Mentoring Programs and Concept in the United Kingdom - Essay Example

?Project Report Executive Summary The United Kingdom is experiencing numerous youth mentoring schemes although most of them are operating informally without the back up of professional practice. The mentors work outside the established careers and lack approved practice guidelines, training programs and formal curriculums. The project will improve the efficiency of mentors to make youth mentoring more effective and beneficial towards youth empowerment. The youth mentoring development project provides opportunities youth to contribute in improving the efficiency of mentoring programs. The project was a national youth meeting characterised by a series of discussion groups involving young people, policy makers and stakeholder representatives. The activities focused on young people discussing youth mentoring issues and presenting their views on key issues and themes within youth mentoring. The participants included: fifty young people around from the United Kingdom, youth practitioners and experts in the youth issues and policy makers. The mentoring academy acted as the lead partner in planning and facilitating events. Table of Contents Project Report 1 Executive Summary 1 Table of Contents 2 Project Report 3 Participants 3 Context and Origin of the Project 3 Aims and Objectives 4 Methodology 4 Contribution to Non-Formal Learning 5 Involvement 6 Activities-Youth in Action Programme 6 Budget 9 Discussion 14 Responses 14 Achievement of Aims and Objectives 15 Impacts of the Project 16 Intercultural Dimension 16 European Dimension 17 Current Issues with Mentoring 17 Mentoring as a Government Policy 17 Benefit to the Mentees 18 Recommendations 19 Conclusion 19 References 20 Project Report Mentoring is defined as a direct non-judgmental relationship whereby an individual dedicates time to support another person. Youth mentoring is a concept of youth work that is increasingly being incorporated in various youth sectors such as schools, community youth settings and private sectors. The youth mentoring development project provides young people with opportunities to play an active role in improving the efficiency of mentoring programs. The project was a national youth meeting characteriaed by a series of discussion groups involving young people, policy makers and stakeholder representatives. The activities focused on young people to discussing youth mentoring issues and presenting their views on key issues and themes within youth mentoring. Participants The participants included: fifty young people around from the United Kingdom who comprised of 25 males and 25 females; youth practitioners and experts in the youth field i.e. Clapham Park Project, Northumberland Park Community Project, Lambeth Youth Council and Robert Levy Foundation; and policy makers such as Mentoring Academy, Great London Authority (GLA), Mayor’s Children and Young People’s Unit, The Learning Trust, and members of parliament Chuka Ummuna, David Lammy and Diane Abbott. The mentoring academy acted as the lead partner in planning and facilitating events. Context and Origin of the Project The project has originated from collaboration among different practitioners. It was developed by the mentoring academy with the purpose of engaging and supporting youths from the deprived areas of London. Mentoring has established itself as efficient tools in helping young people faced with the dangers of deprivation, enabling them lead a prosperous life. The project has also been populariaed by the fact that most emerging mentoring programs are being led by youth groups and increasingly seeking the services of peer mentors. Additionally, minimal research has been conducted on the needs of the mentees and mentors, and standards for mentoring modules yet many practitioners are demanding for this form of standardiaation. This provided the concept within which the project was developed. Aims and Objectives The principle aim of the research was to ensure that the opinions of the youths were incorporated in development of youth mentorship policies. The objectives included bringing young people in close proximity to the policy makers, imparting information of high quality among them to promote the process efficacy, engaging them in discussion and receiving their independent views on mentoring. Methodology The project delivered 10 days of activity based around meetings between policy makers of youth mentorship programs and youths, with a focus on those from disadvantaged/excluded backgrounds. The first 4 meetings were visits from policy makers hosted by young people/youth organisations in youth settings and explored issues such as: What makes a exceptional mentor and what skills do they need? What issues need to be dealt with as part of mentoring qualifications? How skills should be assessed in the context of people studying towards mentoring qualifications? What policies would be beneficial to enhancing quality standards within youth mentoring? The need of Positive role model Personal/Professional development for mentors, qualifications, career paths School based mentoring Community Mentoring Programmes Formal, structured mentoring programmes Informal mentoring support The need of mentoring framework This was followed by a coached event at which young people were supported in formulating and presenting their views in relation to the key youth mentoring themes explored during the first set of meetings. Policy makers then hosted a further series of meetings at which young people presented their views on key youth mentoring issues. Finally, an end of project youth mentoring seminar reviewed the project with a view to providing recommendations that reflect the views of young people and that can be taken forward within policy developments for youth mentoring services. The key principle of the project was to ensure that it captures the views of young people. The working methods used focused on ensuring that young people are able to define and drive project content as well as ensuring that activities and outcomes reflect their view during the development of the mentoring Academy concept. Contribution to Non-Formal Learning Participatory approaches used included digital recording and allowing the young people to curate their response, contributing to their skills and competences. Promotion of social & personal development of young people involved: Confidence, media training, taking part in an event which will be promoted and publicised, the opportunities to be involved further in future events and on the EU level (access to opportunities they were not aware of previously). Leads to Youth pass certificate. Diversity and equal opportunities will form part of the content Involvement They will be made aware that the project is all about their participation. Therefore, the entire project is designed with this in mind, and the 'sandwich' session is all about facilitating them to take this forward. At this second session, they will also be coached on designing in what learning outcomes they want from this, and this will form part of the evaluation. Additionally, they will also design the evaluation framework using this as a 'mid-point' - so will be involved in the final evaluation component. Activities-Youth in Action Programme Meetings Day/Date Host Activity Venue Attendees 1 Jan 2012 The Mentoring Academy Selection of TMA Young people/Facilitators:: Interviews, CV, Personal Statement and CRB checks TBC TMA Young People 2 Feb 2012 Nathan Levy Introduction Project Brief and Task Project planning Project promotion TBC TMA Young People 3 March 2012 The Mentoring academy Project Promotion Event at each LEA community i.e. leafleting to promote the project. Questionnaires Croydon shopping centre/Stratford shopping centre TMA Young People 4 March 2012 Nathan Levy Project Brief/Planning TBC TMA Young People Curriculum Developmental Team 5 May 2012 Baroness Newlove Presentation of research findings by TMA Young people and discussion Office of Baroness Newlove House of Lords TMA Young People Curriculum developmental Team 6 April 2012 David Lammy MP Tottenham Presentation of research findings by TMA Young people and discussion Office of David Lammy Westminster TMA Young People Curriculum developmental Team 8 May Mentoring Academy Data analysis/Developmental Work (2 meetings) TBC TMA Young People Curriculum developmental Team 7 Thursday June 2012 The Mentoring Academy Mentoring Academy Young people Conference Research Findings recommendations. Mentoring Academy Proposal/ concept. Department of communities TMA Young People Curriculum developmental Team All Participants – other guest Budget A. Estimated costs Amount Accepted costs (to be filled in by the Executive Agency or the National Agency) A.1. Direct cost 1. Travel costs 545.79 2. Accommodation/food costs 3,297.50 3. Organisation of seminars, meetings, consultations, activities 16,942.37 4. Publication/translations/information costs 1,569.16 5. Dissemination and exploitation of results 1,114.33 6. Other costs directly linked to the implementation of the project 852.81 Sub-total 24,321.96 A.2. Indirect costs 7. Indirect costs (up to 7% of direct costs; i.e. budget items 1+2+3+4+5+6) 1,702.54 Total estimated costs (A.1 + A.2) 26.024.50 B. Estimated income Amount Accepted income (to be filled in by the Executive Agency or the National Agency) B.1. EU Grant 1. Contribution requested from the “Youth in Action Programme”8 19,518.37 B.2. Co-financing 2. Own resources (including partners) 6,506.13 3. National/regional/local public institutions 4. Private donors 5. Other Community funding for this project 6. Other contributions to this project (please specify each source): Total estimated income (B.1+B.2)9 26,024.50 C. Detailed calculation of costs ALL ITEMS IN EUROS Travel costs Specification Promoter Number of persons From To Means of transport Costs Activity: Cost for young people to travel to event. The Mentoring Academy 50 young people require travel to attend and avertage of 2 events Within London Tube/Bus 545.79 TOTAL 545.79 Accommodation/food costs Specification Number of persons Number of days Cost per day Costs Activity: One meal (Lunch or Dinner) plus refreshment (Tea, Coffee etc) 20 10 329.75 3,297.50 TOTAL 3,297.50 Organisation of seminars, meetings, consultations, activities a) Rental costs (rooms, equipment, etc.) Specification Number of days Cost per day Costs Preparation: Mentors engaged as sessional outreach workers to promote the project and engage young people from excluded groups 25 113.71 2,842.75 Activity: Cost of providing materials (pens, paper, flip charts, etc) for young people to use during events 10 90.97 909.70 Activity: Facilitators 12 days in total (8 x 1 for meetings, 2 x 2 for midpoint and end of project seminar 12 341.12 4,093.44 Activity: Keynote speakers for 4 of the events 4 284 1,137.08 Preparation: Room Hire 10 341.12 3,411.20 Preparation: Create Content for 10 Events 10 397.97 3,979.70 Activity: Equipment Hire (laptop, projectors, digital camera, etc) for events 10 56.85 568.50 Subtotal 16,942.37 Publication/translations/information costs Specification Costs Preperation: Design of leaflet summerising 284.27 Preparation: Translation of leaflet content into key community languages (Arabic, French, Somali, Spanish, Turkish) 852.80 Preparation: Printing Costs (500 x English + 100 x 5 other languages) 432.09 TOTAL 1,569.16 Dissemination and exploitation of results Specification Costs Preparation: Create Project Website 545.79 Activity: Support for young people to use the blogging functions within the website 284.27 Follow up: Support for young people to use digital video edit software to create DVD 284.27 TOTAL 1.114.33 Other costs directly linked to the implementation of the project Specification Costs Follow up: Independent evaluation reviewing project activities and achievements (3 days @ €284.27 per day) 852.81 TOTAL 852.81 Indirect costs Specification Costs 7% of Indirect Cost 1,702.54 TOTAL 1.702.54 Discussion Responses The key characteristics of a successful mentor as posited by the respondents include empathy, honesty, and reliability, availability, supportive, dedicated and committed (Johnson, Bulot, Johnson, 2008:555-569). He or she should also be impartial, trustworthy, have a sense of direction and be able to motivate mentees. The current mentoring problems that were cited by the respondents include lack of progression, lack of direction, informal qualification, minimal operating standards and quality assurance. All participants agreed that there should be a national mentoring qualification or apprenticeship. On the issue of the topic and skills that the approved mentors should be trained on, the respondents suggested skills such as empowerment, safeguarding life and people skills as well as THE transition to adulthood and motivation skills. The respondents agreed that mentors should be monitored through strategies such as national mentors register, new laws and continuous professional development. In addition to monitoring, all participants agreed that there should be national mentors approved by the government. This will prevent downgrading of the program by under qualified mentors that makes the process inefficient. If mentors were to work with young people that are not engaged in training or education, they would impact them positively through encouraging and motivating them to re-enter education or seek employment opportunities. This requires expertise because poorly trained mentoring personnel would not be convincing enough in education affairs. The mentees would also be unresponsive to untrained mentors. Other benefits that can be imparted by mentors on uneducated or jobless youths include life skills, abstaining crime and drug use, avoiding teenage pregnancy, physical and heath education, avoiding the streets through involvement in productive activities, boosting their self confidence and assisting them to change their behaviour (Malmgren, Ottino and Amaral, 2010). These skills encourage them to be proactive and change their attitudes towards life through involving in productive and ethical behaviours. The mentors are required to be role models for them to be successful in imparting knowledge as some behaviour cannot be imparted without practical demonstration. For instance, drug addicted mentees would never abstain from drugs if the mentors are using the same drugs they are preaching against. Achievement of Aims and Objectives The project will achieve its aims and objectives through improving participation, voluntary activities, information and knowledge among the youths. This will also involve promoting participation of the youth in civil life as well as improving their sense of responsibility and citizenship. The project will enhance active participation tendencies to improve the changes of young people’s participation and social cohesion through reduction of barriers. Utilisation of the existing information systems such as social media and blogs by the youth will be enhanced to promote information exchange. The young people’s opportunities to labour markets will be improved by the entrepreneurial topics that have been included in the mentoring programs. Impacts of the Project The project has contributed in widening youth access to all levels of education, establishing common frameworks that facilitate transparency in qualification systems and promoting active citizenship. Its recommendations will foster tolerance and cohesion through capacity building and promoting European Union co-operation among youths. The involvement of the policy makers enhanced the positive impacts of the project towards mentoring as they are more in touch with young people. Authority presence enabled the participants realise the seriousness of the project thus enhancing positive responsiveness. The involvement of both the mentors and the mentees in the program ensured a more accurate assessment of the training needs as the needs of both parties were addressed. The policy makers encouraged the youths to get more involved in youth democracy thus exposing them to the practical relevance that the issues discussed. Dissemination of the project information through web based social and professional network enabled all the participants connect with each other thus contributing into long-term outcomes. Intercultural Dimension The project increases the awareness of young people towards their cultures. Mentoring and interaction will enable participants discern practices that are helpful and those that do not add any value. The project fostered dialogue and real intercultural encounters among the participants as young people from different backgrounds participated in the meeting. The project assisted in combating prejudice and racism leading to development of tolerance and better understanding of diversity (Maloney, 2012). European Dimension The project enhances a sense of European citizenship among the young generation and understanding of their role as part of the present and future Europe. The project also addresses the common concerns for the European Union concerns such as crime and substance abuse. The project organisation reflects the European Union topics such as enlargement and individual roles and obligations. Current Issues with Mentoring The current mentoring initiatives are faced with the need for positive role models a most mentors are acting informally. There is no formal qualification for youth mentors in the United Kingdom. Youth mentoring has gained exponential growth in the United Kingdom and has been applied in helping young generation that are socially excluded and engages in outlawed criminal activities 9 Jones and Perkins, 2006: 90-109). Most of the youths are not in any employment, training or educational programmes. Government and the corporate bodies that supervise mentoring claim of efficiency in mentorship although research has proven that most mentoring programs are not efficient enough. Most mentors work with vulnerable subjects yet they require minimal qualifications characterised by inefficient training and support. Mentoring as a Government Policy The well-being of all children and young people under the age of 19 years has been enhanced by the 2003 publication of Government Green paper Every Child Matters. The policy portends that for every child to be provided with the required support, they should be healthy, safe, enjoy, achieve economic well-being and contribute positively (DuBois and Rhodes, 2006). Another policy published in 2005, support parents: the best start for children, asserted that according to the government, the role of volunteers in mentoring creates more opportunities for mentees and strengthens local communities through linking people from various cultures, ages and ethnicities. However, mentoring has been associated with limited value to the welfare of the youths. In 2007, mentoring and befriending foundation asserted that research evidence on the value of mentoring is not convincing (DuBois and Rhodes, 2006). Benefit to the Mentees According to Philip and Spratt, (2007), mentees benefit in a number of ways that includes increased self esteem, motivation, improved chances of employment, enhanced social and life skills, increased opportunities and a chance to act as a role model among other peers. A meta-analysis review conducted by Du Bois and Rhodes on the effects of mentoring programs on youths revealed that mentoring provides modest benefits to the mentees (DuBois and Rhodes, 2006). Mentors should also be made aware of the possible challenges they are likely to face in the course of their duties. This enables them examine their motivations and commitment when delegating their roles. Challenges The main challenge experienced was dealing with difficult youth (Garvey, Megginson and Stokes, 2002). The project involved addressing the needs of the young people faced with various obstacles such as social (gender, ethnicity and religion), economic (poverty, low income and homelessness), educational difficulties (lower qualified persons, poor performers and early school leavers), cultural differences (immigrants and refugees), health problems (psychiatric conditions and mental health problems) and geographical obstacles (those from rural and their urban counterparts). Recommendations Some of the measures that Mentoring and Befriending foundation can apply in improving the worth of mentoring programs include replacing the current Approved Provider standard with a more comprehensive and compulsory inspection scheme and undertaking comprehensive and conclusive resource to identify the most appropriate group of mentees. Additionally, they should ensure consistency in mentoring programs and offering alternative mentoring programs to the mentees who quit prematurely after identifying the cause of their actions. They should also review the selection criteria and ensure that mentoring literature explains the challenges encountered by mentors when dealing with the youths. The government’s decision to hand over the management of mentoring schemes to under qualified staffs that hire the services of barely trained volunteers is inappropriate and makes mentoring inefficient. Mentoring can only work perfectly if it replicates the role of a parent in the provision of continuous and consistent support. The government should recognise mentoring as a highly skilled concept for of behavioural change for troubled youth. The youths selected for the program should be closely monitored and rigorously controlled. Conclusion Mentoring is an approach that has established its roots in all social and economic sectors. Mentees benefit in number of ways that include increased self esteem, motivation, improved chances of employment, enhanced social and life skills, increased opportunities and a chance to act as a role model among other peers. The project has contributed in widening youth access at all levels of education, establishing common frameworks that facilitate transparency in qualification systems and promoting active citizenship as well as raising its profile among the young generation. References DuBois, D.L. & Rhodes, J.E. (2006) ‘Introduction to the special issue: Youth mentoring: Bridging science with practice’, Journal of Community Psychology, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 647–799. Garvey, B., Megginson, D. & Stokes, P. (2002) Mentoring, Bradford, England, Emerald Group Pub. Johnson, C., Bulot, J. & Johnson, R. (2008) Outcome Assessment of Mentorship Program, Educational Gerontology, vol. 34, no. 7, pp. 555-569. Jones, K. & Perkins, D. (2006) Youth and Adult Perceptions of Their Relationships Within Community-Based Youth Programs, Youth Society, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 90-109. Malmgren, D., Ottino, J., & Amaral, L. N. (2010) The role of mentorship in protege performance, Nature, vol. 465, no. 7298, pp. 622-626. Maloney, M. (2012) Ethical mentorship: the dilemma of success or failure, Clinics in Dermatology, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 210-215. Philip, K. & Spratt, J. (2007) A synthesis of published research on mentoring and befriending, BMF, viewed 31 August 2012 http://www.google.co.ke/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&ved=0CDYQFjAD&url Read More