You are on page 1of 22

D506 Final Paper

Jessica Lee
M.s.Ed. Adult Education Program

Indiana University
Spring 2018
D506 Final Paper Lee 1

CONTENT
As would be expected with a group of four members learning increasingly more about

adult program planning over the course of the semester, our group project pivoted and evolved

continuously from our individual proposals and, in fact, our original group proposal. This

evolution is detailed in the “Process” section of this report. Ultimately, the direction that our

group took reflects a combination of a) evaluative analysis related to an existing program and b)

decision making related to hypothetical design enhancements. In other words, using Caffarella’s

(2002) interactive model as a framework, our group examined each of the twelve components

separately and considered the following questions:

1. What planning and design decisions are evident in the program as it is currently operating?

2. What planning and design decisions would we recommend to enhance the program?

Throughout the remainder of this collaboratively-developed section, we first present a

high-level overview of the targeted organization and training program and research base for our

project. Next, we discuss each component of Caffarella’s (2002) interactive model in relation to

the questions listed above. In the following section (also developed collaboratively by our

group), we detail the process that—facilitated by the class discussion boards for each course

module—led to our ultimate group focus. The final sections include our individual reflections

related to this project.

Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Ohio Valley Volunteer Training

Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Ohio Valley (BBBSOV) is a one-to-one mentoring

program dedicated to improving the lives of children facing adversity. Established in 1969, the

agency currently serves children in Vanderburgh, Warrick, Posey, Perry, Spencer, and Gibson

Counties in Southwest Indiana, and Henderson County in Kentucky. Bigs (mentors) and Littles

1
D506 Final Paper Lee 2

(mentees) are matched based on location, personalities, and preferences. BBBSOV provides

intensive support from the start (i.e., primarily through ongoing monitoring from designated case

managers) so matches can grow into long-lasting friendships (BBBSOV, 2018). A key

component of this support is the volunteer training provided to all Bigs before the mentoring

relationship begins. To date, however, limited evaluation has been conducted on the

appropriateness and effectiveness of this training.

Research Base

There is no shortage of research suggesting the importance of volunteer training related

to youth mentoring. Positive youth outcomes have been associated with length and quality of the

mentoring relationship (Grossman & Rhodes, 2002; Rhodes & Lowe, 2008), while a mentoring

agency’s adherence to established theory-based and empirically-based best practices has been

linked to relationship length and quality (DuBois, Holloway, Valentine, & Cooper, 2002).

Specifically, high quality volunteer training is related to higher levels of perceived program

support among volunteers, more favorable perceptions related to the value of the training, plans

to continue mentoring for longer periods of time, and ultimately increased levels of satisfaction

with the mentoring relationship (McQuillin, Straight, & Saeki, 2015). Further, in a study

exploring the relative importance of individual standards included in the Elements of Effective

Practice for Mentoring (EEPM) Manual (MENTOR, 2015), Kupersmidt, Stump, Stelter, and

Rhodes (2016) observed that training was the only standard independently predictive of match

length.

The research described above provides considerable support for the importance of

volunteer training in the nonprofit sector. In terms of best practices for planning, designing, and

2
D506 Final Paper Lee 3

implementing effective training for adult learners, however, our group turned to more

universally-applicable resources. Namely, Caffarella’s (2002) twelve-component interactive

model served as the foundation for our examination of BBBSOV’s current volunteer training

program and for our recommendations regarding planning and design decisions that would

enhance the current program. Each of the twelve components are discussed in turn throughout

the remainder of this section. Additional support for our recommendations comes from

Silberman and Biech’s Active Training: A Handbook of Techniques, Designs, Case Examples,

and Tips and our group members’ experience with adult training programs in different contexts

(i.e., higher education and corporate training contexts). We identified some commonalities

between some of the design steps of Silberman and Biech’s active training model and

Caffarella’s interactive model and have incorporated those similarities into some of our

recommendations. Silberman and Biech’s eight step model includes: (1) Assessing the need for

training and the participants; (2) setting general learning goals; (3) specifying objectives; (4)

designing training activities; (5) sequencing training activities; (6) starting detailed planning; (7)

revising design details; and (8) evaluating the total result.

Discerning the Context

Through our analysis of the program context, or the “human, organizational, and

environmental factors that affect decisions planners make” (Caffarella, 2002, p. 59) regarding the

BBBSOV volunteer training program, it was clear that program decisions have largely been

aligned with the key contextual factors. As the volunteer training occurs prior to a match being

made between a volunteer and his or her mentee, the people involved in the training process

simply include program staff and prospective volunteers. While the average age of volunteers in

3
D506 Final Paper Lee 4

this program is approximately 33 years-old, this mean reflects a bimodal distribution comprised

of a lot of individuals with adult children (i.e., “empty-nesters”) and college students/young

adults (BBBSOV, 2018). As a result, individuals attending the training are likely to look

substantially different in terms of age, income, and other demographics. However, feedback from

BBBSOV suggests that having such a heterogeneous group of participants actually benefits the

training sessions, adding valuable diversity to the group discussions.

Regarding organizational and environmental contextual factors, the emphasis on safety

within the training program emerged as a key exemplifier. Namely, given the nature of the

program, BBBSOV has many standard operating procedures in place to ensure that children are

safe at all times. Encouragingly, these procedures comprise a considerable portion of the

volunteer training. Further, while the training stops short of directly addressing specific cultural

factors, volunteers are trained on cultural awareness as a result of the fact that BBBSOV serves

youth from a number of different cultures and ethnic backgrounds.

One recommendation that our group identified in discerning the context of this program is

that the organization should be mindful of how power influences the program. Because adults

volunteer for the mentoring program, their participation in training is, by extension, also

voluntary. Viewed through this lens, there is a great deal of power that is held by the participants.

The organization must ensure that the training is engaging enough that participants choose to

attend. In discerning the context, Silberman and Biech’s (2015) Active Training manual suggests

that BBBSOV should be mindful of the familiarity of participants with the subject matter of the

volunteer training program. They should also inquire about any successes and problems

volunteers may have encountered if they have participated in any other volunteer programs

(Silberman & Biech, 2015, p. 16). At the same time, an adult volunteer cannot be matched with

4
D506 Final Paper Lee 5

a mentee until they successfully complete the training. From this perspective, BBBSOV has both

the power and the responsibility to include pertinent information (e.g., safety policies) regardless

of whether or not they are especially engaging. While our group acknowledges that BBBSOV is

aware of this mutually-dependent power structure on some level, feedback from the organization

suggests that this is not a consideration that drives the program design.

Building a Solid Base of Support

As a small organization, BBBSOV has little trouble building support for the volunteer

training program internally. In fact, it was observed that the Executive Director often facilitates

the training himself, though he noted that this decision is at least partially based on his former

roles as case manager and program director. Similarly, adults who sign up for the mentoring

program agree to a minimum commitment of twelve months. During this time, they agree to a

minimum amount of time spent with their mentee each month, regular contacts with their case

manager, and completion of evaluation surveys and other instruments. In other words, the

participants have demonstrated a high level commitment to the mentoring program before being

invited to participate in the training. As a result, feedback from BBBSOV suggests that

participants are typically supportive of the training from the onset.

In terms of enhancing the program, our group recommends that BBBSOV seeks

additional support for the training program from the Board of Directors and the broader

community. To be sure, we would not suggest that the Board of Directors does not currently

support the training program. However, the current level of support from this group is reportedly

passive—Directors are largely ambivalent about the training. Our recommendation would be to

invite one Director to attend each training cohort. This would a) allow them to develop a deeper

5
D506 Final Paper Lee 6

connection to the inner-workings of the organization and b) reinforce to training participants the

importance of the training content.

Caffarella (2002) notes that “thinking through strategies for obtaining support from the

wider community is essential in the planning process” (p. 98), and this is particularly true for

BBBSOV. Recruiting and maintaining a pipeline of mentor candidates is critical to the success

of the organization overall. While this recruitment is tied to the broader mentoring program and

not specifically to the volunteer training component, our group recommends that BBBSOV uses

information about the specific training component as marketing material to recruit volunteers for

the program as a whole. Feedback from BBBSOV suggests that one reason potential volunteers

hesitate is that they feel overwhelmed or underqualified for a mentoring role. Our group suggests

that advertising the training that is required before being matched may minimize these concerns.

Identifying Program Ideas / Sorting and Prioritizing Program Ideas

In describing the interactive model, Caffarella (2002) notes that “not all of the

components—and therefore not all of the tasks—are addressed in every program, and often need

to be altered depending on the people and the context” (p. 25). With this guidance in mind, our

group recognized the barriers in identifying, sorting, and prioritizing program ideas for

BBBSOV. Namely, the decisions related to these components seem relatively obvious when

compared to the other components. It is the mission of BBBSOV to match adult mentors with

children facing adversity, and adults are not prepared to serve in the mentor role (at least, not in

accordance with specific BBBSOV policies) until they are trained to do so. While the specific

objectives for the training sessions (described below) are likely to be adjusted over time, we

6
D506 Final Paper Lee 7

would propose that broader program ideas for this particular training (i.e., preparing volunteers

to be mentors) have been and will be stable for the life of the organization.

Developing Program Objectives

The development of program objectives is one component where our group immediately

recognized the need for BBBSOV to improve. Program objectives, which Caffarella (2002)

describes as “provid[ing] clear statements of the anticipated results to be achieved through

education and training programs” (p. 156) do not exist for the BBBSOV volunteer training

program. The training does address specific content such as the roles and expectations of Bigs

(mentors), and overview of the program and historical outcomes, logistics of the match

introduction, relationship development and common issues, match support (from case managers),

and child safety, and our group agreed that learning objectives could be inferred from the content

that is covered. However, no written objectives are currently included for the training.

As a direct response to this deficit, our group recommends that BBBSOV develops

written learning objectives for the volunteer training program and ensures that content and

delivery of the training are logically aligned with these objectives. This recommendation was

also inspired by Silberman and Biech’s (2015) third step of “Specifying objectives”. Silberman

and Biech (2015) assert that program planners should specify the kinds of learning participants

will experience and the results that you wish to achieve (p.16). Additionally, BBBSOV should

have their objectives written in a way that they can be used as “tools for monitoring, managing,

and evaluating the training (p.16).” For example, a relevant objective for this program might be,

“By the end of this training, participants will be able to describe the BBBSOV policies around

social media use.” Then, program planners would need to ensure that these policies are included

7
D506 Final Paper Lee 8

in the training (e.g., being “friends” with your Little is allowed, use only your Little’s first name,

do not post any pictures of your Little if he or she is a ward of the state). Consistent with

Caffarella’s (2002) best practices and Silberman and Biech’s active training model, we

recommend that the objectives are practical, concrete, discriminative, feasible, and describe

measurable achievements.

Designing Instructional Plans

Having recommended the learning objectives in the prior component, our group next

turned to an examination of the instructional plans for the BBBSOV volunteer training. In the

current training design, a group of participants meets in a conference room with one or more

members of the BBBSOV staff. Instructional materials include handouts that are provided to

each participant and a Power Point presentation that guides the pacing and sequencing of

content. In addition, the staff facilitator supplements the written materials with his or her own

stories. Further, participants are encouraged to ask questions and share their own ideas

throughout the process. Encouragingly, Caffarella (2002) identifies such face-to-face group

discussion as a technique that is aligned with the learning outcome of acquiring knowledge—the

primary goal of the volunteer training.

At the same time, our group recognized a clear lack of instructional techniques tied to

strengthening problem-solving capabilities and changing attitudes. Given the challenging

situations that volunteers will almost certainly face in their roles as mentors to children facing

adversity, our group recommends incorporating additional instructional techniques into the

volunteer training. Namely, Caffarella (2002) identifies simulations and problem-based learning

as effective techniques for building problem-solving skills. These techniques are also echoed in

8
D506 Final Paper Lee 9

Silberman and Biech (2015) as effective for problem solving skills. For BBBSOV, the facilitator

could describe a common problem that volunteers face (e.g., a mentee that seems detached

and/or reluctant to open-up to the mentor) and ask participants to work collaboratively towards a

solution. Importantly, our group would recommend that the scenarios not have a clear-cut

solution, but rather require participants to brainstorm and weigh a variety of solutions. Further,

our group would recommend incorporating role playing into the instruction to concretize the

concepts and scenarios being discussed. With our suggestion that scenarios should not have a

clear cut solution, the active training manual offers a few additional suggestions for role plays

including improvisation and semi-prescribed roles. An improvisational role play could involve

participants being given a general scenario, as mentioned above. Silberman and Biech assert that

improvisation would allow greater spontaneity and an opportunity to gear the scenario towards

participants own experiences (Silberman and Biech, p. 130, 2015) . Similarly, a semi-prescribed

role play could be an effective strategy, where participants are given information about the

situation and the characters to be portrayed, but not told how to handle the situation (Silberman

and Biech, p. 130, 2015).

Devising Transfer-of-Learning Plans

The transfer of learning is a particularly challenging component of the BBBSOV program

given the nature of the enrollment process. Because volunteers must complete the training before

being eligible to be matched with a mentee, and because the matching process can take two

weeks or more, it is almost always the case that volunteers are several weeks removed from the

training before they have the opportunity to apply what they have learned. Further, because

volunteers often only meet with their mentees once a week, it is not out of the question that many

9
D506 Final Paper Lee 10

months could pass before a volunteer is presented with a situation that was covered in the

volunteer training. Required monthly contact with the case manager does aid in transfer to an

extent, there is no guarantee that all of the training content will resurface during these calls.

Caffarella (2002) describes a number of techniques that could be employed to facilitate

learning transfer, and our group highlighted three in particular to recommend to BBBSOV. First,

because much of the instructional material is already presented in written form, our group

recommends posting this information as job aids on a site that is easily accessible by volunteers.

The primary purpose of these aids would be to provide quick and clear answers to specific

questions volunteers may have as they navigate the mentoring relationship. Second, our group

recognizes that mentoring relationships present unique challenges that may be best understood

by individuals in similar situations. As a result, we recommend that BBBSOV facilitates an

online support group for volunteer mentors. This private forum would be an opportunity for all

active mentors to share aspects of their relationships that are working well as well as those that

are a struggle. Within this online support group, we believe that BBBSOV could also implement

an idea from Silberman and Liech (2015), who suggest asking participants to complete a

questionnaire that provides insight about their current functioning in their mentor relationship

(p.312). As a part of this questionnaire participants could be asked to evaluate their areas of

strength and weakness, and seek help with their weakness from others who identified such areas

as strengths. Finally, Caffarella (2002) indicates that follow-up sessions can be effective tools to

reinforce the concepts and knowledge presented in an earlier training. We recommend that

BBBSOV offers such booster sessions at least quarterly for any active volunteers to attend at

their own discretion.

10
D506 Final Paper Lee 11

Formulating Evaluation Plans

When addressing evaluation planning, it was important for our group to consider a subtle

but critical distinction—evaluation of the mentoring program overall versus evaluation of the

volunteer training in particular. We noted a relatively comprehensive evaluation framework in

place for the mentoring program overall and, while a discussion of this evaluation is beyond the

scope of the current report, we recognized that many of the indicators (e.g., increased match

length, improved self-esteem and grades among mentees, a reduction in problematic behaviors)

could be viewed as long-term outcomes of the training program. At the same time, we

recognized that there are there are too many other factors that could influence these outcomes for

this to be the extent of the training evaluation.

As a result, our group’s recommendation is that BBBSOV employ an evaluation

framework that isolates the effectiveness of the volunteer training. For example, we recommend

that BBBSOV develops an assessment of the learning objectives described above and

administers it at the end of each training. This would ensure that participants have learned the

key information covered in the training or highlight the need to revisit certain information. While

this approach admittedly only addresses short-term knowledge gains, it is—interestingly

enough—the short-term assessment that is missing from the current evaluation framework. If it

can be established that all volunteers were adequately knowledgeable upon completion of the

training, the theory could begin to be built that the longer-term outcomes result, at least in part,

from the volunteer training. In addition to evaluating short term learning gains, it is also

important that BBBSOV are capturing participant reactions and experience throughout their

training. Silberman and Biech (2015) suggest issuing reaction surveys in the form of checklists,

anonymous reaction index cards, and ratings (p. 355). We believe that by incorporating surveys,

11
D506 Final Paper Lee 12

those delivering the training will have relevant and recent feedback to make adjustments to

training offerings as needed.

Making Recommendations and Communicating Results

In the absence of any structured evaluation specific to the volunteer training, program

successes and failures are currently identified through staff reflections about the sessions and

informal feedback from training participants. As a result, there are not formal processes in place

for making recommendations about the training program or communicating results of the

program. Our group developed two recommendations related to this component. First,

recognizing the value of subtle and informal feedback, we recommend that participant reactions

to the training (even if only expressed through casual conversation) be taken into consideration

when planning for program improvements. Second, once the training evaluation described above

is in place, our group recommends results be used to inform program improvements. For

example, if a learning objective is not being achieved for a portion of the participants, BBBSOV

should revisit that section of the training and consider revisions. Further, results of the training

evaluation should be shared with key stakeholders such as program staff, volunteer mentors, the

Board of Directors, and even the parents/guardians of youth in the program.

Selecting Formats Schedules and Staff Needs

The BBBSOV volunteer training is a small group, face-to-face format offered in the

evenings or (less frequently) on weekends. BBBSOV staff facilitate the training on a rotating

basis, though it should be noted that the Executive Director often elects to facilitate the training

due to personal preference. Trainings typically take place one to two times per month and are

12
D506 Final Paper Lee 13

attended by between two and twenty new volunteers. The format, scheduling, and staffing of the

training program is operating effectively based on the frequency of new volunteer enrollments.

One recommendation that our group has relates to being proactive with regard to the

possibility of dramatically increasing numbers of volunteers. In anticipation of this possibility,

BBBSOV would be wise to consider a distance learning format. We do agree that the training is

most suitable for synchronous delivery due to the ability to answer questions in real-time and

incorporate additional instructional techniques such as role playing. However, with software

such as Zoom growing in prevalence, it is reasonable for BBBSOV to begin developing a virtual

format as a preemptive step.

Preparing Budgets and Marketing Plans and Coordinating Facilities and On-Site Events

After an analysis of Caffarella’s (2002) best practices and based on feedback from

BBBSOV, our group determined that the final two components are less relevant to this particular

training program. That is, of course, if we are able to separate the volunteer training from the

BBBSOV mentoring program overall. As a nonprofit organization, it is essential for BBBSOV to

establish and follow budgets for almost any initiative. The training, however, seems to be an

exception to this rule. Because the training sessions are held at the BBBSOV conference room,

there are no costs and minimal planning associated with planning facilities. Staff do facilitate the

training during non-typical work hours, but they are instructed to utilize flex-time throughout the

rest of the week to compensate for the additional hours. While some printing costs are incurred

by the organization, these are immaterial in relation to the overall operating budget. Similarly,

while BBBSOV engages in a comprehensive marketing plan for the mentoring program as a

13
D506 Final Paper Lee 14

whole, no such marketing targets the volunteer training because this is a required component of

the volunteer enrollment process.

14
D506 Final Paper Lee 15

PROCESS

With four people coming from several different backgrounds, our group did face a bit of

difficulty trying to get all of our ideas together into one cohesive paper and theme. When we

initially set out to begin this project, we thought that we would do a comparison of each of the 12

Steps of Caffarella’s Interactive Model (2002) from training programs from several different

training environments: corporate, scholastic, and non-profit. However, over the course of our

meeting we concluded that this could be unwieldy and potentially repetitive if there was

significant overlap between the processes used by these different approaches. We discussed our

different backgrounds and adult education planning experience to see where we might have

underlying commonalities. We held bi-weekly Zoom meetings to discuss the overall program

plan and dissect how we each interpreted the steps of Caffarella’s model and how they fit into

our overall plan.

One of our initial options we ruled out was doing a multimedia study on how different

avenues of training utilize different programs and to try and determine if successful

commonalities among training programs exists. We think this could have been a very interesting

study, however once we started getting into the nuts and bolts of compiling information it was

nearing a dissertation-length study rather than a program design plan so ultimately it was

discarded. In a different environment and potentially including field studies, we think this could

lead to very interesting research about how very different approaches to training can have a

common core of what works successfully for them. Ultimately, we decided it was not the right fit

for this group project.

After further discussion we decided that the best approach was to focus on evaluating an

existing program with a non-profit organization in comparison to Caffarella’s Model to

15
D506 Final Paper Lee 16

determine areas where they excel, where there is opportunity to change, and recommendations

our group determined could lead to BBBSOV having a more successful and effective training

program.

One of the largest challenges facing program planning for BBBSOV is the nature of the

program itself. Because most of the participants in these training programs are volunteers, it

poses more of a challenge in determining the timing of the trainings, number of participants,

number of staff needed, etc. as these things will depend on the supply of volunteers to the

program. This area of Caffarella’s model in “selecting formats, schedules and staff needs”

definitely created the largest area of concern. One solution we considered to this is that while

there is not a specified budget for marketing for the training as that is already done for the

volunteer program, there could be more of an emphasis placed on marketing and recruiting to

targeted volunteer groups to help to create a more consistent pool of volunteer candidates. For

example, we discussed holding open houses or fundraising events that could be tied towards

running in a marathon race. While that event can be open to all to participate, it is marketing

towards individuals who care about overall health and wellbeing; a quality desirable in a mentor.

Consequently, this constraint affected several of the recommendations made for steps in the

program due to the inevitable volunteer pool composition and so our recommendations were

made with the assumption of BBBSOV optimizing the way they attract and retain volunteers to

their program.

Overall, we felt that BBBSOV presented a good challenge for evaluating their training

program and determining where opportunities for improvement existed. In part this is because of

areas that there have been inefficient procedures in place for several years that could be

improved with the new processes being implemented. The biggest wealth of information came

16
D506 Final Paper Lee 17

from having two of our group members currently working in the non-profit arena and they

brought working knowledge of areas that they are familiar with due to observing first-hand

successes and failures. Because we all come from very different backgrounds in the training

world, having people who have a more in-depth personal knowledge of non-profit culture and

procedure helped tremendously with being able to better identify areas in which improvements

would be beneficial and if they would even be realistic from an administrative standpoint.

17
D506 Final Paper Lee 18

REFLECTION
Yes, I think the course helped preparing me for more detailed and organized program

planning than I had done in the past and the Caffarella (2002) text helped provide a large amount

of resources for helping in the different stages of program planning. While I have planned

programs in the past, I think by breaking the process down to the 12 Step Interactive Model and

providing a variety of resources, it helps to keep the process organized and to be able to answer

questions that will be asked when presenting the program to leadership for approval. I feel like

this project helped to open my perspective to how program-planning in the non-profit sector

faces its’ own challenges from the nature of needing volunteers to be able to staff the programs

that are being planned to budget and facility constraints, etc. Having only worked in the

corporate sector I have not had the same experience so I think it was very interesting to explore

more into different challenges faced in other training environments.

Through the course of the project I also learned more about myself and how to step out of

the leadership role I tend to take in group projects. I like to take the lead and to direct projects,

however in this project because I was unfamiliar with the non-profit process for developing

training programs so I needed to step back and allow someone else to take the lead as both Joi

and Doug were more knowledgeable about non-profit programs than I am. This helped me to

continue develop my ability to collaborate with other and give them the opportunity to speak up

and help direct our learning rather than feeling I need to take the lead. This is something I have

been working on myself and I feel that this project helped me to continue to my growth to be

able to embrace the diverse knowledge of the group and let others take the lead when they have

more experience or knowledge than I possess.

18
D506 Final Paper Lee 19

Typically I have always embraced and enjoyed Self-Directed Learning (SDL) as I believe

that more learning takes place through changes in thought processes, questioning your beliefs,

and developing learning based upon your experiences and skills. I think that this project helped

to reinforce my enthusiasm for SDL and for transformative learning as that is where I think true

learning takes place as I believe learning is more than memorizing facts and figures, but also

involves growing and changing as a person and growing knowledge. I think from this experience

I would like to also incorporate what I experienced of a student who normally takes the lead

needing to take a back seat to be able to learn from others who possess different knowledge than

them. I think in future group projects or group learning I could recreate this by having students

who are typically more outspoken or leaders paired up with students who are less likely to speak

their mind or take the lead. This will allow these students to learn from one another’s

experiences plus it will enable them to embrace the diversity that comes from working with

someone who has a different background and personality than you do. Overall, I really enjoyed

this project as well as the course and will continue to incorporate what I have learned in my

career as an educator as well as a student.

19
D506 Final Paper Lee 20

REFERENCES

Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Ohio Valley (BBBSOV). (2017). Retrieved from

https://www.mentoringkids.org/

Caffarella, R.S. (2002). Planning programs for adult learners: A practical guide for educators,

trainers, and staff developers. (2 ed.) San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.


nd

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(2), 157-197.

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.

Kupersmidt, J. B., Stump, K. N., Stelter, R. L., & Rhodes, J. E. (2016). Mentoring program

practices as predictors of match longevity. Journal of Community Psychology, 45, 630-

645.

McQuillin, S. D., Straight, G. G., & Saeki, E. (2015). Program support and value of training in

mentors’ satisfaction and anticipated continuation of school-based mentoring

relationships. Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 23(2), 133-148.

MENTOR. (2015). Elements of effective practice for mentoring (4 ed.). Boston, MA.
th

Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in Adulthood: A

comprehensive guide (3 ed.). San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.


rd

Rhodes, J., & Lowe, S. R. (2008). Youth mentoring and resilience: Implications for practice.

Child Care in Practice, 14(1), 9-17.

Silberman, M. & Biech, L. (2015). Active training: A handbook of techniques, designs, case

20
D506 Final Paper Lee 21

examples, and tips. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

21

You might also like