumni Association. The table also provides a snapshot of each program’s goals.

It is clear from the statements of goals that each of the programs is career based. In addition, each has been successful in building and retaining mentor bases and program longevity through word-of-mouth recommendations, mailings and web- based advertising. Some of these programs are linked with the career advising office in the respective college, which can provide a good source for both student and mentor. Finally, end-of-year qualitative survey results generally show very positive responses to the quality of the programs.

The Mentor Connection Committee for Program Communication

Comprised of the mentor coordinators from each of the colleges, Mentor Connection serves as a sounding board for a regular once-a-month sharing of experiences and a central body for communication. A resource for hosting workshops, social events and mentor /student recognition, two specific workshops hosted by the group included an evening of speed networking skill development and a training session on the elements of mentoring. Just completed was a “Best Practices” workshop where coordinators from each program were able to share ideas that did or did not work well, as well as initiating the planning for the upcoming year events. In addition to playing a part in the recruitment for mentors, Mentor Connection publishes a mentor guidebook that changes fairly frequently based on perceived need.

Co-Curricular Programs for Career and Psychosocial Development

Separate from each of the college career based programs are several co-curricular programs that offer mentoring as a part of the organization activity. Generally accomplished via alums of the particular group, the intent is to foster engagement with like-minded people and with the university itself. Emphasized within the programs are both the career and psychosocial elements of mentoring.

Programs Centered About Cultural and Youth based Organizations

GLBTA Mentor Program

The program is designed to connect University of Minnesota undergraduate and graduate students with faculty, staff, alumni, and community members and in general help students better understand themselves and the GLBTA community. The program also attempts to build an intergenerational community for GLBTA people and to reduce feelings of isolation. The program differs from other programs in that the relationships do not revolve around a preset goal but allows participants to set their own goals (http://glbta.umn.edu/programming/mentorprogram).

Youth Mentoring

Formal activities that encourage and support multicultural youth mentoring are part of the Family Literacy and Citizen Scholars Programs at the University, and were described in a letter from Jean Frommer, the organization’s Mentoring and Grants Coordinator (Personal communication, August 28, 2008).

The Multicultural Family Literacy Program-MFLP engaged 82 work-study students in sixteen school and community sites. Forty beginning tutors from the university student body received literacy training provided by the Literacy Initiative from the College of Education and Human Development. The tutors also attended training at the various community sites as required. Results from the program indicated that seventy-five percent of the group maintained a grade point average above 3.0. In addition, retention rates in the program resulted in 30-50% continuing in their work assignment for two or more years and 15% in those assignments for three or more years. The cultural diversity represented in the groups was 39% Asian, 39% African-American, 13% Hispanic, 3% Caucasian and 6% Native American.

The Midwest Campus Compact Citizen-Scholar Fellows Program (M3C) enrolled 44 University students from freshmen to seniors as Fellows in the 2007-2008 program. The basic goal for the program is to enhance the retention, academic, civic and leadership development of first year, first generation and transfer students. Conducting a writing workshop for 6th through 8th graders and their families, the Fellows helped in exploring students’ attitude toward writing and their motivation to aspire to college writing. Over 150 participated from six area schools. For the M3C program itself, results indicated that the Citizen-Scholar Fellows as a group achieved a grade point average of better than 3.0, completing an average of 14 credits. The cultural make-up of the group included 39% African American, 36% Asian, 16% Hispanic, 4% Native American and 4% Caucasian (Palestinian) where the majority of Black and Asian students were Somali and Hmong.

Table 1, Career Based Mentoring Programs
College	Goals Statements from Program Web Sites: August 26, 2008
College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences	An inside view of how various companies and organizations work, how professionals balance life and career and suggestions on how to better prepare for the working world.
Biological Sciences	Students have the opportunity to develop a relationship with a CBS alumnus to get information careers, professional contacts, and share real world experiences.
College of Design	Program gives students additional insight into the discipline and practice of architecture and landscape architecture, clothing design, graphic design, housing studies, interior design, and retail merchandising.
College of Education and Human Development	Opportunities to develop professional skills outside the classroom through the guidance of professionals in the community.
Journalism and Mass Communication	The mentorship isn’t an internship, nor is it intended to lead to a job at the mentor’s workplace. It is simply a chance to talk candidly, to learn about life after college and to begin that transition from college life to the “real world.”
Medical School	Connections Physician-Student Mentoring Program matches physicians with current medical school students.
Carlson School of Management	Provides valuable career exploration and professional development opportunities by matching students with successful professionals from the Minneapolis/St. Paul business community, as well as professionals outside of Minnesota.
College of Liberal Arts	Liberal arts students have the opportunity to meet and talk with professionals in various career fields.
Pharmacy	Introduce first-year pharmacy students to professional career opportunities under the mentorship of pharmacists working in a variety of practice and business settings.
Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs	To create a network among students and alumni through individual relationships, to promote teaching and learning in the working environment, and to help students prepare for a career in public service
Public Health	Students get to learn from the professional experiences of their mentors. Mentors get to play a role in training future public health leaders.
Institute of Technology	Volunteer professionals in technical fields help students prepare for the transition from the academic environment to the professional world.
Industrial Relations Center - Carlson School of Management	Students have an opportunity to interact with an experienced senior manager within the manager's organizational environment.
Veterinary medicine	To link students and mentors according to career interests and provide an opportunity for students to become acquainted with the real life world of veterinary medicine.

Leadership Based Programs

Three individual programs make up the co-curricular leadership development agenda. Each is a non-credit, competitive program combining a weekly seminar on leadership skills and characteristics with student dyad or triad peer mentoring, and mentoring from community members with similar interests. The programs, normally numbering about twenty-five students each, emphasize personal leadership development and critical thinking skills. Seminar subjects range from personal values and ethics to conflict resolution and community involvement as well as some career advising.

The First Year Leadership Institute is directed to freshmen students with a goal of a satisfying engagement with the University. In addition to the seminars, a new student is paired with a knowledgeable and experienced senior student, most of who are participating in the second of the programs, the Tom Burnett Leadership Program. Designed for seniors, the program is career oriented with seminars that seek to hone leadership skills. Mentors are community and faculty members with experience in the anticipated field of the soon-to-graduate senior. Utilizing the same seminar format, the third program, LeaderQuest, is designed for sophomores and juniors. Leadership skills are developed with an emphasis on self-awareness and critical thinking skills that mentors from the community seek to augment. A closer look at the LeaderQuest program is next since it clearly embodies the psychosocial elements of mentoring, and has twenty-five years of history.

LeaderQuest Program Development and its Direction by a Student Coordinator

A program designed for sophomores and juniors, LeaderQuest has a very simple, yet challenging mission: to create an environment where young leaders are developed. Though there are a variety of ways to foster this kind of learning and development, it is the program’s belief that a strong leader has first and foremost, a high sense of self-awareness. Coordinators develop exercises that prompt students to identify their personal values and challenge those values against moral and ethical dilemmas. Furthermore, students take the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator to serve as a tool to identify personality tendencies in self and others. Mentors from the community aid in the student’s exploration.

The interpretation of the MBTI and the discussion and reflection surrounding the values, morals, and ethics exercises are used as the foundation for topics more closely related to leadership. Specific attention is paid to identifying and developing awareness of passions and self-interests, and consequently creating positive change in participants’ surroundings. Conversations concerning the meaning and purpose of leadership as well as effective and ineffective leadership tactics are focused through case studies of national, local and world leaders and prompt more developed visions of leadership. Used weekly, simulations, challenges, and critical thinking exercises are designed to deepen the participants’ understanding of leadership.

Along with theoretical notions of leadership, practical skills are presented as well. Tools such as Dale Carnegie’s Human Relations Principles in conjunction with Daniel Goleman’s Emotional Intelligence are used to emphasize the importance of networking and making connections with people who have similar interests and goals.

The content of LeaderQuest can be challenging with topics ranging from personal values, purpose, and morals and ethics to networking, understanding others, and unraveling complicated social problems. While having a student coordinator has never compromised the integrity of the program, implementing an adult mentor relationship for each of the participants is vital in terms of seeing and understanding the real world applications of the topics discussed. Based on evaluations of former LeaderQuest participants, those that benefited most from the program typically maintained strong connections with their mentors, many staying in contact with their mentors beyond the end of the program. There is a clear connection between a quality mentor relationships and leaving LeaderQuest with a stronger sense of self and greater knowledge leadership and confidence using this newfound knowledge.

The program is created through the eyes of a student who has previously experienced the program and fully accepts and understands its general themes and topics. The student coordinator’s understanding of the challenges and fears facing students is perhaps the best way to develop a leadership program that fits most closely with the students’ needs and desires for personal and professional development. What the coordinator cannot account for in terms of post-college experience, the mentors take on as they advise and assist the students in pursuit of their future goals.

Peer Mentoring, Dyads, Triads and Group Mentoring in LeaderQuest

The success of the LeaderQuest program can be largely attributed to the application of a shared leadership model - a program structure based on a multidimensional perspective of learning, teaching, reflecting and sharing. What is essentially created is a culture of mentoring where program participants relate to each other and the facilitator, augmented by mentors from the community. Forming a major component of the program are the ‘Triad’ and ‘Dyad’ relationships, a strong form of peer mentoring designed to promote team building, utilize individual expertise and further develop a culture of mentoring through giving and requesting help among team members. Facilitated and implemented solely by the group members, the meetings between groups of two or three participants occurs once outside of the regularly scheduled weekly seminar meetings. Each subgroup is formed from the larger group and meets during the span of one week, reforming into other subgroups the following week thereby creating an opportunity for the participants to experience the unique skills of many individuals, as well as encouraging a spirit of teaching, sharing and helping within the program.

Although the Triad-Dyad relationship is an asset to the program as shown in survey results, its overall success relies almost entirely on the accountability of each individual. If one participant cancels the meeting and in turn fails to reschedule, the peer mentoring that was the goal essentially disappears. Furthermore, if one or both of the participants fails to utilize a facilitating and/or listening role within the meeting, the amount of sharing and trust that occurs within the team is limited.

For a six-year period, student coordinators have asked their students to fill out program evaluations specifying which components of the program should remain a part of LeaderQuest. The response from the evaluations have consistently shown that 60-75% of students believe the mentor program is essential to LeaderQuest, second only to the opening retreat at 65-

85%. The biggest change in evaluation responses over the last six years surprisingly has been the Triad-Dyad component of the program. While in 2004 only one student of 20 claimed the Triad-Dyad component was essential, by 2007, 14 out of 19 students, or 74% claimed it was indeed essential and should not be changed.

Designed to enhance and support the Triad-Dyad relationship, the LeaderQuest program has also utilized an Accountability Partnership in more recent years. The partnership is structured very similar to the Triad-Dyad relationship, the difference being that within the partnership, two participants are paired at the beginning of the program and continue to meet weekly within the scheduled weekly meeting times. While the Triad-Dyad relationship remains essential to the sharing of diverse opinions and skills made available to multiple members of the group, the Accountability Partnership encourages a more intimate relationship between two participants of the group, allowing the essential element of trust to develop between the students.

Research Directed Toward the Development of Mentoring

Mentoring has existed on the campus for many years, and it is known intuitively, from surveys and from anecdotal reports that excellent results have come from these efforts. Both career and co-curricular based programs offer elements that are thought to be important to student development and their engagement with the University, forming an important link in improving self awareness and critical thinking skills.

Using information from on-going and recently completed research on engagement and retention of university students, a recent research effort for the Office of Student Leadership and Engagement sought to quantify the value of mentoring in improving student engagement and learning. Based on findings that note the importance of social as well as academic engagement within the University, it is suggested that program elements composed of community, faculty, peer and team- mentoring approaches could be of value as additional “tools” in the approach to improving student development outcomes. Both broad based studies serving as background information, and survey and study results directly associated with the University of Minnesota will be presented.

Research on Qualities and Attitudes Important to Student Retention and Engagement

Vincent Tinto (1993) in his work Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition, has asserted that students enter an institution with background characteristics including family influence, prior schooling, and personal skills and abilities that shape their commitment to the completion of their degrees. Secondly, Douglas Guiffrida (2006) indicates that the students’ level of commitment was continually shaped by their interactions within the various academic and social systems of the college, and that the more students are academically and/or socially integrated into the university, the greater their commitment to completing their degrees. Reinforcing Tinto, Guiffrida also emphasizes the motivational element of familial or home influences and friendship. In this sense, it seems that creating a mentoring connection with a peer, a senior student, a faculty advisor/mentor or a person from the community would strengthen the interactions that both Tinto and Guiffrida have advocated.

The same notion is supported by the work of Dixon Rayle and Chung (2007-2008, pp. 21-37) whose research examines the concept of “mattering.” Their findings show the continuing importance of family and close friends for the transition of a first year college student, and that any help in creating these relationships would be particularly helpful in the transition. Counselors, the research points out, can help by inviting students to openly talk and share about important relationships, and bring in photographs or other mementos that represent these relationships. This would seem to be a natural mentoring activity that could augment the traditional advising sphere. Schlossberg (1989, pp. 5-15) supports this same theme, suggesting that

…when college students believe that they matter to others, their feelings of marginality diminish; college students succeed in a multitude of ways when they perceive that they are appreciated by others and receive positive affirmation.

Guiffrida (2006, pp. 451-472) also suggests “…greater mattering to individuals may lead to greater mattering to groups and organizations, such as college campuses.” Both Tinto and Guiffrida’s emphasis on the need for integration into the social and academic systems of the college to substitute for the supportive effects of family and friends supports the concept of “mattering” for students. Furthermore, Schlossberg relates the lack of such integration to increased dropout rates simply due to the decreased social support. From both anecdotal and quantitative study results, mentoring could well be a tool that can help provide the integration.

Research on mentoring done by both Kram (1985), and Girves et al. (2005) effectively separates mentoring functions into two categories, psychosocial and vocational. The psychosocial functions include role modeling, encouraging, counseling, and colleagueship, all forms of personal support. The vocational or career-related functions include among others, educating, coaching, consulting and sponsoring. Girves also states that when asked which type of support they thought they needed the most, mentees cited the psychosocial functions as being the most important.

With a different interpretation on the needs of students for retention and success, Stevenson, Buchanan and Sharpe (2006-2007, pp. 141-148) indicate that the potential impact of faculty on student success far outweighs all others. Their reasoning is that student success is ultimately determined by persistence to graduation driven by mastery of academic content. Mastery affects persistence and graduation, and faculty determine what level of academic mastery has occurred, consequently, “…faculty are vital to student success” (emphasis theirs). With other retention research results considered, it would seem more focus on the faculty puts further strain on their available time, and disregards positive elements of other engagement resources. Nonetheless, results from the study discussed below show that faculty mentoring is indeed worthwhile and successful.

Studies Specific to the University of Minnesota

Two studies are reviewed, the first looking briefly at student activity loads and the related campus involvement while the second involves a specific look at mentoring at the University and its impact on elements of the Social Change Model.

Student Activity Loads

Examining some statistics concerning student activity, Ronald Huseman (2004) has assembled data from University of Minnesota student surveys completed in 2003 summarizing typical student activity. Tabulated in Figure 1 are selected work, study and extracurricular activity hours or percent activity for a sampling of students.

Of particular interest is the percentage of students with no extracurricular activity, which would seem to suggest very little engagement with the University. While not explored in this short study, the equally important impact of work hours simply adds to this possibility. Work impact, as well as other pertinent variables from the survey has been analyzed in the work of Matross and Huseman (2001-2002). Results from the next study support the notion that the use of a mentoring relationship could help engage students in extracurricular activity, and implement the important findings of Tinto, Guiffrida, Kram, Girves and the other researchers discussed above.

Impact of Mentoring

Study Premise

Data pertinent to mentoring at the University of Minnesota were collected in the Multi-Institutional Study Of Leadership: University Of Minnesota Final Report (2006). Sponsored by The University Of Maryland, the study determined the impact on the elements of the Social Change Model for Leadership for various student activities and responsibilities. The student activities surveyed included among other things, off and on-campus work, participation in community services, specific involvements (academic, experiential learning, study abroad, activism), mentoring, positional leadership roles (campus and community), active member participation (campus and community) and participation in leadership training.

The Social Change Model has seven elements that were examined by the study, and include those in the left column of Table 2. As a comparison, the Development Outcomes defined by the University of Minnesota for all students as they progress toward their degree appear in the right column. Linking the Outcomes with the results from mentoring programs would seem to greatly enhance the acceptance of such programs as integral parts of the learning infrastructure at the University.

Table 2. Elements of the Social Change Model and University Development Outcomes
Social Change Model	University Development Outcomes
Consciousness of Self Congruence Commitment Collaboration Common Purpose Controversy with Civility Citizenship Change	Responsibility and Accountability Independence and Interdependence Goal Orientation Self Awareness Resilience Appreciation and Differences Tolerance of Ambiguity

While each of the elements of the model are relevant to student development, three examples are examined with regard to their sensitivity to mentoring, and their similarity to three of the elements defined by the Development Outcomes. The comparisons are shown in Table 3.

While not an exhaustive comparison, there are clear links between these elements, which is not altogether surprising. This being the case, results of mentoring programs that influence Social Change Model elements can be directly related to Development Outcomes. An additional question is the connection between Model elements, Outcomes and the characteristics for engagement and retention discussed by the researchers above. Certainly the psychosocial functions defined by Kram and

Girves are directly related to both Model and Outcomes. Tinto and Guiffrida emphasize social integration and interaction with university systems in general, and the Social Change elements of collaboration and change are basic to this integration. Similarly, “mattering” would seem to be supported by Model elements of common purpose, citizenship and again, collaboration. Clearly, a strong self-awareness is fundamental to a student’s ability to integrate him or herself into the societal and academic systems of the university. It would seem then, that the surveyed results of mentoring support the student needs defined by the above researchers.

Table 3. Comparison of Three Elements of the Social Change Model and University Outcomes
Three Social Change Model Elements	Three University Development Outcomes
Consciousness of self - Awareness of the beliefs, values, attitudes, and emotions that motivate one to take action. Collaboration - To work with others in a common effort constitutes the cornerstone value of the group leadership effort because it empowers self and others through trust. Change - The ability to adapt to environments and situations that are constantly evolving, while maintaining the core functions of the group.	Self Awareness – Knowing personal strengths and talents and acknowledging their shortcomings. Independence and Interdependence – Knowing when to collaborate or seek help and when to act on their own. Tolerance of Ambiguity – Demonstrating the ability to perform in complicated environments where clear-cut answers or standard operating procedures are absent.

Study Results

For the MISL study, the types of one-on-one mentoring situations included were faculty members, representatives from student affairs, a peer student, members from the community and an employer. Data gathered using a 5-point Likert scale were plotted in bar graph form to display the relative change in skill level for the different mentoring approaches. The data included mean, standard deviation and population allowing tests for significance to be completed.

The first of the charts in Figure 2 shows the measured effectiveness of mentoring in helping the student develop a better consciousness of self as defined in the above table, and reflects the type of mentor as well as the number of times the pair met. Here, the data shows a statistically significant (based on a t analysis) skill improvement as the frequency of meetings is increased for all mentor types. The differences in the type of mentoring from the various sources are, for the most part, not statistically significant.

One may easily draw the conclusion that mentoring success is based primarily on the frequency of meetings, and that most types of mentoring relationships will accomplish that goal. This would seem to support the findings of Dixon Rayle and Chung and others in that “mattering” to someone or some organization will accomplish part of our goal for engagement. The undefined parameter is the competence of the mentors. Other data from after-program surveys indicate that a greater potential for success lies with students and mentors who have had training in the conduct of the mentoring relationship.

The chart of Figure 3 illustrates the development of a collaboration skill with the same mentor to student relationships as Figure 2. Again connecting to the Development Outcomes, this time those of Independence and Interdependence, the developing collaboration skill shows significant improvement and relates to working with others or on one’s own, choices also reflecting critical thinking skills.

Finally, the chart of Figure 4 illustrates the development of adaptability to change again with the same mentor to student relationships. Improvement of the skill of adapting to changing or complex environments supports well the Development Outcome of Tolerance of Ambiguity, and is a component seemingly necessary for engagement and integration with a university.

Similar to the other findings in terms of statistical significance, it is the fact of mentoring itself rather than its source that is important. However other surveys, as previously suggested, imply a definite improvement in the satisfaction of a mentoring program if the mentors and students alike have some preliminary training, and subsequent opportunities for feedback. Examples can be seen in the results of another University survey discussed below, specifically regarding the mentoring programs, and point to a need for a definite level of training prior to the beginning of the program.

Matching and Training of Students and Mentors

Good student to mentor matches, then training that highlights some of the anticipated problem areas has become important and developing element of mentoring programs, both co-curricular and those centered in each of the University’s colleges. To better control the initial matching process, the University is presently exploring on-line application and matching programs that can be either student or administrator driven. Preliminary trials with a University developed program have shown anecdotal positive results that are in the process of being quantitatively studied. However a key element is the existence of a common interest between the mentor and student.

Concepts for training have developed from the practical experience of coordinators within the programs, and results of surveys that point to specific problem areas. Open-ended questions formed the basis of a set of surveys conducted to understand the relative success of the career based programs, and identify specific areas of success as well as program items needing work. Samples from a satisfaction survey taken after the 2005-2006 programs (Greiman, 2006) are shown below, and are unedited student responses from the survey sheets.

The first question reviewed was: How do you feel your experience with the mentor program will assist you in reaching your career and professional goals? A sampling of the responses is shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Responses the Question on Career and Professional Goals

• My mentor was too busy to meet with me even once. I would say it will not assist me in any way.

• I don't think it will

• The Program got me started on thinking past my undergraduate

• Did not help at all.

• My experience helped me to begin making professional connections, which will help me down the road when I am looking for a job or need a favor.

• My mentor helped solidify my reasons for wanting to be an engineer by showing me many different projects that he worked on.

• They did not help me meet any sort of goals. All my mentor wanted me to do was work in a lab in Mexico which has not and never will be part of my professional goals. I work in scientific computation and use state of the art computer systems and going to an underfunded lab in Mexico would have never helped me. My
• mentor suggested one ACS meeting and when I said I was busy in November failed to further contact me.

• I was able to communicate with someone who'd been through the graduate school process I plan on going through, and provided insight on what to expect.

• I now have a better idea of what I want to do when I graduate (go right into grad school). I have also gained interviewing experience.

Along with these responses, a second question and its responses will help clarify areas that can indicate necessary changes for the program. The question “Do you have any suggestions for improving the program for next year?” generated the answers, again unedited samples, found in Table 5.

Table 5. Responses to the Question on Program Improvement

I attended the kick - off and didn't have a match yet. I really think that you should tell me if they don't have a match before the kickoff so they are not there taking time if they can't even meet their mentor.

Match up majors better. Sales and Marketing are two different feilds.

I was not very well matched with my mentor. He did not really have a background in anything I was interested in him. Thus, the relationship was good for very general things, but was rather limited in what it could do for either of us, which was frustrating. He seemed like he would have been a fabulous mentor to someone who was interested in doing what he was doing or even in doing something with his company, but I was not interested in either. I felt like

I was not a good mentee, and I also felt like I wasn't getting much out of the relationship, which was frustrating.

Don't allow a mentor to have two mentees when they work in public accounting.

I just needed a mentor more in the financial industry instead of an Entre mentor.

Do a better job of matching. My mentor did not do anything that I was remotely interested in. The program was a huge waste of my time.

Not thing much because the program is already very good.

Attending the kick-off should not be mandatory, especially if your mentor isn't able to attend.

Keep up the good work!

There should be requirments mentors must meet before qualifying as a mentor, such as 5-7+ years in the field. For example, my mentor had 2 years of experience in the accounting field and was just getting started in his career. It

was difficult to talk to him about what I wanted to do because he didn't know what he wanted to do himself.

Have backup mentors if the ones who have committed are not actively participating.

I didn't get a match before the orientation. When I was told that I still had to wait for another 2-4 weeks, I was

really disappointed and lost, and felt so bad when I saw my friends had begun their ice-breaking with their mentors. I hope next year, the arrangement would be better in this area.

Have more Friday programs so consultants can meet more.

More sponsored events at different times. We tried to make a few, but his schedule never allowed it.

More mentor and mentees program events other than speakers (bowling, casino night, ect)

Provide more opportunities for group interactions with mentors and other student/mentor pairs.

While some of the responses indicate situations that are not necessarily serious to the programs, others indicate a sense of frustration that could lead to dissatisfaction on the part of both mentor and student. Representing a condition where a student has had a bad mentoring experience and may not search for another, it also reflects someone from the community, peer or faculty member that might not mentor again. It is clear from the results that matching is a major area for concern. Unfortunately, given the usual spread of available mentors, there will be difficulty in providing the “perfect match” that will satisfy the student. Addressing this problem along with that of the new and inexperienced mentor is the focus of training efforts.

Training

Training and more concise event planning would seem to be a method of curing some of the above problem areas. For example, it is clear that more social events for unstructured conversation and networking would help (food always helps). Secondly, training that emphasizes the importance of generalized skills that are a requisite for any profession would form the basis for many conversations no matter what the match-up of careers would be. Third, early communication about important dates allows planning by both mentor and student. Fourth, training both mentor and student that communication between themselves, diligence in setting up and adhering to meeting agreements and establishing a level of trust within the relationship will go far in creating a meaningful mentoring relationship. Examples of two charts for the LeaderQuest orientation session are shown below in Figure 5. Included are goals that stress not only the career elements, but also other elements of personal development that can be discussed with a mentor irrespective of the accuracy in matching the fields of interest.  Obviously, all of these goals cannot be met in a semester’s work. Consequently, it is important for the mentor/student pair to carefully select a reduced set, or even one of the goals for a focus.

Mentoring Goals Setting Student Goals
Facilitate a period of personal growth Provide contact with the world outside of the classroom Express ideas and concerns one-on- one How you made decisions about your life Emphasis on: Critical thinking Sensitivity for community Self-analysis and reflection	Interpersonal Skills Decision-making Time management Problem solving skills Relating to difficult personalities (overbearing, egoistic, pessimistic) Career Interviewing skills Career goals Relationships with co-workers	Leadership Feel comfortable giving directions to a group Conflict management Ethical leadership Academic Choosing a major Extra curricular involvement Appreciating the Arts Spirituality

Figure 5. Sample Training Charts from LeaderQuest

Conclusions

Briefly stated, mentoring programs at the University of Minnesota are achieving, and in many cases have achieved, a maturity in organization and implementation. Based on generalized studies concerning student engagement and retention, important elements of student attitude and “mattering” become a focus for an evolving Student Engagement program as well as the overall development of improved mentoring programs in both the career based and co-curricular areas. Specific studies within the University have shown success for mentoring in exactly the areas defined as outcomes for the student’s years of learning. Considering the Developmental Outcomes of Self Awareness, Independence and Interdependence, and Tolerance of Ambiguity, the survey results show significant impact of a mentoring activity in achieving these goals. Furthermore, the mentoring can be broad based, utilizing peer, community, administrative and faculty members as resources. Lastly, a concise training effort involving both student and mentor is a prerequisite for a successful program. All of these results appear to support the accomplishment of engagement and integration within a university system as called for in recent research on retention. Consequently, it is clear that mentoring should be a vital link in the efforts of the university to achieve both learning and developmental outcomes.

 

References

Rayle, A. D. & Chung, K-Y. (2007-2008). Revisiting First-Year College Students’ Mattering: Social Support, Academic Stress, and the Mattering Experience.” Junior College Student Retention, 9(1).

Girves, J. E., Zepeda, Y., & Gwathmey, J. K. (2005). Mentoring in a Post-Affirmative Action World. Journal of Social Issues, 61(3), 449-479.

Greiman, B. (2005-2006). Evaluation summary: Mentor Connection Program, University of Minnesota Alumni Association.

Minneapolis, MN: UMN College of Education and Human Development.

Guiffrida, D. A. (2006). Toward a Cultural Advancement of Tinto’s Theory. The Review of Higher Education, 29(4), 451-472.

Huesman, R. L., Jr. (2004). The 2003 student experiences survey report: Students’ perspectives on their experiences at the University of Minnesota. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Office of Institutional Research and Reporting.

Huesman, R. L., Jr., Brown, A. K., Lee, G., Kellogg, J., & Radcliffe, P. (2007). Modeling student academic success: Does usage of campus recreation facilities make a difference? Presented at The National Symposium on Student Retention, Milwaukee, WI, September 24-26.

Kram, K. E. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.

Matross, R. & Huesman, R. (2001 – 2002). Why do they leave? A study of student departure from the University of Minnesota. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, Office of Institutional Research and Reporting.

Radcliffe, P. M., Huseman, R. & Kellogg, J. (2006). Modeling the incidence and timing of student attrition: A survival analysis approach to retention analysis. Paper presented at 2006 Conference of AIRUM, Bloomington, MN, November 2-3.

Schlossberg, N. K. (1989). Marginality and mattering: Key issues in building community. New Directions for Student Services, 48, 5-15.

Stevenson, J. M., Buchanan, D. A., & Sharpe, A. (2006-2007). The pivotal role of the faculty in propelling student persistence and progress toward degree completion [Commentary]. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice 8(2) 141-148.

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

University Of Maryland. (2006). Multi-institutional study of leadership: University Of Minnesota final report. College Park, MD: The National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs, Acpa Educational Leadership Foundation, & Naspa Foundation © Msl/ Nclp.

University of Minnesota Alumni Association Web Site: http://www.alumni.umn.edu/mentor.html and http://www.career.umn.edu/mentr.htm, Retrieved August 26, 2008.