group mentoring: the experience of adolescent mentees on probation

Social Work with Groups, 37:213–229, 2014Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 0160-9513 print/1540-9481 onlineDOI: 10.1080/01609513.2013.862895

Group Mentoring: The Experience ofAdolescent Mentees on Probation

NATALIE DIANE CAWOOD and JESSICA MARIE WOODDepartment of Sociology and Social Work, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona

Group mentoring is an innovative approach to working withvulnerable youth. This qualitative study examined a groupmentoring program and the experience of youth participantsinvolved with the juvenile justice system. Eleven mentees andtwo mentoring coordinators participated in a combination offocus groups and individual interviews, while participant obser-vation was also employed. All participants indicated that the groupmentoring program had a positive influence in their lives, helpedthem to make better choices, and provided a healthy weekly activ-ity. Mentees identified the mentoring coordinator and the groupactivities as the most important aspects to the experience.

KEYWORDS activity groups, group work, mentoring, juvenileoffenders, community group

INTRODUCTION

Mentoring programs across the United States are being asked by their fundersand boards to demonstrate the effectiveness of their programs (Grossman,2009). The research literature provides a significant number of studiesdemonstrating the effectiveness of youth mentoring in promoting positiveoutcomes in the domains of emotional and psychological well-being, behav-ior problems, and academic achievement (Deutsch & Spencer, 2009; Dubois,Holloway, Valentine & Cooper, 2002; Garraway & Pistrang, 2010; Jackson,2002; Pryce, Silverthorn, Sanchez, & DuBois, 2010; Rhodes, Davis, Prescott,

Received: September 2, 2013; Revised: October 29, 2013; Accepted: November 1, 2013.Address correspondence to Natalie Diane Cawood, Northern Arizona University,

Department of Sociology & Social Work, PO Box 15300, Flagstaff AZ 86011-5300. E-mail:[email protected]

213

214 N. D. Cawood and J. M. Wood

& Spencer, 2007; Spencer, Collins, Ward, & Smashnaya, 2010; Thompson &Kelly-Vance, 2001; William, 2011).

Big Brothers and Big Sisters of America (BBBSA) one-on-one mentoringprogram is considered by the Office of Juvenile Justice and DelinquencyPrevention (OJJDP) to be a model evidence-based program (McGill, Mihalic,& Grotpeter, 2006). An evaluation of the BBBSA program assessed childrenwho participated in BBBSA compared to their nonparticipating peers. Afteran 18-month period, the BBBSA youth were less likely than control youthto initiate drug use; were 27% less likely than the control youth to initiatealcohol use; were almost one third less likely than the control youth to hitsomeone; were better than control youth in academic behavior, attitudes,and performance; were more likely to have higher quality relationships withtheir parents than control youth; and were more likely to have higher qualityrelationships with their peers (McGill et al., 2006).

Although mentoring is traditionally thought of as a community-basedone-on-one relationship, mentoring agencies are developing innovativeapproaches to mentoring that may reach more youth, cost less money, andrequire fewer volunteers. One of these approaches is group mentoring.Although therapeutic group work is a frequent intervention for workingwith youth considered to be high-risk, group mentoring is a less commonapproach to working with vulnerable youth (Goodman, Getzel, & Ford, 1996;Khoury-Kassabri, Sharvet, Braver & Livneh, 2010; Redondo, Martínez-Catena& Andrés-Pueyo, 2012; Shin et al., 2010; Short & Singer, 1972). Typically,group mentoring is used in academia and workplace settings with thegoal to foster intellectual development, career aspirations and competen-cies, personal satisfaction and growth, and career advancement (Darwin &Palmer, 2009; Ilesanmi, 2011; Liang, Tracy, Taylor, & Williams, 2002; Lord,Atkinson, & Mitchell, 2008; McCormack & West, 2006; Young & Cates, 2005),and little research has been done to examine the impact of this techniquewith vulnerable populations (Herrera, Vang, & Gale, 2002; Kirk & Day,2011).

Although group mentoring, similar to mentoring in general, does nottypically have an explicit therapeutic focus, the similarities between clini-cal group work and group mentoring with adolescents are naturally many.Through the act of affiliation with others, groups are used to foster a sense ofbelonging and connectedness, a goal that is principally relevant for youth asthey search for meaning in their lives (Skudrzyk et al., 2009). School-basedgroup work has been reported to be an effective intervention for devel-oping empathic skills in elementary-age children, encouraging emotionalregulation in teens, and supporting adolescents who are facing personalchallenges (Akos, 2000; Dwivedi & Gupta, 2000; Glodich, Allen, & Arnold,2001; Jagendorf & Malekoff, 2000; Truneckova & Viney, 2007).

Group Mentoring 215

STEP UP Mentoring

This study investigated STEP UP Mentoring, an innovative group mentoringprogram for youth involved with the juvenile justice system. Through a part-nership between Big Brothers Big Sisters of Flagstaff, Arizona (BBBSF) andArizona’s Coconino County Juvenile Court Services, STEP UP Mentoring con-nects local teens to positive resources in their community with the help ofappropriate adult mentors. The BBBSF website provides a detailed descrip-tion of the program, including its purpose and goals (bbbsf.com). Weeklygroup mentoring sessions explore teens’ interests and provide a variety ofunique opportunities for success. Through these ongoing and semistructuredmentoring meetings, the youth undertake various activities, visit interestingplaces, and forge contacts with constructive people. It is thought that throughestablishing and strengthening these relationships, teens experience a pos-itive support system that they can rely upon. It is believed that alongsideengaged adult mentors young people can build confidence, competence, andcaring that can continue to develop into long term community connections.

All program participants have had some involvement with the juve-nile justice system and the STEP UP Mentoring program is an opportunityfor them to engage in healthy alternatives to various high-risk behaviors.Activities include visits from guest speakers, field trips, job shadowing,sports, outdoor recreation, crafts, games, as well as a myriad of other possi-bilities. It is the intent of the program to reduce recidivism in court-involvedyouth by assisting these youth in practicing new social competencies withmentors, and by helping youth connect with positive and constructive peo-ple and places in the community. The teens on probation that attend STEPUP weekly sessions are not mandated to participate; however, parole officersand judges usually recommend that they do.

Although this program is still in its infancy, there have been a fewpositive results documented by the agencies involved. Several teens in theSTEP UP probation mentoring groups demonstrated improvement in self-confidence after program participation, and 80% of teens in the programdemonstrated improvement in use of community resources after programparticipation (Coconino County Juvenile Court Services, 2009). Many teensvoluntarily attend the weekly group outings even after completing probation.

Purpose

This study explored the experience of youth participants in the STEP UPgroup mentoring program. The goal of this study was to answer the followingresearch questions:

1. What is STEP UP group mentoring as experienced by the youth partici-pants?


2. What are some potential benefits for mentees participating in the STEP UPgroup mentoring program?

3. Can positive relationships develop between mentors and youth in theSTEP UP group mentoring program?

4. What are the leadership/mentoring qualities of the STEP UP coordinator?

METHOD

This study consisted of participant observation, focus groups, and in depthinterviews with youth participants, as well as in depth interviews withthe STEP UP Mentoring coordinators. The study was approved by theresearchers’ university Institutional Review Board, and all current STEP UPmentees chose to participate in the research. Participants who attended thefocus group sessions received dinner and snacks at the meeting, whereasindividual interview participants received a $20 movie gift card for incentiveto participate.

Participants

Study participants (n = 11) consisted of youth between ages 14 to 17 witha history of involvement with juvenile court services, specifically youthcurrently on probation. Through collaboration with BBBSF and CoconinoCounty Juvenile Court Services, youth participating in the STEP UP Mentoringprogram were invited to participate in the research study and parentalconsent was obtained. The mean age was 15.5 years. With 40% of the par-ticipants being female (n = 4) and 60% being male (n = 7). The participantswere from diverse cultural backgrounds with youth self-identifying with thefollowing ethnic backgrounds: Native American/American Indian (n = 5),Mexican American (n = 2), Hispanic American/Latina(o) (n = 3), andNative American/American Indian and Hispanic American/Latina(o) (n = 1).In addition to the youth participants, the two mentoring coordinators werealso interviewed.

Participant Observation, Focus Groups, and Interviews

The first phase of this study involved participant observation where oneof the researchers imbedded herself in the STEP UP Mentoring group as amentor. Following each group session for youth in detention and probation,notes were written down by the researcher as soon as possible. These noteswere based on participant observations, and every detail was recalled tothe best of the researcher’s ability. Direct quotes, when remembered, wereincluded in the journal entries.

Group Mentoring 217

The second phase of this study involved focus groups thatlasted approximately 90 minutes and individual interviews that lastedapproximately 30 minutes. Two focus groups were facilitated by oneresearcher/social work faculty member, a second social work faculty mem-ber, and an undergraduate social work student. There were seven malementees in the first group and four female mentees in the second group. Thementees had participated in STEP UP Mentoring anywhere from 3 monthsto 2 years. Focus groups were used because the participants were accus-tomed to being together in a group setting, and the researchers believedit was important to hear the experience of the mentees in a group setting.The focus groups were followed by individual interviews with the partici-pants. The individual interviews provided the mentees with the opportunityto share more of their personal experience in the mentoring group and dis-cuss anything that they may not have felt comfortable sharing in a groupsetting. The focus group and interview schedule included open-ended ques-tions about the mentees’ experience of group mentoring (e.g. “If you wereto describe the STEP UP mentoring group to a friend that you trusted, whatwould you say?”, “What sort of activities do you enjoy doing with the STEPUP mentoring group?”, “Do you think the mentors of the group truly careabout you?”, “Have the mentors of the group made a difference in yourlife?”, and “Do you think that the STEP UP mentoring group helps you inany way?”).

The mentoring coordinators were not present during the focus groupsor individual interviews with the mentees but were interviewed separately.This represented the third phase of the study, and the interview scheduleconsisted of open-ended questions regarding their role as lead mentors (e.g.“Please describe your roles and responsibilities as the Coordinator of theSTEP UP Mentoring Program?”, “Please describe what you see as the mostimportant qualities that a STEP UP Mentoring coordinator should possess,”and “What aspect of STEP UP Mentoring do you think makes the biggestimpact in the lives of the participants?”).

Analysis

The focus groups and the interviews were audio taped, transcribed, andwere analyzed using a paper-and-pencil grounded theory approach (Strauss& Corbin, 1990). Transcripts were coded and analyzed by a minimum of twomembers of the research team. The transcripts were coded separately using“working labels” (Morse, 1994) to interpret the data. Participant observationjournal entries were typed and similarly coded and analyzed. The interpreta-tion of the individual researchers was then discussed to examine reliability,and to discuss the validity of the coding scheme. Inter-rater reliability wasobtained by having the second coder independently code the answers witha third researcher reconciling any differences.


RESULTS

Dynamics of STEP UP Mentoring

For the first research question—What is STEP UP group mentoring as expe-rienced by the youth participants?—five major themes were identified thatare crucial to the success of the STEP UP Mentoring program: mentor, activ-ities, connections, behaviors and feelings, and challenges. The predominanttwo themes are mentors and activities (see Figure 1). Overall, the mentorsand the activities are the strongest determining factors to the success ofthe STEP UP Mentoring program. However, the other themes of behaviorsand feelings, challenges, and connections are extremely important and worksynergistically together to enhance the program’s effectiveness.

Mentors

Subtheme 1.1: Leadership. “My impression of [Mentor Coordinator] is thatshe does her best to mentor and draw boundaries, but not enough tonag. She knows what these girls have been through and where they comefrom so she has a pretty good understanding of their stories and I thinkbalances the right amount of leniency with their stories without naggingand sounding like a parent.”

Subtheme 1.2: Mentor Role. “Curious, [Mentor Coordinator] asked her whatmemories was she recollecting and [mentee] replied, (laughingly), ‘it isthe song I always got drunk to.’ Of course, she knew that this was

FIGURE 1 Dynamics of STEP UP mentoring program.

Group Mentoring 219

not appropriate; however she is brutally honest and that is what sheremembered about the song. [Mentor Coordinator] was first to reply, ‘thosearen’t the memories you want to create [mentee].’”

Subtheme 1.3: Mentor Rapport. “[Mentee] is becoming more talkative and ischatting it up a lot more in the car and during group. She even invited usto attend her volleyball game.”

Activities

Subtheme 2.1: Activities. “After shooting hoops we all left and headed toDairy Queen for ice cream.”

Subtheme 2.2: Community Involvement. “[Mentor Coordinator] had a greatactivity planned for this week. She had made up fliers that had all theinformation about STEP UP and her contact info. She wanted the girls toget out in the public and try talking to the local businesses about the STEPUP mentoring program. She thought this would be a good opportunityfor them to learn a little about public speaking, but also to promote theprogram and be part of it.”

Connections

Subtheme 3.1: Internal. “[Mentee] mentioned that she liked the BBBSF STEPUP program and really likes the group camaraderie. She was telling[another Mentee] that she should continue to come.”

Subtheme 3.2: External “[Mentee 1] and [Mentee 2] are friends and know a lotof the same people. During the ice cream conversation they kept saying“you know so and so and you know what happened to him” so I got theimpression that they probably hung out with similar people.”

Behaviors and Feelings

Subtheme 4.1: Positive behaviors and feelings “[Mentee] was very much intoparticipating and talking about what she is proud of. At first she didn’tthink she had anything to be proud of, but then we pushed her and saidwhat about grades, math, science and she said she was really good atEnglish. Then [Mentor Coordinator] asked her what she liked to write andshe said poetry. After that, she warmed up to the idea of telling us whatshe was proud of and she dug deep and told us that she was proud sheisn’t all ‘crazy and messed up from the upbringing I had.’ She said she wasproud that her younger sister was still in school and she was helping herwith her schoolwork.”


Subtheme 4.2: Negative behaviors and feelings. “She tends to say aggressivethings such as when we passed this guy in a car she said ‘I didn’t like thelook in that guy’s eyes, he should have a hatchet in his head.’”

Challenges

Subtheme 5.1: Personal. “Currently, since her release she has been stayingat the Halo House (youth shelter). She says the place looks like a bombshelter so that is depressing.”

Subtheme 5.2: Family. “I started by asking her how her Thanksgiving went.She said horrible. I inquired as to why and this is what she told me (para-phrased): ‘That the sister she lives with got into a fight with her boyfriend(who Mentee also lives with) and apparently there was screaming andfighting.’ I didn’t ask who hit who, but violence was part of the scene.She said the cops were called and both her sister and the boyfriend werearrested. Her mom was also arrested because the cop found out she hadwarrants out for her arrest.”

Positive Alternative

For the second research question—What are some potential benefits formentees participating in the STEP UP group mentoring program?—girls andboys expressed that the STEP UP Mentoring Program has changed their livesfor the better. They discussed how they learned how to interact in posi-tive ways during group and could then practice that behavior in their ownfamilies. All participants indicated that STEP UP Mentoring had a positiveinfluence in their lives, helped them to make better choices, provided ahealthy activity for them, provided positive role models, broadened theirhorizons, improved how they viewed themselves, and that it gave themsomething to look forward to/helped them get through the week.

One participant stated that since he has become involved with thementoring group he is “not involved with any of the gangs I used to hangout with and I don’t smoke no more. I don’t do coke no more. I don’t drinkno more. So it’s really helped me a lot.” He went on to say,

It makes me look forward for something to come to that week. So like ifI’m going out with a friend and they want to do coke, I’d be like, “no, Idon’t do that no more. I’m just going to Big Brothers.”

Another participant echoed the idea that the group provides her anopportunity to keep busy and stay out of trouble:

Like Wednesdays is just a positive day, I guess. Like I have to go to agroup at Juvenile on Wednesdays and then like right after that is Big

Group Mentoring 221

Sisters so my Wednesdays are booked. I don’t go home. I go to school,Juvenile, and then Big Sisters. Busy is better. That is what I need to stayout of trouble is to just stay busy.

Another youth said, “I would say that the people that are there support youa lot and like if you need something like they’ll help you out. They’re therefor you for support and it is just a great group.”

Another participant said the group, “like turned my mind around, youknow. Kind of made me like hang out with a lot more people and be morefriendly. I would say it’s pretty good for me because it helps keep me busy.”Another teen went on to describe how it has influenced his interactions withhis family, “Like when me and my parents don’t have nothing to do in a day,like I show them these things like what the [lead mentor] showed to us andall that. Like hiking trails, the Frisbee golf.”

Positive Activities and Relationships

For the third research question—Can positive relationships develop betweenmentors and youth in the STEP UP group mentoring program?—the dataobtained through individual interviews and focus groups with the male andfemale participants of the STEP UP Mentoring Program identify the leadmentor/coordinator and the activities as the two most important aspects tothe experience of the mentees participating in STEP UP Mentoring.

During the focus groups and individual interviews, girls in STEP UPMentoring emphasized the importance of the activities. Overwhelmingly, thegirls indicated that although the mentors were helpful and cared about them,it was the activities that were the most important aspect of the program. Thegirls discussed how the activities broadened their horizons, gave them ahealthy activity to do during the week, and boosted their self-confidence.The girls particularly enjoyed craft activities, indicating that the crafts helpedthem discover their talents, but also gave them something with which todecorate their rooms and express themselves. One participant summed it upwell by saying, “I just like the activities. We switch it up. I like how theydo that.” Another youth mentee stated, “I always like participating no matterwhat it is. Like community service or other things. We usually go over to thefood bank and put food in boxes for the people.”

One female participant described the lead mentor by saying,

She cares about us. She shows it and she will tell us . . . well with thegirls with drug problems I guess . . . like, I like to smoke weed, so shewould be like “don’t just try not to, but if you ever need somebody orif you think that you want to do something bad, even if it is 3 in themorning, you wake me up and I’ll be there. I’ll be there without makeupbut I’ll be there.”


Another teen similarly discussed how the lead mentor is available to thementees:

It’s been good because like whenever I need somebody to talk to I knowI could like talk to her about it. Like whenever. It doesn’t matter whenit is but she will talk to me about it. Like help me with my problem so Ithink it’s good.

The boy participants indicated that though the activities were importantto them, it was their relationship with the lead mentor/STEP UP Mentoringcoordinator that made the most significant impact on them. The boysdescribed how the coordinator cares about them, listens to them, takes aninterest in their lives, and is fun to be around. One participant described howthe mentors make a difference in his life when he is having a bad day,

Like if I’m angry that day, I’ll come over here and they’ll just make jokes,make me laugh you know. Just relive that stress off my shoulders. If I’mlike sad, too, they’ll talk to me and stuff like that. Relieve it.

Another teen discussed how the mentoring group and his relationship withthe lead mentor has changed how he views himself, “having a friend like[lead mentor]. He’s always like pretty fun, a cool guy. We like keep jokesgoing on. We make each other happy and stuff. Make each other laugh.”

Mentor and Model

For the fourth research question—What are the leadership/mentoring qual-ities of the STEP UP coordinator?— the following key characteristics wereidentified: modeling, engaging, listening, teasing, caring, learning, andempathizing. The STEP UP Mentoring coordinators discussed the importanceof building rapport with the youth, being genuine, being well rounded andwell educated, being open minded, and connecting youth with communityresources (See Table 1).

The male coordinator sees himself as a model, “The youth are watchingevery little thing I do.” He sees that the youth notice how he dresses, howhe conveys himself, how clean his car is, and how messy his office is. Hebelieves that the youth look up to him and look at all aspects of his life.If they see any inconsistency they call him on it. The coordinators ask ques-tions and try to engage the youth in STEP UP. The girls’ coordinator stated,“I believe it is important to be genuine.” Another quality identified by bothcoordinators is not to mind being teased by the youth. They believe it helpsto build a rapport with them. They said that they have to be able to handleteasing because the teens try to rattle them sometimes. Both coordinatorsbelieve that they are testing limits to see if they care and that it is important

Group Mentoring 223

TABLE 1 Characteristics of STEP UP Mentoring Coordinator

Roles Attributes Skills

Model Empathic Ability to build rapportFriend Genuine Knowledge of community resourcesTeacher CompassionateListener Well rounded Ability to seek out community

connections/resourcesAdvocate Nonjudgmental

Strong sense of selfAt ease with youthCreativeSense of humorAvailability outside of group

to “not need anything from the kids.” This idea of being able to handle teas-ing from the teens was also brought up during the girls’ focus group. Two ofthe girls mentioned that the mentoring group coordinator would sometimesseem “defensive” or appear to “take things personally.” This appears to sup-port the idea that the coordinator needs to be someone who can cope withsome level of teasing from the youth.

The male STEP UP coordinator finds it helpful to know a little bit about alot of things (e.g. music, sports): “I find it helpful to be well rounded and welleducated.” This helps him to discuss a wide variety of topics and interests thatthe youth may have. The coordinators both show an interest in the youth.They demonstrate empathy and caring about the things going on in their livesoutside of group. They visit their homes and see them around town. Theyconnect the youth with community resources. Both coordinators articulatedthat it is important to somehow project that you care, even when it is yourjob. The boys’ coordinator described his role this way: “They sometimesdon’t realize this is my job.” This echoes the reports from the youth thatthe teens know the coordinators truly care about them. Clearly, this is animportant factor. Finally, the coordinators both try to model their values.They strive to teach the youth lessons about how things they do today willhelp them tomorrow. They try to project all of this to the mentoring group,“with the hope that the kids will start to take on these traits and qualities.”

DISCUSSION

Mentors play a large role in the STEP UP Mentoring program. STEP UP isnot a therapeutic group, and what makes the group unique is the fluiditybetween the mentors and the mentees. The primary role of the mentors isbuilding relationships with the youth. Many of these youth come into theprogram with low self-esteem, trust issues, mental health concerns. Mentors


must gain the trust of participants slowly over time. The structure of theSTEP UP Mentoring program allows for natural mentoring relationships toform between mentee/mentor and the mentors must be open to mentoringone, two, or three youth at a time.

Mentors are also responsible for supporting positive changes in the feel-ings and behaviors of the youth in the program. A mentor may hear negativestories about the youth, hear them say negative things about themselves, orwitness behavior that may require attention from a mentor. Mentors have aresponsibility to not only model positive and healthy behavior themselves,but they also need to help the youth deal with behaviors and feelings thatthey may express. Mentors who are insensitive or not properly trained to dealwith vulnerable teens may have difficulty addressing problems that arise andmay end up not being an appropriate fit for the STEP UP Mentoring pro-gram. The idea that the coordinator needs to have a sense of humor and notbecome defensive when working with groups of adolescents, is supportedby the group work literature (Aronson, 2004; Malekoff, 2007).

The leadership of the STEP UP group mentoring program is the key tothe program running smoothly. An effective coordinator has responsibility fororganizing the program, mentoring the youth in STEP UP, and supporting theother mentor volunteers that assist with the group. His or her role is essentialin keeping fostering open communication between mentors and mentees.She or he is also responsible for making sure that the activities plannedeach week follow STEP UP’s protocol of having a mixture of communityinvolvement and fun.

Another important strength of the STEP UP program is the activities.The draw to this program for many of the youth is the opportunity to beinvolved in the community. They get to meet others from similar circum-stances and backgrounds, meet mentors who they can learn from and buildfriendships with, and participate in fun activities free of charge. Sometimesan activity may be as simple as going out to dinner, but for several of theyouth in the STEP UP program, this is a luxury that they don’t get to experi-ence too often in their own lives. The long-term goal of STEP UP Mentoringis to help these kids make positive choices in the community. The weeklyactivities are important in creating an incentive for the STEP UP Mentoringparticipants to remain in the program. The value of the act of participatingin the creative activities should not be disregarded, as research has demon-strated that creative interventions can facilitate belonging, acceptance, andmutuality in relationships (Skudrzyk et al., 2009). The activities are directlylinked to the mentors and the group leadership, as weekly activities wouldnot be possible if the mentors weren’t available or if the coordinator lackedcreativity and enthusiasm.

It should be noted that there had been turnover with the girl’s STEP UPcoordinator approximately six months prior to the focus groups and inter-views, whereas the boy’s coordinator had remained constant. Two of the

Group Mentoring 225

girls mentioned several times that they had preferred the previous coordina-tor and were less fond of the new coordinator. This could have been a factorin why the girls, although they appreciated the coordinator and knew shecared about them, emphasized the activities as being most important. Thepreference for the previous coordinator over the current coordinator was,of course, only mentioned by those girls who had participated in the grouplong enough to have been exposed to both coordinators. The girls newer tothe group did not express any concerns with the coordinator. Otherwise, thelength of time each mentee had participated in the mentoring group seemedirrelevant to their described experience of the group for boys and girls. Thismay highlight the importance of consistency in the role of the STEP UPcoordinator and how turnover in that position could negatively impact theexperience of the mentees. Researchers in the area of adolescent group workpractice support this idea by emphasizing the importance of the ability of thegroup faciliator to provide consistency, stability, and constancy even whenprovoked (Aronson, 2004).

The youth in STEP UP Mentoring face many personal, family and school-related challenges. The connections to the mentors and their peers in STEPUP Mentoring may help to reduce the negative impact these challenges havein their lives. The youth who participate in STEP UP have internal and exter-nal connections that may either support or deter their ability to participate inthe program. Internal connections reflect the feelings and attitudes the youthhave toward the group, mentors and the activities. Most of the time, inter-nal connections reflect positive feelings and behaviors; however, sometimesthese internal connections and pressure from peers can create challenges forthe group. When this happens, it is the coordinator who must reorganize thedynamics of the group and make changes to reinforce group cohesion. If theyouth are connected to the coordinator, mentors, and other participants inthe program they may be less likely to disengage from the mentoring group.External connections come in the form of peer pressure from siblings andfriends who are not in STEP UP Mentoring. Sometimes these connections canaffect the participants’ behaviors and feelings about whether they want tocontinue in STEP UP group mentoring. Another role of the STEP UP mentorsis to attempt to counteract the impact of the negative external connectionson the youth.

Limitations

In addition to the small sample size, other limitations to this study shouldbe noted. The first limitation was the short amount of time the researcherspent observing the STEP UP Mentoring groups, which amounted to onlyfour months. Second, the participant observation only focused on the girls’perspective of the mentoring program. Because STEP UP Mentoring onlymatches same gender mentors and mentees, the researcher was only able


to participate in the weekly gatherings of the girls’ group. A third limita-tion of this study is that the perspective of the social dynamics of the STEPUP Mentoring groups only came from one researcher, although her expe-rience was reinforced through the focus groups and interviews that wereconducted by the entire research team. The issue of positionality and biasof the researcher who was also a mentor participant–observer is a potentiallimitation. Although we cannot be completely assured that the researcher’sobservations, interpretations, and representations were not affected by herpositionality in the process, every effort was made to report unbiased datain her journal entries, which were then analyzed and coded by a secondresearcher. In addition, the researchers attempted to mitigate any issues ofparticipant observation bias through triangulation of data sources. For exam-ple, though the participant observation revealed that the coordinator and theactivities were vital to the mentoring group, the focus group and individualinterview data also showed that the coordinator and activities were vital tothe group experience. A fourth limitation is that the participants reside in asmall, rural community. Participants in a similar group mentoring programmay not have the same experience if located in a metropolitan area whereyouth have greater access to community resources and activities. Althoughthe group is located in a rural community, the Southwest region of NorthernArizona has a diverse population. Although there could be drawbacks to theheterogeneity of the STEP UP group participants, the data collected in thisstudy did not reveal any limitations to the diversity of group members, andno concerns related to group cohesion were identified. Finally, as a uniqueprogram, it is difficult, at this time, to compare this study’s results with othergroup mentoring programs serving vulnerable youth. Due to the fluidity ofthe STEP UP Mentoring group, it may also be difficult to replicate.

CONCLUSIONS

The data obtained through this study helps us to understand the dynamics ofthis group mentoring program and the experience of the mentee participants.Mentees report that STEP UP Mentoring plays a valuable role in their lives.As reported by the participants, the STEP UP activities and mentors affect theyouth in a positive way. The coordinators demonstrate the use of effectivementoring styles, as well as the use of playful communication and modeling.This combination of activities and interactions appears to create a successfuland rewarding mentoring experience for the participants.

This study helps to address the lack of literature in the area of groupmentoring with youth involved in the juvenile justice system and could pro-vide mentoring organizations and juvenile court systems with data about thepotential positive effects of a group mentoring program, as well as the keyroles and mentoring style of the leader of such a group. The results of this

Group Mentoring 227

study could be helpful to practitioners working with youth on probation andconsidering group mentoring as a possible intervention strategy.

Despite the limitations of this study, the results suggest that moreresearch in this area would be valuable. Future research could providevalue data to mentoring organizations and juvenile court systems about thepotential positive effects of a group mentoring program.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to thank all of the teens in STEP UP Mentoring and thementoring coordinators who were so willing to participate in this study. Theauthors also would like to give a special thank you to Kelly Elliott, BryonMatsuda, and Rommy Sekhon for their enthusiasm and help in enabling thisstudy to take place.

REFERENCES

Akos, P. (2000). Building empathic skills in elementary school children throughgroup work. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 25, 214–223.

Aronson, S. M. (2004). Where the wild things are: The power and challenge ofadolescent group work. The Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine, 71(3), 174–180.

Coconino County Juvenile Court Services. (2009). Step up probation: Steps to success.Unpublished manuscript.

Darwin, A., & Palmer, E. (2009). Mentoring circles in higher education.Higher Education Research & Development, 28(2), 125–136. doi:10.1080/

07294360902725017Deutsch, N. L., & Spencer, R. (2009). Capturing the magic: Assessing the quality

of youth mentoring relationships. New Directions for Youth Development, 121,47–70.

Dubois, D. L., Holloway, B. E., Valentine, J. C., & Cooper, H. (2002). Effectivenessof mentoring programs for youth: A meta-analytic review. American Journal ofCommunity Psychology, 30, 157–197.

Dwivedi, K. N., & Gupta, A. (2000). “Keeping cool”: Anger management throughgroup work. Support for Learning, 15, 76–81.

Garraway, H., & Pistrang, N. (2010). “Brother from another mother”: Mentoring forAfrican-Caribbean adolescent boys. Journal of Adolescence, 33, 719–729.

Glodich, A., Allen, J. G., & Arnold, L. (2001). Protocol for a trauma based psychoe-ducational group intervention to decrease risk-taking, reenactment, and furtherviolence exposure: Application to the public high school setting. Journal ofChild and Adolescent Group Therapy, 11, 87–107.

Goodman, H., Getzbel, G. S., & Ford, W. (1996). Group Work with high-risk urbanyouths on probation. Social Work, 41(4), 375–381.

Grossman, J. B. (2009). Evaluating mentoring programs. Philadelphia, PA: Public/Private Ventures.


Herrera, C., Vang., Z., & Gale, L. Y. (2002). Group mentoring: A study of mentoringgroups in three programs. Philadelphia, PA: Public/Private Ventures.

Ilesanmi, O. O. (2011). Workplace mentoring: Learning and developmentalApproaches. In A. A. Olowu (Ed.), Mentoring: A key issue in human resourcemanagement (pp. 169–179). Ile-Ife, Nigeria: Ife Centre for PsychologicalStudies.

Jackson, Y. (2002). Mentoring for delinquent children: An outcome study with youngadolescent children. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 31(2), 115–122.

Jagendorf, J., & Malekoff, A. (2000). Groups-on-the-go: Spontaneously formedmutual aid groups for adolescents in distress. Social Work with Groups, 22,15–32.

Khoury-Kassabri, M., Sharvet, R., Braver, E., & Livneh, C. (2010). An evaluation of agroup treatment program with youth referred to the juvenile probation servicebecause of violent crime. Research on Social Work Practice, 20(4), 403–409.

Kirk, R., & Day, A. (2011). Increasing college access for youth aging out of fostercare: Evaluation of a summer camp program for foster youth transitioning fromhigh school to college. Children and Youth Services Review, 33(7), 1173–1180.

Liang, B., Tracy, A. J., Taylor, C. A., & Williams, L. M. (2002). Mentoring college agewomen: A relational approach. American Journal of Community Psychology,30(2), 271–288.

Lord, P., Atkinson, M., & Mitchell, H. (2008). Mentoring and coaching for profession-als: A study of the research evidence. Heslington, UK: National Foundation forEducational Research Northern Office.

Malekoff, A. (2007). A flexible orgaining framework for group work with adolescents.Social Work with Groups, 30(3), 83–102.

McCormack, C., & West, D. (2006). Facilitated group mentoring develops keycareer competencies for university women: A case study. Mentoring & Tutoring:Partnership in Learning, 14(4), 409–431.

McGill, D. E., Mihalic, S. F., & Grotpeter, J. K. (2006). Big Brothers Big Sisters ofAmerica: Blueprints for violence prevention, book two (Blueprints for ViolencePrevention Series, D. S. Elliott, Series Editor). Boulder, CO: University ofColorado, Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute ofBehavioral Science.

Morse, J. M. (1994). Emerging from the data: The cognitive process of analysis inqualitative inquiry. In J. M. Morse (Ed.), Critical issues in qualitative researchmethods (pp. 23–43). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Pryce, J. M., Silverthorn, N., Sanchez, B., & DuBois, D. L. (2010). GirlPOWER!strengthening mentoring relationships through a structured, gender-specific pro-gram. New Directions for Youth Development, 126 , 89–105. doi:10.1002/yd.351

Redondo, S., Martínez-Catena, A., & Andrés-Pueyo, A. (2012). Therapeutic effects ofa cognitive-behavioural treatment with juvenile offenders. European Journal ofPsychology Applied to Legal Context, 4(2), 159–178.

Rhodes, J. E., Davis, A. A., Prescott, L. R., & Spencer, R. (2007). Caring connections:Mentoring relationships in the lives of urban girls. In B. J. Ross Leadbeater& N. Way (Eds.), Urban girls revisited: Building strengths (pp. 142–156). NewYork, NY: NYU Press.

Group Mentoring 229

Shin, R. Q., Rogers, J., Stanciu, A., Silas, M., Brown-Smythe, C., & Austin, B. (2010).Advancing social justice in urban schools through the implementation of trans-formative groups for youth of color. Journal for Specialists in Group Work,35(3), 230–235.

Short, M. C., & Singer, M. J. (1972). Group work with youths on parole. Social Work,17(6), 78–84.

Skudrzyk, B., Zera, D. A., McMahon, G., Schmidt, R., Boyne, J., & Spannaus,R. L. (2009). Learning to relate: Interweaving creative approaches in groupcounseling with adolescents. Journal of Creativity in Mental Health, 4, 249–261.

Spencer, R., Collins, M. E., Ward, R., & Smashnaya, S. (2010). Mentoring for youngpeople leaving foster care: Promise and potential pitfalls. Social Work, 55(3),225–234.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theoryprocedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Thompson, L. A., & Kelly-Vance, L. (2001). The impact of mentoring on aca-demic achievement of at-risk youth. Children and Youth Services Review, 23(3),227–242.

Truneckova, D., & Viney, L. L. (2007). Evaluating personal construct group withtroubled adolescents. Journal of Counseling & Development, 85, 450–460.

William, C. A. (2011). Mentoring and social skills training: Ensuring better outcomesfor youth in foster care. Child Welfare, 90(1), 59–74.

Young, R. W., & Cates, C. M. (2010). Listening, play, and social attraction in thementoring of new teachers. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning,18(3), 215–231.

group mentoring: the experience of adolescent mentees on probation

Documents