Social & Economic Factors Education Employment Income Family & Social Support Community Safety Search Policies & Programs

Display All Policies & Programs Contribute Content

Mentoring programs to improve graduation rates

Health Factors: Education
Decision Makers: Schools
Evidence Rating: Scientifically Supported
Population Reach: 1-9% of WI's population
Impact on Disparities: Likely to decrease disparities

Is this program or policy in use in your community? Tell us about it.

Description

Mentoring programs provide adult mentors to guide students through academic and personal challenges (Campbell-Wilson 2011). A trained mentor meets regularly with the at-risk student, establishes a personal relationship, helps the students overcome obstacles in and out of school, and models positive behavior and decision-making skills (IES WWC-Dynarski 2008).

Expected Beneficial Outcomes

Increased High School graduation rates
Increased progression in school
Improved attendance
Increased school attachment and engagement

Evidence of Effectiveness

There is strong evidence that mentoring programs improve high school graduation rates. Most types of dropout prevention programs, including mentoring programs, reduce the likelihood of participants dropping out of high school (Campbell-Wilson 2011).

Implementation quality appears crucial to program effectiveness (Campbell-Wilson 2011). Researchers suggest that programs choose willing adult mentors committed to their task, purposefully match students to mentors, and establish regular mentor/student meetings at least weekly. Effective programs can prepare mentors for common obstacles, train them to partner with students, parents, and school staff, and teach them how to advocate for students (IES WWC-Dynarski 2008). Effective mentors build strong relationships with students (Anderson 2004, Christenson 2004), and help them with both academic and personal problems (Christenson 2004).

Check & Connect, a mentoring program effective at preventing dropout, costs about $1800 per student per year (SPTW).

Implementation Examples

United States

Check & Connect has been implemented in over 27 states and internationally (Check and Connect).

Implementation Resources

ALAS - Raise Inspired Kids. ALAS dropout prevention. Accessed on July 2, 2012
Webpage: http://raiseinspiredkids.com/
Check and Connect - University of Minnesota. Check & connect: A comprehensive student engagement intervention. Accessed on June 18, 2012
Webpage: http://checkandconnect.org/

Citations - Description

Campbell-Wilson 2011 - Wilson SJ, Tanner-Smith EE, Lipsey MW, Steinka-Fry K, Morrison J. Dropout prevention and intervention programs: Effects on school completion and dropout among school-aged children and youth. Campbell Systematic Reviews. 2011:8. Accessed on June 15, 2012
Webpage: http://campbellcollaboration.org/lib/project/158/
IES WWC-Dynarski 2008 - Dynarski M, Clarke L, Cobb B, et al. Dropout prevention: A practice guide. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences (IES), US Department of Education (US ED); 2008. Accessed on June 19, 2012
Webpage: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/PracticeGuide.aspx?sid=9

Citations - Evidence

Anderson 2004* - Anderson AR, Christenson SL, Sinclair MF, Lehr CA. Check & connect: The importance of relationships for promoting engagement with school. Journal of School Psychology. 2004;42(2):95-113. Accessed on June 23, 2012
Webpage: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022440504000172
Campbell-Wilson 2011 - Wilson SJ, Tanner-Smith EE, Lipsey MW, Steinka-Fry K, Morrison J. Dropout prevention and intervention programs: Effects on school completion and dropout among school-aged children and youth. Campbell Systematic Reviews. 2011:8. Accessed on June 15, 2012
Webpage: http://campbellcollaboration.org/lib/project/158/
Christenson 2004* - Christenson SL, Thurlow ML. School dropouts: Prevention considerations, interventions, and challenges. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2004;13(1):36-9. Accessed on June 15, 2012
Webpage: http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/13/1/36.full.pdf+html
IES WWC-Dynarski 2008 - Dynarski M, Clarke L, Cobb B, et al. Dropout prevention: A practice guide. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences (IES), US Department of Education (US ED); 2008. Accessed on June 19, 2012
Webpage: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/PracticeGuide.aspx?sid=9
SPTW - Social Programs That Work (SPTW). Full list of interventions.

Accessed on June 18, 2012
Webpage: http://evidencebasedprograms.org/wordpress/?page_id=1080

Citations - Implementation Examples

Check and Connect - University of Minnesota. Check & connect: A comprehensive student engagement intervention. Accessed on June 18, 2012
Webpage: http://checkandconnect.org/

* Journal subscription may be required for access.

Comments from Users about this Policy/Program (Cost, Feasibility, Lessons Learned)

No comments

X
 

Health Factors

Health Behaviors
Tobacco Use
Diet & Exercise
Alcohol Use
Sexual Activity
 Clinical Care
Access to Care
Quality of Care
 Social & Economic Factors
Education
Employment
Income
Family & Social Support
Community Safety
 Physical Environment
Environmental Quality
Built Environment

Decision Makers

Businesses & Employers
Community Organizations
Government - Local
Government - State
Government - Federal
Healthcare Organizations
Individuals
Schools

Evidence Rating

Level of effectiveness based on a scan of academic literature and key recommendations of leading organizations.

  • Scientifically Supported Numerous studies or systematic review(s) with positive results
  • Some Evidence Research suggests positive impacts; further study may be warranted
  • Expert Opinion Recommended by credible groups*; research evidence limited
  • Insufficient Evidence Evidence limited or unavailable; further study warranted
  • Mixed Evidence Evidence mixed; further study warranted
  • Evidence of Ineffectiveness Research consistently shows program is detrimental or has no effect

Although many policies and programs are recommended by credible groups, we apply the rating ‘expert opinion’ only when policies are recommended but limited scientific evidence of effectiveness is available.

* The American Heritage Dictionary defines credible as 'capable of being believed; plausible.' and 'worthy of confidence; reliable.' To be considered an 'expert recommendation,' policies and programs must be recommended by one or more organizations that are recognized for their impartial expertise in the area of interest and have limited evidence available.

Potential Population Reach

Portion of Wisconsin's population likely to be reached by a policy or program if implemented statewide, based on its characteristics (e.g., target population(s), geographic limitations, and potential implementers).

<1%   20-49%
1-9%   50-99%
10-19%   100%

Potential Population Reach

Portion of Wisconsin's population likely to be reached by a policy or program if implemented statewide, based on its characteristics (e.g., target population(s), geographic limitations, and potential implementers).

<1%   20-49%
1-9%   50-99%
10-19%   100%

Potential Impact on Health Disparities

Likely impact of a given policy or program on racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, geographic or other disparities in Wisconsin based on its characteristics (e.g., target audience, mode of delivery, etc.) and best available evidence related to disparities.

  • Likely to decrease disparities
  • No impact on disparities likely
  • Likely to increase disparities