The Young Women Leaders Program College Women Mentoring Adolescent Girls

Transcription

1 1 The Young Women Leaders Program College Women Mentoring Adolescent Girls 2012 National Mentoring Summit Edith Winx Lawrence, Ph.D. Jenna Marshall, M.Ed.

2 2 Key Figures & Funders Our Team Jennifer Merritt, Assoc. Director Melissa Levy, Asst. Director Nancy Deutsch, Director of Research Joanna Lee Williams, Assoc. Director of Research Amazing graduate students Sources of Funding: US Department of Education US Department of Justice W.T. Grant Foundation Alcoa Foundation University of Virginia:

3 3 Young Women Leaders Program (YWLP) After-school combined group and one-on-one mentoring Vulnerable youth Emerging leaders Established in sister sites nationally

4 And four international sister sites in Cameroon and Mozambique

5 What should a mentoring program for adolescent girls be concerned about? Adolescent girls confronted with important decisions Peer pressure and relationships Family issues and body image Academics and risky choices Damaging for youth if relationship doesn t work (Grossman & Tierney, 1998; Rhodes, 2002) 50% don t last longer than three months Girls more often referred for relational difficulties

6 College students as mentors College students wellsuited to be mentors Proximity in age Similar issues Available Popular option Over 4,500 programs

7 Concerns from mentoring field Not tied to community (Tierney & Branch, 1992) Different race and social class than mentees (DuBois et.al., 2002) Inconsistent and insensitive mentoring can have negative effect on mentees (Rhodes, 2002; Spencer, 2007)

8 Research-supported mentoring best practices (Rhodes & DuBois, 2006) Training, supervision, and support for mentors Setting and structure for mentoring activities Parental support and involvement Evaluation

9 9 Mentor training, supervision, and support through an academic service-learning format: Structure for: Integrating knowledge with service Ongoing supervision and support Scaffolding reflection and growth

10 10 YWLP Structure Big Sister Activities (5 hrs/wk) 6-8 pairs per school-based group Facilitator Big Sister meeting Mentoring Group One-onone Mentoring Class Professor Little Sister

11 11 YWLP Structure Big Sister Activities (5 hrs/wk) 6-8 pairs per school-based group Facilitator Big Sister meeting Mentoring Group One-onone Mentoring Class Professor Little Sister

12 12 YWLP Structure Big Sister Activities (5 hrs/wk) 6-8 pairs per school-based group Facilitator Big Sister meeting Mentoring Group One-onone Mentoring Class Professor Little Sister

13 13 YWLP Structure Big Sister Activities (5 hrs/wk) 6-8 pairs per school-based group Facilitator Big Sister meeting Mentoring Group One-on-one Mentoring Class Professor Little Sister

14 Structure for mentoring activities Focus: leadership training Weekly group (2 hr/wk) Group check-in Sister time Relational/skill-building activities Leadership/service project One-on-one time (4 hr/mo) Fun activities Skill building

15 Parent Support and Involvement Appreciation Certificate Dinner Interview University/community engagement Fall Finale & UVa Day Leadership projects

16 Evaluation College Women Comparison group Pre and post-participation surveys Mid-year surveys Post-intervention interviews Adolescent Girls Randomized experimental design Half assigned to program and half to control 4 schools: urban, rural and suburban Pre and post-participation surveys Post-intervention interviews

17 cohort (n = 67) Outcomes: Retention Middle School Girls 87% remained in YWLP for the full academic year 52% participated in YWLP for a second year (n = 33) College Women 96% served as a mentor for the full academic year 33% participated in YWLP for a second year (n= 22)

18 Measure of self-report improvement Being in YWLP improved the way I Relationships Attitude Problem-solving skills Tolerating difference Thinking about self/ future

19 YWLP helped me improve the way I % Yes Talk with my teachers 57.4% Talk with my parents 62% Make decisions about my behavior at school 69.8% Get involved in school as a leader 71% Do my schoolwork 63% Talk with my friends 75% Support my friends 74% Talk with other kids at school 75%

20 YWLP helped me improve the way I % Yes Deal with problems 82% Deal with sticky situations 68% Listen to people with different views from mine 74% Interact with people who are different from me 71% Feel about my body 63% Think about my future 76% Think about myself 66%

21 Pre/post participation Failed a class YWLP: no change Control: 4.4% increase Out-of-school suspension YWLP: pre = 22% post = 14% Control: no change Fighting Of YWLP girls in a fight pre, 84% not in fights while in program

22 Academic Functioning Pre and post-program data from three cohorts (2007, 2008, 2009) and comparison girls While most girls showed decline in grade-point average and school bonding, significantly less so for 2009 YWLP cohort

23 Who benefits: Pre-existing risk and self-reported improvement (Sovik, Lawrence,& Deutsch, 2008 ) data (4 cohorts) SES Greater for low SES girls than those not low SES SES & family structure Greater for low SES and from single parent home than for those with neither of those risks Relational risk: Higher risk, greater improvement in: How they talked to and supported friends Thought about themselves

24 Training, supervision, and support for college student mentors Service-learning vs. community service 2,3. Increasing popularity of service-learning on college campuses 1. College students as youth mentors 4. Most programs are not in service-learning format 5. 1 Campus Compact, 2011; 2 Giles, Honnet & Migliore, 1991; 3 Rhoads, 1998; 4 Corporation for National & Community Service, 2006; 5 Rhodes & DuBois, 2006

25 Background Service-learning benefits: Personal development (Astin et al., Jones & Abes, 2004; Simons & Cleary, 2006) Increased cultural competence (Astin et al., 2000; Eyler, Giles & Braxton, 1997) Challenges Cultural and socioeconomic differences (Eyler & Giles, 1999, Herrera et al., 2007) Expanding emotional comfort zones (Dahms, 1994; Knefelkamp, Widick, & Parker, 1978) Support Faculty Peers

26 26 YWLP Structure Big Sister Activities (5 hrs/wk) 6-8 pairs per school-based group Facilitator Big Sister Meeting Mentoring Group One-onone Mentoring Class Professor Little Sister

27 Class Relational skills Active listening Goal setting Collaborative problem-solving Sticky situations Reflection Sparkling moments

28 Big Sister Meeting Problem-solving Relational issues New perspectives Joining forces Letting out frustrations We re in this together Diversity within big sister group

29 Modeling relational skills Support for reconnection Opportunities for leadership Mentoring Group

30 Research Questions Do YWLP mentors have better psychosocial and ethnocultural empathy outcomes compared to: College women without community service involvement? College women with alternative community service involvement? Among mentors, does the level of perceived peer support moderate these outcomes?

31 Design & Participants College women mentors in YWLP (n = 254) Comparison college women (n = 334) Self-report surveys; quasi-experimental

32 Measures Ethnocultural Empathy 1 : Feeling Expression Psychosocial well-being: Competence Scholastic Competence 2 Global Self- Worth 2 Competence at College 4 Connection Social Acceptance 2 Connection at College 4 Autonomy 3 Demographic measures Perceived YWLP group support 1 Wang et al., 2003; 2 Neeman & Harter, 1986, 3 Noom, 1999; 4 Lawrence & Marsh (2000)

33 Analysis #1 RQ 1: Do YWLP mentors have greater outcomes than college women with and without alternative community service (CS) experience? Separated into two subgroups No community service involvement (No CS) (n = 106) Community service involvement (CS) (n = 228) 2 MANCOVAs All YWLP vs. No CS group All YWLP vs. CS group

34 Analysis #2 RQ 2: Among YWLP mentors, does the level of perceived mentoring group support moderate their outcomes? Separated mentors into 3 support subgroups Low Support (n = 82) Medium Support (n = 94) High Support (n = 78) 6 MANCOVAs a. Low, Medium, & High YWLP Group Support vs. No CS b. Low, Medium, & High YWLP Group Support vs. CS

35 All YWLP vs. No CS 1. MANCOVA results All YWP vs. CS Outcome Cohen s d Outcome Cohen s d Emp. Expression.43 Emp. Expression.55 Emp. Feeling.19 Emp. Feeling.28 Schol. Comp.46 Schol. Comp, n.s. - Self-Worth.32 Self-Worth.30 Comp. in College.32 Comp. in College - Social Accept..21 Connection - Autonomy.44 Social Accept., n.s. - Connection, n.s. - Autonomy 0.38 p <.10; p <.05; p <.01; p <.001

36 2a. Mean differences between the 3 YWLP support levels and No CS Mean Difference Low Support vs. No Medium Support vs. High Support vs. No 0 Emp. Expression Emp. Feeling Schol. Comp Self-Worth Comp. in College Social Accept. Connection Autonomy

37 2b. Mean differences between the 3 YWLP support levels and CS Mean Difference Low Support vs. CS Medium Support vs High Support vs. CS 0 Emp. Expression Emp. Feeling Schol. Comp Self-Worth Comp. in College Social Accept. Connection Autonomy

38 Conclusions YWLP s model may be a useful format for college student mentors. Class Peer supervision/support Structured mentoring group activities Support Psychosocial well-being Ethnocultural empathy

39 Research Limitations Limitations in determining causality Self-report data Generalizability limited by unique structure of YWLP

40 Future Directions for YWLP Global connections Leadership badges Future research OJJDP study And

41 Questions?