Online Mentoring for Talented Girls in STEM: The Role of Relationship Quality and Changes in Learning Environments in Explaining Mentoring Success

Stoeger, Heidrun; Debatin, Tobias; Heilemann, Michael; Ziegler, Albert

doi:10.1002/cad.20320

Cited by 32 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One can nevertheless bring other key constructs into focus that—in combination with regulatory insight and regulatory power—might help resolving the mentoring paradox. For example, mentors who have a positive relationship quality with their mentee will be better accepted and consequently have more regulatory power 121 . Social–emotional influences on regulatory power can be studied from a similar angle.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The regulations in a mentee's actiotope supporting the nonmentoring pathway are antagonistic to the mentoring. For example, we conducted mentoring programs with girls interested in STEM 31,121,122 . The participating girls were exposed to the gender stereotype of STEM as an unfeminine domain before, during, and after the mentoring program.…”

Section: Regulatory Insight Regulatory Power Space Conflicts and Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Spaces of possibilities: a theoretical analysis of mentoring from a regulatory perspective

Ziegler

Gryc

Hopp

et al. 2020

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A review of the literature on the effectiveness of mentoring reveals a paradox: on the one hand, there is evidence that mentoring can be highly effective. On the other hand, meta-analyses usually only show small to moderate effect sizes, and sometimes even negative effects. To better understand this mentoring paradox, we discuss three fundamental problems in mentoring research. We propose working definitions and theoretical premises to overcome these problems. We apply various systemic concepts to the field of mentoring that might help to resolve the mentoring paradox. We introduce mentees' actiotopes and their interaction with other systems as the unit of analysis, and the regulations for which mentors are responsible for in the context of mentoring as the categories of analysis. To systemize and elaborate on the regulatory dimensions of mentoring, we introduce the nonagonal framework of regulation in mentoring (NFR-M). To facilitate the analysis of ongoing changes caused by mentoring and therefore a dynamic understanding of mentoring, we introduce the concept of spaces of possibilities in mentoring (M-spaces). Finally, we introduce the concepts of the Athena Mentor to explain why mentors can differ so dramatically in the effectiveness of the regulations they are responsible for in the context of mentoring. We conclude by describing how mentoring comparisons based on the NFR-M, mentors' regulatory insight, regulatory power, and M-spaces can help to resolve the mentoring paradox.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Regulatory Insight Regulatory Power Space Conflicts and Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spaces of possibilities: a theoretical analysis of mentoring from a regulatory perspective

Ziegler

Gryc

Hopp

et al. 2020

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies show that the program has a positive influence on mentees’ STEM activities ( Stoeger et al, 2013 , 2016 ). There is also evidence that mentors play an important role for increases in STEM activities ( Stoeger et al, 2019 ). In future research, it would be interesting to investigate more thoroughly how peer- and mentor-influences interact when it comes to increasing STEM activities in the CyberMentor program.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Supporting Role of Mentees’ Peers in Online Mentoring: A Longitudinal Social Network Analysis of Peer Influence

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies show that online mentoring is an effective measure to support girls in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), especially if it also allows for networking with other participants on the mentoring platform. However, research is missing on peer influence. This topic seems especially crucial in programs for adolescents as peer influence plays an important role at this age. In our study, we investigated peer influence on mentoring outcomes-confidence in own STEM abilities and STEM-related activities-in an online mentoring program in STEM for secondary school girls (N = 124, M = 14.3 years, SD = 2.2 years, age range: 11-19 years). The program provides girls with at least 1 year of one-on-one interaction with a personal female mentor who has a college degree in a STEM subject. Participants can also interact with other participants on the platform. We used a longitudinal social network analysis approach to examine peer influence on mentoring outcomes. Our results indicate that both mentoring outcomes-mentees' confidence in own STEM abilities and STEM-related activities-are influenced by peers moderated by the mentees' own age. Younger mentees tended to become more similar to their peers regarding confidence in own STEM abilities and STEM-related activities, whereas older mentees tended to become more dissimilar over time. In addition, peer group size had a positive effect on confidence in own STEM abilities, but not on STEM-related activities. This effect was moderated by the mentee's age. Overall, peers have a positive influence on the measured mentoring outcomes, especially for young mentees.

show abstract

“…In the case of an online mentoring program for girls in STEM, 72,91 for example, a design that included pretest and posttest measures as well as repeated measurements over the course of program participation allowed researchers to investigate the development of various mentoring outcomes in mentees (e.g., their certainty about career goals or their STEM activities). Continuous collection of logfile data made it possible to also investigate the influence of program characteristics (e.g., mentees' STEM-related communication and mentees' networking behavior on the mentoring platform) and their influence on mentoring effectiveness.…”

Section: Key Issue 7: Ongoing Evaluation As the Basis Of Self-improvimentioning

confidence: 99%

Key issues in professionalizing mentoring practices

Stoeger

Balestrini

Ziegler

2020

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mentoring has experienced a tremendous upswing over the past decades, which has only recently slowed down somewhat. One possible factor explaining mentoring's popularity are numerous case studies suggesting that it is one of the most effective ways of helping individuals to develop. Meta-analyses indicating effect sizes for mentoring that are below what would theoretically be possible appear to contradict the success stories, however. This circumstance raises questions about the professionalization of mentoring practices. We focus on seven key issues for future efforts at professionalizing mentoring. Key issues 1 and 2 address observation of the state of the art within formal mentoring when programs are planned and implemented: the consideration of recent research and of best practices. While both areas can overlap, they provide complementary sources of pertinent information for the professionalization of mentoring. Key issues 3-6 address the need to align mentoring activities to the specific context and goals of individual mentoring programs by observing idiographic program characteristics, mentoring dynamics, the orchestration of mentoring goals, and the provision of mentoring resources. Finally, key issue 7 highlights ongoing evaluation as the basis of the effective, continuous improvement of mentoring programs.

show abstract

Online Mentoring for Talented Girls in STEM: The Role of Relationship Quality and Changes in Learning Environments in Explaining Mentoring Success

Cited by 32 publications

References 48 publications

Spaces of possibilities: a theoretical analysis of mentoring from a regulatory perspective

Spaces of possibilities: a theoretical analysis of mentoring from a regulatory perspective

The Supporting Role of Mentees’ Peers in Online Mentoring: A Longitudinal Social Network Analysis of Peer Influence

Key issues in professionalizing mentoring practices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About