Program Design and Effectiveness for Formal Mentorship - Essay Example

FORMAL YOUTH MENTORSHIP By of School and Formal Youth Mentorship The youth mentoring programs are built on the one-on-one relationship that exists between the youths and the caring adult mentors, and the parties meet for at least four to eight hours within a month at a designated site, including; school, community organization site, or at a private place of their chosing (Zachary, 2002). The youth mentoring could also be a single adult mentor taking the mentorship responsibility for several youths in a group, but with a maximum of four youths meeting for the four to eight hours in a month. Mentors could have more than a single mentee, although they should take their sessions exclusively and separately. A mentor concentrates on creating a positive relationship with the youths under mentorship, as well as following the goals identified for the mentoring program towards the success of the mentee. The creation of a quality program for youth mentoring is majorly based on effective practice elements. According to the findings by Young and Wright (2001) on the positive effects of youth mentorship, quality practice standards are instrumental in fostering the desired outcomes for the participating youths. In essence, the formal youth mentoring practice is important in enhancing the emotional well-being and social skills of the youths. The youths also benefit from the improved cognitive skills through listening and dialogue, as well as serving as advocates and role models (Whitmore, 2002). Program Design and Effectiveness for Formal Mentorship The increased number of the mentoring programs has equally compromised the quality of the programs over the long time. According to Trzesniewski (2008), not all mentoring programs and relationships are beneficial to the mentees. In these findings, the mentoring programs that have stronger infrastructure can potentially produce greater positive impacts, since the infrastructure directly relates to the impact of the mentor on the mentees. The solidity of the relationship between the mentor and the mentee is essential towards the improvement of the attitudes of the mentees, together with their performances and behaviors (Tsangaridou, 2008). The formal mentorship programs, for instance, are important in providing the settings for maintaining and developing a solid relationship between mentees and the mentors. Literature highlights particular elements that are considered critical for the effectiveness of a mentorship program. Among the important elements exhibited in the formal mentorship program is the screening process, which facilitates the identification of the most effective personnel to act in the mentors’ capacity (Colley, 2000). The characteristics of an effective mentor include; the skills and ability to maintain a steady presence within the life of the youth, building of trust, having respect for the viewpoint of the youth, as well as understanding the need for acquaintance and fun with the family of the mentee without their involvement (Bennetts, 2002). It is also an important aspect that the mentor demonstrates the willingness to consult with the staff in the program for advice and help. The formal mentorship is also characterized by orientation and training, which is important in ensuring that the mentees and the mentors have a common understanding of the roles they play in the program. Such activities are essential towards the development of realistic expectations for accomplishment by the mentor (Davis, 2008). Another important aspect of the formal youth mentorship is the support and supervision involved, which helps the mentor in the building of trust as well as development of positive relations with the mentees. This is important for both the mentor and the mentee in negotiation of the challenges that exist within the relationship. Additionally, the matching process is regarded as another basic infrastructure element. The rate of failure for mentor matches is relatively high in certain programs where the ideal pairing strategy is not well known. However, according to the research, the behavior of the mentor is far more important to the general success of the relationship, which is determined in terms of the mentee satisfaction, the length, as well as the positive outcomes compared to the characteristics of the mentor, which include; gender, race or age (Bohnert, Crnic and Lim, 2003). The matches on the basis of the preferences and similarities between the mentor and the mentee, among which are the activities and attitudes, are seen to have higher likelihood of resulting in a close and supportive relationship. Functions of a mentor A better understanding of mentoring can be achieved through knowledge of the roles and functions involved. From the early 1908s, several researchers have moved to categorize the functions and roles performed by the mentors into two, namely; the psychosocial and career support. Under the career functions are the various practices by the mentor, which include; coaching, sponsorship, protection, visibility and exposure, as well as the assignments of challenging work (Wright and Wright, 1987). On the other hand, the psychosocial benefit umbrella covers advice and feedback, competence, together with the clarity of identity. While the professional mentorship shows a shift in a manner in which the mentorship is encouraged and consciously applied by the management, the institutionalized or formal mentorship goes beyond that by turning mentorship into an issue of systematic policy as well as being a standard part of the training program of the institutional staff. In this case, therefore, the mentorship is made a core and compulsory component of the institution’s training program for the staff. Within institutions and organizations with formal mentorship programs, there is the involvement of a couple of senior staff together with the junior or new staff. As Trainor (2008) notes, the formal programs are those that are assigned, monitored and maintained by the concerned organization. Formal mentorship has been praised for its ability to ensure that the mentorship is extended to the individuals and minorities who would never have benefited from the same in the previous programs of the organizations or institutions. The effectiveness of the formal mentorship, as observed by Timperley and Phillips (2003), depends on several assumptions, including; the mentors having full commitment to the proposed program, compatibility between the mentors and the mentees, and that the mentors posses both interpersonal and technical skills. Therefore, it must be understood that formalization of mentorship and installing it as a compulsory staff development aspect does not result in automatic outcomes or the desired adoption and acceptance. Mentoring as a Youth Development Strategy Adolescence is cited as a challenging stage that poses very difficult choices for the youths. At the same time, the youths at this stage have limited access to healthy and safe support and alternatives, amongst which are the after-school and recreational activities, which would be important in helping them avoid risky behaviors like use of drugs and sexual activity (Bramble, 2010). This is so true, particularly among the youths living in environments that are characterized by crime, poverty, and violence. Generally, the mentoring programs have been traditionally used as interventions in addressing particular problems for the youths, especially the rates of school drop-out, pregnancies among adolescents, as well as the alcohol and drug use. The targeted strategies of intervention are focused on giving solutions to the problems, offering the adult guidance that is important in influencing the youths engaging in risky behaviors, as well as helping prevent those yet to engage in such behaviors (Buchmann, 2002). In the current perspective, mentoring is seen in a wider view, where it is perceived as a component of the approach towards positive youth development. The positive youth development orientation is founded on the basic stages and needs for the development of youths. There is the assumption that focusing on the basic developmental needs, as opposed to removing or fixing particular problems, is the most effective way of achieving endurance and positive results (Dubois, Holloway, Valentine and Harris, 2002). The youth developmental strategy is important in helping the youths to acquire the competencies they require in mastering the adolescent challenges as well as becoming healthy, caring and responsible adults. The mentoring program is inclusive of a series of experiences and activities that are meant to help the youth become morally, socially, physically, cognitively and emotionally competent (Hansmann, 2002). The basic foundation of the youth development is founded on the theories of prevention and development. According to the prevention research findings, the environment for children and youths are shaped by the absence or presence of a variety of factors. Protective factors and risk factors are found across families, schools, peers, and the community environment, including within the individuals themselves (Jekielek, Moore, Hair and Scarupa, 2002). The exposure to increased risk factor numbers enhances the possibilities of problem behaviors. On the other hand, an increased exposure to the protective factors is more likely to prevent the occurrence of problem behaviors, regardless of the risk factors (Colley and Hodkinson, 2001). Additionally, the same protective and risk factors have been identified as having a great impact in bringing various problem behaviors. According to the prevention research, it is also evident that there is a developmental impact since different protective and risk factors impact greatly at varying stages of a youth’s development. The youth mentorship development approach is aimed at building strength upon the assets in existence for the youths. The premise underlying this is that the more the assets the youths have, the less the likelihood of their engagement in trouble or risky behaviors (Hattie, 2008). On the other hand, youths with more assets have higher likelihood of engaging in positive behaviors which the society perceives as being valuable, among which is successfully pursuing academics and providing voluntary services to the community. The youth mentoring approaches focus on the broader needs for development of the youths, amongst which are the interesting and challenging activities, including; the sense of safety, leadership, the feeling of belonging, partaking in decision making, as well as the opportunity for serving in the community (Felix, 2004). In addition, there are considerations for the health and mental health skills, with the children acquiring mentorship assistance perceived as being healthy and productive in their adulthood. Colley (2006) suggests that a supportive and sustained relationship with an adult that is caring is instrumental for the successful development of the youth. The formal mentoring practices offer a structured caring relationship for the youth from the adults. The formal mentorship programs, as observed by Finch (2001), have been made particularly important to the drastic changes that have occurred in the modern society setup, amongst which are the evidence of isolation and increased mobility, which have inevitably denied the developing children chances of enjoying the informal caring structures with adults. The developmental perspective incorporated in the formal mentoring recognizes the essential tasks, milestones and challenges, together with the competencies required in order to enhance youth development (Heathfield, 2010). The major positives, as exhibited by the formal mentorship activities, is the theme of focusing on the positive development and growth of the youth’s belief in own abilities, as well as enhancing the connectivity feeling to other society members. The youths are also made to identify and appreciate their belief in their own control over own fate and their stable identities. Another dominant theme within the youth mentorship strategy is that the youth development is initiated through dynamic and reciprocal interactions between the youth and his or her environment, among which is the society, peers and families. A recent research study on the interventions for youth development found that a greater range of approaches for youth development, among which is mentoring, leads to positive behavioral changes, which includes improved interpersonal relationship and skills, as well as enhanced self-control and academic excellence (Colley, Hodkinson and Malcolm, 2002). The mentorship approaches are also important in reducing some problem behaviors, including; the use of drugs and aggressive behaviors. For instance, according to the study conducted by Colley (2003), the vast majority of police chiefs within the small, medium and large cities of the US acknowledged that crimes could be significantly reduced if more investment by the government was directed into more mentorship programs, which assist the youths in getting a good start in life. The increase in investment for the programs was ranked by the police as being instrumental in their strategy for crime prevention in the long term. Examples of Formal Youth Mentorship 1. Career Development Career development programs are important formal mentorship practices for the youths. This process is important in inculcating ideal skills and qualities in the young people, as well as offering them objective insights into their potential, based on the qualities and abilities they have. This can be achieved through experienced mentorship for the purpose of preparing them for their future leadership roles in the given organizations. The established systems for leadership development within formal settings is aimed at fostering career success through acquiring career advancement for the youth as well as obtaining scholarships, funding from external financial bodies, and for appropriate career choice and advice. Advantages of Formal Mentorship a. Social inclusion Among the important aspects of the formal mentorship is the social inclusion, with the program providing ample environment that enables the groups, who could have otherwise found it impossible to access influence networks, the necessary help for overcoming extrinsic and intrinsic barriers to career progression and self-development. Among the obvious programs here are the diversity programs that are purposed to offer similar competition grounds for all individuals in the competitive career market regardless of their gender, race, forms of disabilities, or any other social inclusion aspects (Compas, Connor-Smith, Saltzman and Wadsworth, 2001). It is evident that the formal mentoring provides the desired psychological and career benefits, most notably among women, who have achieved spectacular and measurable outcomes in their careers, especially in job promotions that come as a result of developed career abilities. b. Organizational v individual benefits The program has been praised for its effectiveness in promoting individual and organizational benefits. This means that the formal mentorship promotes an equal balance between the employees and employers. The individual employees within an organization are likely to benefit from the formal programs in terms of career development, skill development, opportunities for gaining experience and learning, acquisition of knowledge, as well as having a sound counselor or board (Colley, 2000). On the other hand, the organization benefits from the formal programs of mentorship through improved employee performances, employee retentions, safety value, and sharing of knowledge within the organization. Practitioners that have formal programs have a higher likelihood of providing benefits for mentors. According to Cook (2002), the training of skills in mentoring can be transferred to other relationships thus helping the mentors acquire significant learning and satisfaction from the dialogue on development. Several organizations rewards the mentors with increased accessibility to more management opportunities, and this is motivational and impacts positively on the career development abilities c. learning Potential Evidence suggest that if left on their own, there is a higher likelihood that the mentees will look for mentors that are easily reachable by them, or the high-flyer mentors, with the abilities of providing career tow-rope for them. The formal settings of mentorship provide the mentees with a wide range of alternatives from which they can settle on their preferred choice for mentors. This is important in creation of relationships in the environment that is characterized by too much comfort and similarities for stimulating the high challenge levels and of varying perspectives (Flaherty, 2005). The choice of mentors from within the formal settings enables the mentee to choose the perceived high flyer, and this presents certain level of career benefits. The formal form of mentorship is also instrumental in weeding out the toxic or unsuitable mentors, especially the persons whose value in the organization is termed as dysfunctional or obsolete. This means the mentoring staff is maintained at competent levels for the purpose of ensuring high levels of mentee satisfaction and influence (Bullough, 2005). Disadvantages The lack of motivation among the formal mentors is a threat to the general success of the mentorship program. The mentors within the formal organizations do not receive the recognition and rewards they deserve for the accomplishment of their respective tasks accomplished. The organizations perceive their achievements as responsibility completion and this denies them entitlement to bonuses, pay increase and other motivational incentives, which could eventually compromise the quality of services they provide. On the other hand, the formal relationships have been perceived to have a greater focus on the short-term career goals and only foster relations to the current positions of the mentees. However, the informal mentors focus on the long-term desires of the mentee. The short-sighted approach of the formal programs makes them less popular among the protégés, who lose focus on the program when they realize it will not help them overcome the future life problems (Foskett, 2001). It should be understood that not all the formal programs lack the long-term aspect of mentorship, since most of them go further and exert much emphasis on the fact that their relationships are not solely based on career assistance, but equally promote overall individual development. There is less motivation among the formal mentors in their practices compared to those of the informal mentors. This is because they perceive the practice as a duty to be accomplished in order to earn a certain favor. Chesterman (2000) also observes that formal mentors could exhibit less effective coaching and communication skills compared to their informal compatriots. The formal setting of mentorship follows a particular and strict format of practices, which may not facilitate random and free communication and interactions. This may give the mentor limited understanding of the mentees and this compromises the effectiveness of the general program. The perception held by the mentee is of great significance than that of the mentor. It is in this respect that many schemes have began adopting the selection and preferences by mentees in order to ensure that there is comfort and confidence for the mentees in the hands of the mentors, and this also enhances the motivation and interest of the mentor in the relationship. The formal programs are also executed in a manner that matches people across the departmental boundaries as a means of avoiding favoritism. Clutterbuck (2004) thinks this could possibly impede the ability of the formal mentor to intervene on the behalf of the mentee and provide the required protection, exposure, sponsorship, as well as the assignment functions that are challenging. They could equally have career modeling and role modeling functions that are less effective, due to their differences in career paths and interests. 2. Drug Addict Youth Rehabilitation This form of mentorship is particularly meant for transforming the youths’ life from the otherwise risky and problematic behaviors of drug use, to a safe drug-free life. In this case, therefore, the rehabilitation centers are made available for these practices, with the personnel hired for this purposes having acquired the sufficient academic training and qualifications for the same. This means that the program for rehabilitation is formulated to suit a particular formal program that is meant to bring forth the desired outcomes within a foreseeable period of time among the youths. According to the labeling theory, individuals are likely to develop the feeling of obligation to acting out the roles as dictated by their criminal status in the society. This means that the people regarded as morally incompetent in the society are often sidelined and secluded from the general society (Densely, 2011). The link between deviant self identification and the real deviant behaviors cannot be undermined, although there is a possibility that the association between behavior and identity is largely mediated by other social influences. The labeling concept demonstrates that the drug addicts, who are considered as socially incompatible, face a bigger challenge of conforming to what the society perceives as normal life, and this inevitably compromises their willingness to transform into better persons. Advantages The critical aspect of the mentoring relationship is its ability to enable acquisition of new skills and enhancing competence in the future roles to be played by and individual. According to Budd and Sims (2001), the experience gained from a formal relationship of mentorship is important in enabling the mentee to have a clear understanding of the future expectations at both personal and society levels, and this leads to increased competence in their respective roles. Majority of the formal programs include within their core goals, socialization into the culture and climate of the society (Hattie, 2011). The varying models of social environment provided by the formal mentorship program are important in enabling the addicted youths to have the opportunity of socializing with the new roles. The formal mentorship is also important in increasing the level of confidence experienced due to the mentees’ full integration into the new life roles following their rehabilitation. In addition, the formal mentors in the rehabilitation programs assist the mentees in development of own potential, acquisition of self-knowledge, as well as development of self-confidence. The program also bears twin benefits of feedback and assistance, which fall under the theme of personal support together with development and learning (Gilligan, 2000). The two benefits give an illustration of the valuable guidance and advice given by the mentors. Among other benefits of the formal mentorship in this program is the continuous developmental and performance rating provided following evaluations of the mentee rehabilitation progress. This means the program can easily detect any aspects of deterioration or improvement on the part of the mentee and sanction a change in the mentorship approach that suits the individual mentee’s progress. In the same way the mentees report mentoring as a factor that enhances their self-confidence, Dalton (2002) has demonstrated that the mentoring process improves the mentor’s self image, since they are capable of seeing themselves as helpful, competent, and with the personality currency in other people’s life. The mentoring experience also provides self rejuvenation for the mentor through the sharing of life experiences with the mentees. The interaction provides an avenue for learning new things about life from an individual and societal point of view. Disadvantages The formal mentorship is not always a voluntary practice for both the mentor and the mentee. As suggested by Hjelle and Ziegler (1992), majority of the individuals enrolling for the rehabilitation programs do not do that at free-will, but as a result of certain external pressure on them to have a behavior change for better life. This means the program is bound to experience a significant level of resistance from the mentees, especially if the formal mentor fails to provide the mutual and social relationship between them that would serve as an additional conviction for the mentor to prefer behavior change. There are several sources that generally focus on the formal mentoring programs together with the associated problems. For instance, Barmaki and Zangeneh (2009) carried out a research on formal mentorship as compared to the informal form of mentorship from the perspective of both the mentee and the mentor. Within a formal program of mentoring, the mentor occupies a high hierarchy in the organization, which is about two levels above that occupied by the mentee. In this research, the leader-member exchange theory was applied in evaluation of data from mentee and mentor relationship (Hargreaves and Fullan, 2000). The theory is based on the social exchange theory, thus providing parallels between the mentoring processes to that of leadership. Heaney (2002) observes that the informal mentoring relationship has been effective in developmental functions for psychosocial and career growth than that realized in formal mentorship. This shows that the formal mentorship has always required longer period of time in order to result in significant benefits. On the other hand, it is also evident that the formal schemes mostly put arbitrary limits of time on the relationship which may not be sufficient in fostering the ideal impact required for an individual under mentorship. Another notable disadvantage of the formal programs is that the protégés in this relationship could perceive that the mentors stay with them for longer periods as a matter of duty and commitment towards the program due to organizational demands, rather than as a result of personal commitment. Such suspicion among the mentees could result in restricted trust development and lack of emotional closeness. Conclusion Participation Theory In line with the participation theory and the participation larder by Roger Hart, it is evident that the positions occupied by the youths under mentorship in both of the formal mentorship programs is significantly suppressed. Based on the larder position categories, the roles of the mentees in the career development mentorship is the tokenism position, where the young person seems to be given a certain role to play, yet there is limited or no chance of the opinions they give influencing the course of their programs (Dubois, Holloway, Valentine and Harris, 2002). The formal mentorship for career development has definite guidelines and procedures guiding the process, hence giving no room for external input into the process. This inevitably compromises the quality of development for the youths, since it fails to acknowledge the individual abilities of the youths. However, this position occupied by the mentee could be perceived ideal for both the mentorship instution and the mentor since it facilitates uninterrupted course of activities in the program. The lack of input from the mentee means the set goals and objectives for the individual mentee, as determined by the mentoring organization, are achieved (Hargreaves and Fullan, 2000). This also ensures that only the prioritized organizaitional development goals are mentored into the junior personnel. Labeling Theory According to the labeling theory, individuals are likely to develop the feeling of obligation to acting out the roles as dictated by their criminal status in the society. This means that the people regarded as morally incompetent in the society are often sidelined and secluded from the general society (Densely, 2011). The link between deviant self-identification and the real deviant behaviors cannot be undermined, although there is a possibility that the association between behavior and identity is largely mediated by other social influences. The labeling concept demonstrates that the drug addicts, who are considered as socially incompatible, face a bigger challenge of conforming to what the society perceives as normal life, and this inevitably compromises their willingness to transform into better persons. Based on this theory, therefore, formal mentoring fails to provide the perfect society model that would give a real reflection of the society for the youth development. Bibliography Barmaki, R. and Zangeneh, M., 2009. Canadian Dream, Capitalism and the State: Structural Conditions of Youth Gambling in Canada. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 7(4), pp. 572-587. Bennetts, C., 2002. Traditional mentor relationships, intimacy and emotional intelligence. International Journal of Qualitative studies in Education, 15(2), pp. 150-177. Bohnert, A.M., Crnic, A. and Lim, K. G., 2003. Emotional Competence and Aggressive Behavior in School-Age Children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 31(1), pp. 79-9. Bramble, S., 2010. An exploration into the mentor and young person as mentee relationship. Published by Children’s workforce development council. Buchmann, C., 2002. Interpersonal Influences and Educational Aspirations in 12 Countries:The Importance of Institutional Context. Sociology of Education, 75(2), pp. 99-122. Budd, T. And Sims, L., 2001. Anti-social behaviour and disorder: findings from the British Crime Survey. Home Office Research Findings, p. 145. Bullough, R. V., 2005. Being and becoming a mentor: school-based teacher educators and teacher educator identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(2), pp. 143-155. Chesterman, C., 2000. Women and mentoring in higher education. Australian Technology Network, Executive Development Program for Women. Clutterbuck, D., 2004. A review of competencies and capabilities in mentoring. Gower Publishing Ltd. Colley, H. and Hodkinson, P., 2001. Problems with ‘Bridging The Gap’: the reversal of structure and agency in addressing social exclusion. Critical Social Policy, 21(3), pp. 337-361. Colley, H., 2000. Righting rewritings of the myth of Mentor: A critical perspective on career guidance mentoring. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 29(2). Colley, H., 2003. Engagement mentoring for socially excluded youth: problematising an ‘holistic’ approach to creating employability through the transformation of habitus. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 31 (1), pp. 77-100. Colley, H., 2006. Mentoring for young people not in education, employment or training: a ‘NEET’ solution, but to whose problems? Nuffield Review of 14-19 Education & Training. Colley, H., Hodkinson, P. and Malcolm, J., 2002. Non Formal Learning: Mapping the Conceptual Domain. University of Leeds: Lifelong Learning Institute. Compas, B. E., Connor-Smith, J. K., Saltzman, H. and Thomsen, M. E., 2001. Coping with stress during childhood and adolescence: Problems, progress, and potential in theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 127, pp. 87-127. Cook, S. A., 2002. Authorizing Students’ Perspectives: Toward Trust, Dialogue and Change in Education. Educational Researcher, 31(4), pp. 3-14. Dalton, B., 2002. Interpersonal influences and educational aspirations in 12 countries: the importance of institutional context. Sociology of Education, 75(2), pp. 99–122. Davis, K., 2008. Trust in the lives of young people: A conceptual framework to explore how youth make trust judgments. GoodWork Project Report Series, Number 52. [online] Available at:< http://pzweb.harvard.edu/eBookstore/PDFs/GoodWork52.pdf> [Accessed 19 December 2014]. Densely J A., 2011. The Organisation of London’s Street Gangs. Global Crime, 13(1) pp. 42-64. Dubois, D. L., Holloway, B. E., Valentine, J. C. And Harris, C., 2002. Effectiveness of mentoring programs for youth: A meta-analytic review. American Journal of Community Psychology, 30(2), pp. 157-197. Felix, R., 2004. Understanding Youth Culture. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 16(4), pp. 7-38. Finch, A.E., 2001. The non threatening learning environment. Korea: TESOL Journal of Edcation 3, pp. 348-368. Flaherty, J., 2005. Invoking Excellence in Others. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth –Heinemann Foskett, J., 2001. Pastoral Counselling in Britain: An Introduction. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 29(4), pp. 373-379. Gilligan, R., 2000. Adversity, resilience and young people: the protective value of positive school and spare time experiences. Children and Society, 14(1), pp. 37-47. Hansmann, C.A., 2002. Diversity and Power in Mentoring Relationships. Center on Education and Training for Employment.The Ohio State University. Hanushek, E.A., 1987. The economics of schooling. Journal of Economic Literature, 49(3), pp. 1141-1177. Hargreaves, A. and Fullan, M., 2000. Mentoring in the New Millenium. Theory into Practice. 39(1), pp. 50-56. Hattie, J., 2008. Learning in relation to achievement. London: Routledge. Hattie, J., 2011. Learning for Teachers: maximising impact on learning. London: Routledge Heaney, C. A., 2002. Health Behaviour and Health Education: Social Networks and Social Support. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishing. Heathfield, S. M., 2010. What makes a successful mentor? Plenum Press Publications. Hjelle, L. K. and Ziegler, D. J., 1992. Personality theories, assumptions and applications. Journal of Rational Emotive & Cognitive-Behaviour Therapy, 18(2), pp. 67-85. Jekielek, S. M., Moore, K. A., Hair, E. C. and Scarupa, H. J., 2002. Mentoring: A promising strategy for youth development. Washington, DC: Child Trends. [online] Available at: [Accessed 19 December 2014]. Timperley, H. and Phillips, G., 2003. Changing and sustaining teachers’ expectations through professional development in literacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, pp. 627–641. Trainor, A., 2008. Using cultural and social capital to improve post secondary outcomes and expand transition models for youth. Journal for Special Education, 42(3), pp. 148-162. Trzesniewski, K. H., 2008. Do Todays Young People Really Think They Are So Extraordinary? An Examination of Secular Trends in Narcissism and Self-Enhancement. Psychological Science, 19(2), pp. 181-188. Tsangaridou, N., 2008. Teachers’ beliefs and practices and their impact on practice. Education, Pedagogy & Cultural Studies, 13(2), pp. 131-152. Whitmore, J., 2002. Coaching for Performance. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing, Wright, C. A. and Wright, S. D., 1987. The role of mentors in the career development of young professionals. Family Relations, 36(2), pp. 204–208. Young, C. and Wright, Y., 2001. Mentoring: Components of Success. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 28(3), pp. 221-237. Zachary, L., 2002. The role of the teacher as a mentor. In J.M. Ross-Gordon (Ed.). Contemporary viewpoints on teaching adults effectively (pp.27-38). New Directions for Adult and Consulting Education, No.93 San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Read More