The study that I am in the process of exploring focuses on the factors that contribute to the success of African American adolescent males who participate in Phi Beta Sigma Fraternity, Inc.’s mentoring program. Phi Beta Sigma Fraternity, Inc. established its auxiliary group, the Sigma Beta Club, in 1950 for boys ages 8 through 18 to tackle the changing needs within the African American community. Sigma men developed four major principles to address the growing concerns for the future success of African American adolescent males: culture, athletics, social and educational. The Sigma Beta Club’s motto “the next generation of leaders, accepting the responsibility and loving the challenge” displays Phi Beta Sigma Fraternity, Inc.’s interest in fostering the development of youth into effective, contributing leaders within society and has been realized in the establishment of strong and productive Sigma Beta Clubs across the country. The number of programs implemented, as well as the way they are implemented, varies by fraternity chapter and Sigma Beta Club program. Since its beginning, the club’s aim has evolved but the goal of mentoring young males in an effort to assist with struggles they encounter while preparing for their future remains constant.
I am interested in how participation in Phi Beta Sigma Fraternity, Inc.’s mentoring program, the Sigma Beta Club, influences mentees’ self esteem, perceptions of the relationships between all participants, and ultimately the mentees’ social, and mental success. The fraternity defines success of the Sigma Beta Club as the increase of the mentees’ self esteem, their ability to interact with others appropriately, and the decrease in deviant behavior. Although omitted from this study, academic success is determined by the grades received before and the improvement of those while participating in the program. The Phi Beta Sigma Fraternity, Inc. chapter’s Sigma Beta Club chosen for this study is considered to be a successful program, but data have not been collected to confirm or dispute this claim. I chose to conduct research on this particular chapter’s Sigma Beta Club to observe what strategies are currently being used to implement its program, what training is offered to its mentors, determine what are the pros and cons based on its implementation and develop recommendations of practice for its program (and possibly other mentoring programs) based on those results. There are many mentoring programs available for African American males in a variety of settings. Research on the Sigma Beta Club will help to reinforce the need for quality community based mentoring programs and serve as another option for adolescent African American males seeking support. After thoroughly researching African American male mentoring programs and what is needed to be successful based on the definition created by the fraternity, I refined my ideas on what research suggests and aligned it with evidence based practices recommended by recent studies in an effort to compare what actually takes place in the Sigma Beta Club.
African American males are disproportionately represented in Special Education programs across the country. Despite representing 15.1% of the school population, Black students comprise 27% of students enrolled in special education (U.S. Department of Education, 2005) requiring services to address academic and behavioral deficits (Sinclair, Christenson, and Thurlow, 2005; Weinstein, Tomlinson-Clarke, and Curran, 2004). In special education classrooms, they tend to receive an education that is less rigorous academically. The lifelong implications of special education for this specific group includes higher rates for dropouts, arrests and incarceration as well as lower rates for college attendance, socio-economic well-being, and life expectancy.
In general educational programs throughout the United States, African American adolescent males ages 13 to 18 rank near the top of every indicator of school failure, including dropout rates (less than 50% graduate nationally), absenteeism, and achievement (Cooper and Jordan, 2003). Their standardized test scores consistently lag behind other ethnic groups (Barnes, Bentrup, Ekman, and Brady, 2004; Legum and Hoare, 2004) and, despite the narrowing achievement gap, considerable distance still exists between Black males and White males (Cooper and Jordan, 2003). African American males are subject to frequent disciplinary actions as well (Ipka, 2003 and Monroe, 2006). They tend to be suspended, expelled, sent to the office, and/or placed in the hall at rates much higher than other groups which causes them to miss valuable instruction time.
African American males also have the fastest growing rates of suicide (Poussaint and Alexander, 2000) and account for more than 65% of all new male AIDS cases (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006). Nationwide many Black males are unemployed and under employed; lead the nation in homicides both as victims and as perpetrators; and have the highest incarceration, conviction, and arrest rates among comparative ethnic groups (Noguera, 2003). They also face the reality of being the only group in the United States experiencing a decline in life expectancy (Noguera, 2003).
New research is needed to add to the limited research available on mentoring programs and the relational characteristics (authenticity, empathy, collaboration, and companionship) that influence the relationships between the mentor and youth and how those connections develop. Previous research tends to focus more on the youth outcomes than on the mentoring relationships themselves and what occurs to make them beneficial for all participants. Research on community based mentoring programs is limited and those that consist of mentoring programs of African American fraternities are nonexistent. Research is also needed to understand how fraternity mentoring programs contribute to the social and mental success of the mentees through the relationships developed between the mentors and mentees by analyzing its relational process.
The purpose of the study is to recommend best practices for mentoring programs as a result of evidence-based research. These practices should suggest the most suitable ways to develop a positive and appropriate mentor/mentee relationship that promotes positive developmental outcomes (Grossman and Rhodes 2002). One major implication focuses on the duration of time spent and the frequency of meetings between the mentor and mentee. In a reanalysis of data from the evaluation of the BBBS program (Grossman and Tierney, 1998), for example, positive effects on youth outcomes became progressively stronger as relationships persisted for longer periods of time and were greatest when relationships lasted at least 1 year (Grossman and Rhodes, 2002). Early termination of a mentoring relationship, within the first 3 months, may ultimately cause more harm than good as compared to not participating in a mentoring program at all. The frequency of the meetings is as important as the overall length of the mentoring relationship. One mentoring program, Across Ages, has achieved the status of ‘‘model program’’ on the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices (Rhodes and DuBois 2008) by incorporating strategies that will increase that bond. In this program, participants are expected to have face to face contact weekly for a minimum of 2 hours. Also, mentees are expected to call their mentor weekly while mentors are expected to participate in weekly meetings with their mentee.
Beyond issues of time, research indicates that the extent to which mentors and youth establish a strong connection is influenced by the dynamics of their interactions with each other. Langhout, Rhodes, and Osborne (2004) found that outcomes were most favorable when youth reported experiencing not only support but also some degree of structure in their relationships with their mentors. Close and enduring ties appear to be fostered when mentors adopted a flexible, youth-centered style in which the young person’s interests and preferences are emphasized, rather than when they focused predominantly on their own agendas or expectations for the relationship (Morrow and Styles, 1995). Careful planning of the mentoring process, including recruitment and training of mentors, is required to increase the probability of success (Britner, 2006). Empirically driven data should be used to guide training before and during the implementation of a mentoring program. The evaluation of the programs is essential in determining what follow up training is necessary for mentors.
A vital role of a mentoring program is to positively influence the mentees’ ability to develop long standing relationships. By serving as supportive models of success, mentors may directly stimulate improvements in adolescents’ self-perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors (Bandura, 1969; Hamilton and Hamilton, 1990; Klaw and Rhodes, 1995; Taylor, 1989; Walker and Freedman, 1996). The quality of mentor/mentee relationships is a significant way mentoring services influences youths’ perceptions of their interpersonal relationships. Enduring positive relationships may modify adolescents’ general perceptions of relationships leading to the ability to expect and form healthy interpersonal relationships while terminating those that are not in their best interest.
To guide the principles of this study, I generated a major research question with several sub-questions to explore the concerns more extensively. The primary research question is: what factors influence the success of the Sigma Beta Club members? Within Phi Beta Sigma Fraternity, Inc., the Sigma Beta Club chosen to participate in this study has a reputation of being one of the more successful programs. I would like to determine what strategies the mentors are implementing that foster success as defined by the fraternity (i.e.., are the mentors paired individually with a mentee, how often outside of the regular meetings do contact take place, and how long have mentors been a part of the program). In an effort to fully address the main research question, I chose to individually focus on the key elements evidence based research has shown to be necessary to positively impact the participation of the members of the Sigma Beta Club by generating more specific sub-questions around each element (relationships, training, and outcomes). The sub-question that relates to relationships is: what strategies are used to foster positive experiences for participants in the Sigma Beta Club? Here I would like to delve deeper into how the program is designed to address the four major principles of the Sigma Beta Club in a way that translates as enjoyable to the mentees. In doing so, I want to explore how the curriculum for the program is designed, how activities are chosen, if the mentees have any input in determining what activities are to take place, and how far in advance lessons/activities are planned. My desire to understand the ways mentors attempt to create opportunities for positive experiences for the mentees led me to wonder how much and what type of training mentors receive. The sub-question related to this element is: what skills must mentors learn? Researchers recommend that mentors are trained on the most appropriate ways to interact with the specific population they are serving and on ways to build a positive rapport with them. When mentors are assigned to lead workshops, what training and support are they given? What qualifications must he have? Also, I would like to know if there are follow up trainings that take place, if so, how many, and how often? When do the mentors, the members of Phi Beta Sigma Fraternity, Inc., meet to discuss the concerns and needs of both the mentees and the mentors? Finally, I chose sub-questions that addressed how the Sigma Beta Club’s success is assessed and how outcomes are analyzed. How are the mentees’ perceptions of self influenced by their participation in the Sigma Beta Club? How are the successes of the Sigma Beta Club measured? How is the satisfaction of the mentees and mentors measured? I would like to investigate what data are collected by the fraternity chapter to determine how successful the program is. Also, have the fraternity chapter chosen ways to analyze how participation in the Sigma Beta Club benefits the mentees’ self-esteem, relationships with mentors, other mentees, parents, peers, and others they interact with outside the program? In an effort to generate answers to these questions, I begin analyzing theories that may serve as a framework to build my argument upon. Relational theories seemed to be the most appropriate one to serve that purpose.
Relational theories provide a framework to analyze the affects participating in the Sigma Beta Club has on the mentees’ self-esteem and social and mental success by linking psychological health and vitality with participation in growth-fostering relationships. These theories, which have grown out of the work of several groups of researchers and clinicians studying and working with infants, adolescents, and adults, have increasingly detailed the centrality of relational processes to individual social and emotional development throughout the lifespan (e.g., Brown and Gilligan, 1992; Miller and Stiver, 1997; Tronick, 2001; Spencer, 2000). Relational theories identify four processes that are considered essential to build relationships that promote healthy psychological development. 1.) Authenticity allows a relational partner to have access to one’s thoughts, feelings and intentions and also involves offering perceivable and engaging responses to the thoughts, feelings, and intentions of the other person (Spencer, 2006). Each participant must believe that they are able to express themselves openly and will receive the same in return. 2.) Empathy can be thought of most simply as understanding another person’s perspective based on their experiences through the expression of awareness and concern. Relational theories emphasize how both participants are drawn closer to each other through empathy and assert that through such experiences, both learn that they matter to each other and gain a sense of relational competence, or feel effective in building relationships (Jordan, 1999). 3.) Collaboration through mutuality is thought to facilitate emotional development. Especially beneficial are those experiences in which the young person and the more skilled partner focus their attention on a task chosen by the youth where they are attempting to develop or promote a specific skill or problem solve to deal with a conflict that has occurred with others. 4.) Companionship refers to how much the participants enjoy spending time with each other and enjoy their company. Engaging in leisure activities with someone you like and who you know likes you is believed to contribute to an ongoing state of emotional well-being, enhancing the pleasure experienced in everyday life (Rook and Underwood, 2000). The desire to be thought of as consequential by someone who you consider to be important is a need that is present throughout a person’s lifetime.
It is important to understand how mentoring relationships affect the youth participating in mentoring programs. Based on empirical and theoretical literature, Rhodes (2005) has proposed a model that describes several processes and conditions, which coincides with Spencer’s (2006) relational theories framework, and is thought to be important for understanding the effects of mentoring relationships on youth. Beneficial effects are expected only to the extent that the mentor and youth forge a strong connection that is characterized by mutuality, trust, and empathy (Rhodes and DuBois, 2008) (also based on authenticity, collaboration, and companionship, Spencer, 2006). For this type of bond to arise, mentors and youth are likely to need to spend time together on a consistent basis over some significant period of time, generally one year (Spencer, 2007). After doing so, youth may experience significant benefits from participation.
Fig. 1. Model of youth mentoring (Rhodes, 2005).
Well-established mentoring relationships may contribute to positive youth outcomes through three interacting developmental processes: social-emotional, cognitive, and identity-related (Rhodes and DuBois, 2008). There are several ways in which the social-emotional development of children and adolescents may be furthered through mentoring. By serving as a sounding board and providing a model of effective adult communication, mentors may help youth to better understand, express, and regulate their emotions (Rhodes, Grossman, and Resch, 2000). The model also suggests that positive socio-emotional experiences with mentors can successfully influence youth to interact with others more effectively. Benefits of mentoring relationships have been indicated to accrue in part through improvements in youths’ perceptions of their parental relationships as well as their relationships with peers and other adults in their social networks (Rhodes, Reddy, and Grossman, 2005; Rhodes et al., 2000). According to Rhodes and DuBois (2008), this aspect of the cognitive developmental process is derived from theory and research that highlights the role of social support from adults in fostering cognitive gains during development. Through interactions with mentors, protégés may gain and revise new thinking skills, becoming more appreciative of adult values, advice, and perspectives. In support of these possibilities, close, enduring ties with mentors have been found to predict improvements in academic and vocational outcomes (e.g., Herrera et al., 2007; Klaw, Fitzgerald, and Rhodes, 2003). Mentors can be instrumental in helping change youths’ perceptions of their current and future identities. Mentors’ influence on the mentees’ at-risk behavior and academic outcomes may contribute to a more positive orientation in their future identities. For this type of guidance and support to be realized, however, mentors may need to model appropriate behaviors and values (Rhodes and DuBois, 2008).
Mentoring relationships and the pathways linking them to youth outcomes may be conditioned by a range of individual, family, and contextual influences (Rhodes and DuBois, 2008). Youth who are overwhelmed by social and behavioral problems, for example, appear to be less likely to experience strong, enduring ties with their mentors and, perhaps consequently, also receive fewer benefits (Rhodes, 2005). Environmental adversities such as family instability and socioeconomic disadvantage also frequently can pose challenges to the formation of mentoring relationships (Spencer, 2007). Yet, youth from backgrounds of environmental risk have been found to be especially likely to benefit from mentoring (DuBois et al., 2002). These findings suggest that the challenges presented by such circumstances do not necessarily have to be barriers to building effective relationships.
Rhodes and DuBois (2008) suggest that trainings and ongoing supervision of the mentors must also occur to promote close, enduring, developmentally enriching relationships. I believe that the success of the mentor trainings and ongoing supervision should guide the influence the mentors have on the mentees’ social/emotional, cognitive, and identity development which should, in turn, affect their relationships with the mentors, other mentees, peers, parents, and the community. The mentor trainings should be influenced by the developmental outcomes of the mentees. Based on these outcomes, the trainings and ongoing supervision of the mentors should be revised to improve the success of the mentees in needed areas and discussed to replicate when relationships have generated positive outcomes.
In order to collect the most useful data possible to address the issues found in this study, I am choosing a mixed methods approach. Both quantitative and qualitative data will provide a detailed understanding of the research problem. To collect quantitative data, I will use surveys and questionnaires. In order to collect demographic information, I will ask the mentees to complete a questionnaire where each will be asked his current age, length of time in the program, age when he started the program, who referred him, current grade, where he lives (city or suburb), how many parents are in the home, is parent in a fraternity or sorority, and if he has a relationship with mentors (formal or informal). I am hoping the data will help me recognize any notable trends. I would hope that I would be able to make a connection to positive interpersonal relationships through their experiences with other mentors (formal and informal) while noticing any changes based on their participation in the Sigma Beta Club. The mentees will also be administered the 10-item Mentor Youth Alliance Scale (MYAS). MYAS is used to assess the mentees’ perceptions of the quality of their relationship with the mentors. MYAS sample items include “My mentor cares about me,” “My mentor is happy when good things happen to me,” and “I look forward to the time I spend with my mentor.” Responses will be coded on a 5-point Likert scale that range from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (5), with higher scores indicating a higher quality relationship. Because I am not sure mentees are assigned a particular mentor, the questions will be slightly changed to make mentor plural. I will also assess how the mentees perceive themselves by administering the 6-item subscale of the Self-Perception Profile for Children (Harter, 1986). Sample items include “I am often unhappy with myself”, “I don’t like the way I am living my life”, and “I am very happy being the way I am”. Responses will be coded on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (5), with higher scores indicating a higher perception of self. I hope to get a clear picture of who the Sigma Beta Club is currently serving in regards to where they reside, their desire to be a part of the program, general opinions of the mentors and the overall view of themselves. I plan to collect demographic information from the mentors as well. I would like to know his age, length of time as a mentor, and highest level of degree completed. This data should prove to be highly beneficial before collecting the qualitative data.
To collect qualitative data, I will conduct interviews, a focus group, and observations. I plan to interview the members of the Sigma Beta Club, the mentees, individually. I chose to use interviews with this group because I was concerned that the more vocal mentees would dominate the conversation during a focus group or independent thoughts could be limited if the more reserved mentees agreed with the more outgoing ones instead of expressing what their true opinion is. As for the mentors, I am planning to conduct a focus group. Whereas I do not want the mentees to feed off the responses of the others, I welcome such an interaction with the mentors. Adults tend to be more expressive than children and typically do not have trouble expressing their opinion about things that are important to them. Because I am a member of Phi Beta Sigma Fraternity, Inc., I believe that during the exchange the mentors and mentees will feel comfortable enough to produce honest and thought provoking responses. I will use observations to determine what behaviors mentors are exhibiting that build relationships with the mentees, how mentees interact with other mentees, nonverbal cues and body language of mentors and mentees, the number of participants at each mentoring session, how often mentors and mentees are absent, types of conversations held during the informal moments of the meetings, who is actually interacting with others during the informal moments of the meeting, and the level of engagement during both the formal and informal moments of the meetings. I am hoping to pick up on the strategies both consciously and unconsciously used to build relationships with the mentees, how effective they are, and how pleasurable participation in the Sigma Beta Club appears to be to the mentees based on attendance and their interactions.
Examining the role participation in the Sigma Beta Club has on the mental and social success of its mentors will aid in producing evidence based research that suggests best practices to implement a community based mentoring program, specifically those within an African American fraternity, while suggesting modifications to other community based programs as well as school based programs that serve similar populations. I believe that the results of this study will also assist the administrators of the Sigma Beta Club by improving the implementation of its program through suggestions offered for revision of its current mentor training protocol and ongoing supervision. Determining how participation in the Sigma Beta Club improves the self esteem of the mentees may also give some insight into how we can improve the self esteem of other African American adolescent males in mentoring and nonmentoring relationships. Improving the mental and social success as well as the self esteem of African American adolescent males will ultimately improve the community, leading to more productive, responsible citizens and contributors to society who will, in turn, continue the trend by mentoring those males that follow. They will recognize the significance of the relationships they experienced during their adolescence with positive African American male role models and utilize the available resources to continue to advance the quality of life for African American males.
REFERENCES
Bandura, A. (1969). Social learning theory of identification processes. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of Socialization Theory and Research. Chicago: Rand-McNally.
Barnes, J. E., Bentrup, N., Ekman, M., Brady, M. (2004). Unequal education. U.S. News and World Report, 136, 66–75.
Beam, M.R., Gil-Rivas, V., Greenberger, E., Chen, C. (2002). Adolescent problem behavior and depressed mood: Risk and protection within and across social contexts. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 31, 343–357.
Britner, P.A., Balcazar, F.E., Blechman, E.A., (2006). Mentoring special youth populations. Journal of Community Psychology, 34(6), 747-763.
Brown, L. M., Gilligan, C. (1992). Meeting at the Crossroads: Women’s Psychology and Girls’ Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2006). Youth risk behavior surveillance—United States, 2005. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 55(SS-5), 1–112. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr
Cooper, R., Jordan, W. J. (2003). Cultural issues in comprehensive school reform. Urban Education, 38, 380–397.
Darling, N., Hamilton, S.F., Toyokawa, T., Matsuda, S. (2002). Naturally occurring mentoring in Japan and the United States: Social roles and correlates. American Journal of Community Psychology, 30(2), 245–270.
Darling, N., Bogat, G.A., Cavell, T.A., Murphy, S.E. (2006). Gender, ethnicity, development, and risk: Mentoring and the consideration of individual differences. Journal of Community Psychology, 34(6), 765-779.
Davis, B. (2010). The impact of the 5000 role models of excellence project on the lives of 30 african-american males. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (UMI 3400889)
DuBois, D.L., Holloway, B.E., Valentine, J.C., Cooper, H. (2002). Effectiveness of mentoring programs for youth: A meta-analytic review. American Journal of Community ` Psychology,30, 157–197.
DuBois, D. L., Silverthorn, N. (2005). Natural mentoring relationships and adolescent health: Evidence from a national study. American Journal of Public Health, 95, 518–524.
Durlak, J.A., Wells, A.M. (1997). Primary prevention mental health programs for children and adolescents: A meta-analytic review. American Journal of Community Psychology, 25, 115–152.
Eby, L.T., Lockwood, A. (2004). Protégé’s and mentors reactions to participating in formal mentoring programs: a qualitative investigation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 441-458.
Freedman, M. (1993). The Kindness of Strangers: Adult Mentors, Urban Youth, and the New Volunteerism. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Grant, D.G., Dieker, L.A. (2010). Listening to black male student voices using web-based mentoring. Remedial and Special Education, 32, 322-333.
Grossman, J.B., Rhodes, J.E. (2002). The test of time: predictors and effects of duration in youth mentoring relationships. American Journal of Community Psychology, 30(2), 199–219.
Grossman, J. B., & Tierney, J. P. (1998). Does mentoring work? An impact study of the Big Brothers/Big Sisters program. Evaluation Review, 22, 403–426.
Hamilton, S. F., Hamilton, M. A. (1990). Linking Up: Final Report on a Mentoring Program for Youth. New York: Cornell University, College of Human Ecology, Department of Human Development & Family Studies.
Harter, S. (1986). The self-perception profile for children. Unpublished manual, University of Denver.
Herrera, C., Grossman, J.B., Kauh, T.J., Feldman, A.F., McMaken, J. (2007). Making a difference in schools: The Big Brothers Big Sisters school-based mentoring impact study. Philadelphia, PA: Public/Private Ventures.
Hurd, N.M., Sanchez, B., Zimmerman, M.A., Caldwell, C.H. (2012). Natural mentors, racial identity, and educational attainment among African American adolescents: exploring pathways to success. Child Development, 83(4), 1196-1212.
Hurd, N.M., Sellers, R.M. (2013). Black adolescents’ relationships with natural mentors: associations with academic engagement via social and emotional development. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 19(1), 76-85.
Ipka, V. W. (2003). At risk children in resegregated schools: An analysis of the achievement gap. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 30, 294–304.
Jordan, J. V. (1999). Toward connection and competence. Work in progress, No. 83. Wellesley, MA: Wellesley College.
Klaw, E. L., Rhodes, J. E. (1995). Mentor relationships and the career development of pregnant and parenting African-American teenagers. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 19, 551–562.
Langhout, R.D., Rhodes, J.E., Osborne, L.N. (2004). An exploratory study of youth mentoring in an urban context: Adolescents’ perceptions of relationship styles. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 33, 293–306.
Legum, H. L., Hoare, C. H. (2004). Impact of a career intervention on at-risk middle school students’ career maturity levels, academic achievement, and self-esteem. Professional School Counseling, 8, 148–155.
Miller, J. B., Stiver, I. P. (1997). The Healing Connection. Boston: Beacon.
Monroe, C. R. (2006). African American boys and the discipline gap: Balancing educators’ uneven hand. Educational Horizons, 84, 102–111.
Noguera, P. (2003). The trouble with Black boys: The role and influence of environmental and cultural factors on the academic performance of African American males. Urban Education, 38, 431–459.
Omoto,A. M., Snyder,M. (1995). Sustained helping without obligation: Motivation, longevity of service, and perceived attitude change among AIDS volunteers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 671–686.
Poussaint, A. F., Alexander, A. (2000). Lay my Burden Down: Unraveling Suicide and the Mental Health Crisis Among African Americans. Boston: Beacon.
Randolph. K., Johnson, J. (2008). School-based mentoring programs: A review of the research. Children & Schools, 30, 177-185.
Rhodes, J.E. (2002). Stand by me: The Risks and Rewards of Mentoring Today’s Youth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Rhodes, J. E. (2005). A model of youth mentoring. In D. L. DuBois & M. J. Karcher (Eds.), Handbook of youth mentoring (pp.30–43). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rhodes, J.E., Grossman, J.B., Resch, N.L. (2000). Agents of change: Pathways through which mentoring relationships influence adolescents’ academic adjustment. Child Development, 71, 1662–1671.
Rhodes, J.E., DuBois, D.L., (2008). Mentoring relationships and programs for youth. Association for Psychological Science, 17(4), 254-258.
Rhodes, J. E., Reddy, R., Grossman, J. B. (2005). The protective influence of mentoring on adolescents’ substance use: Direct and indirect pathways. Applied Developmental Science, 9, 31–47.
Rook, K. S., & Underwood, L. G. (2000). Social support measurement and interventions: Comments and future directions. In S. Cohen, L. G. Underwood, & B. H. Gottlieb (Eds.), Social Support Measurement and Intervention: A Guide for Health and Social Scientists (pp. 311-334). New York: Oxford University Press.
Sinclair, M. F., Christenson, S. L., Thurlow, M. L. (2005). Promoting school completion of urban secondary youth with emotional or behavioral disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71, 465–482.
Sipe, C.L.(1996). Mentoring: A synthesis of P/PV’sresearch:1988–1995. Philadelphia:Public/PrivateVentures.
Spencer, R. (2000). A comparison of relational psychologies, Project Report no. 5. Wellesley, MA: Stone Center Working Paper Series.
Spencer, R. (2006). Understanding the mentoring process between adolescents and adults. Youth & Society, 37, 287–315.
Spencer, R. (2007). ‘‘It’s not what I expected’’: A qualitative study of youth mentoring relationship failures. Journal of Adolescent Research, 22, 331–354.
Styles,M. B., Morrow, K. V. (1992). Understanding how youth and elders form relationships: A study of four Linking Lifetimes programs (Research report). Philadelphia, PA: Public/Private Ventures.
Taylor, R. L. (1989). Black youth, role models and the social construction of identity. In R. L. Jones (Ed.), Black Adolescents. Berkeley, CA: Cobb & Henry.
Thomson, N.R., Zand, D.H. (2009). Mentees' perceptions of their interpersonal relationships: The role of the mentor-youth bond. Youth & Society, 41(3), 434-445.
Tronick, E. Z. (2001). Emotional connections and dyadic consciousness in infant-mother and patient-therapist interactions. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 11, 187-194.
U.S. Department of Education. (2005). 27th annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: Author.
Utsey, S.H., Howard, A., Williams III, O. (2013). Therapeutic group mentoring with African American male adolescents. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 25(2), 126-139.
Walker, G., Freeman, M. (1996). Social change one on one: The new mentoring movement. The American Prospect, 27, 75–81.
Weinstein, C. S., Tomlinson-Clarke, S., & Curran, M. (2004). Toward a conception of culturally responsive classroom management. Journal of Teacher Education, 55, 25–38.
Wyatt, S. (2009). The brotherhood: empowering adolescent African- American males toward excellence. Professional School Counseling, 12(6), 463-470.
