Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Citation: Jones, K.V.; Gowdy, G.;
Griffith, A.N. Why Not All Three?
Combining the Keller, Rhodes, and
Spencer Models Two Decades Later to
Equitably Support the Health and
Well-Being of Minoritized Youth in
Mentoring Programs. Youth 2024,4,
1348–1363. https://doi.org/10.3390/
youth4030085
Academic Editor: Giulio D’Urso
Received: 11 July 2024
Revised: 26 August 2024
Accepted: 31 August 2024
Published: 5 September 2024
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Article
Why Not All Three? Combining the Keller, Rhodes, and Spencer
Models Two Decades Later to Equitably Support the Health and
Well-Being of Minoritized Youth in Mentoring Programs
Kristian V. Jones 1 ,* , Grace Gowdy 2and Aisha N. Griffith 3
1School of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98105, USA
2Youth, Family & Community, Education Northwest, Portland, OR 97209, USA; grace.gowdy@ednw.org
3Educational Psychology, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA; griffit3@uic.edu
*Correspondence: kjones21@uw.edu
Abstract: Building on previous work examining the three central theoretical models driving the
youth mentoring literature, the present paper presents an updated conceptual framework on how
youth mentoring can equitably support health outcomes for young people, particularly minoritized
or otherwise marginalized youth. Youth mentoring has been demonstrated to support positive health
outcomes (e.g., mental health, well-being) for all young people, and has a growing literature base
to match the enthusiasm in findings. The core conceptual models, however, had not been updated
for nearly 20 years. This paper starts with the guiding values behind the updated model, including
centering the pursuit of social justice, a recognition of structural oppression, and utilizing key
modern theoretical bases (healing-centered engagement, a strengths-based approach, and community
cultural wealth). Ultimately, this paper presents an updated conceptual model, outlining key aspects
needed to support mental health for minoritized young people through youth mentoring, including
building a foundational relationship, key mechanisms of mentoring, reciprocal benefits, and context-
specific support.
Keywords: mentoring programs; minoritized youth; equity; conceptual model
1. Introduction
Since as early as 1975, there have been over 70 studies testing the impacts of formal
youth mentoring programs [
1
]. Dozens more published studies have considered qualities of
mentors and programs, specific youth populations, and how to best support young people
through mentoring interventions. This ever-growing field of study has, so far, established
that there are small-to-moderate, short-term positive outcomes for young people [
1
,
2
].
Positive outcomes for young people are more likely to occur, with greater effect size, when
programs are of high quality [2].
More recently, key scholars of the youth mentoring literature have begun to think
about the ways in which mentoring programs differ for minoritized (i.e., groups that are
systematically oppressed due to their identities [
3
]) and other marginalized youth (i.e.,
young people pushed to the margins of society due to demographic characteristics [
4
]) [
5
–
7
].
The growing number of formal, published studies on this important topic coincide with
much larger informal conversations among youth mentoring scholars around the need
to recognize the role of structural oppression in examinations of access to, and quality of,
formal youth mentoring relationships. As members of the National Mentoring Resource
Center’s Research Board, the three authors of this paper have been privy to conversations
in which key scholars informally discuss the role of structural oppression and antiracist
perspectives raised in recent studies by Dr. Sanchez, Dr. Hurd and others, and the need for
updated theoretical models that consider these important factors. Indeed, Dr. Hurd has
recently published an updated theoretical model considering these key factors in informal
Youth 2024,4, 1348–1363. https://doi.org/10.3390/youth4030085 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/youth
Youth 2024,41349
youth mentoring, a separate but coinciding field of study [
8
]. Needed now is a close
examination of the currently-utilized theoretical models for formal youth mentoring and
efforts to modernize these models to include key factors such as the acknowledgement
of structural oppression and valuing of antiracist perspectives, particularly in regard to
how formal youth mentoring relationships can facilitate positive health and well-being for
minoritized and marginalized young people.
2. Process
In order to put forth an updated theoretical model, the three authors of this paper first
needed to consider the currently-utilized theoretical models. We identified three models,
all developed in the mid-2000s, and considered foundational to the field. We then had
formal conversations with the three main authors of these models, Renee Spencer [
9
], Tom
Keller [
10
], and Jean Rhodes [
11
]. These conversations enabled us to explore in detail
Spencer’s relational framework of mentoring, Keller ’s systemic model of the mentoring
framework, and Rhodes’s model of mentoring. Our findings on how these models origi-
nated, their contributions to the field, and where to build from there can be found in depth
in the corresponding article [12].
The current paper builds on that work by proposing a model that combines the
three foundational models, alongside important perspectives on recognizing structural
oppression and valuing antiracist ideals and how these concepts impact the health and
well-being of young people engaged in mentoring programs. This proposed model first
comes with a statement of who we are and our shared values guiding this endeavor. We
then present the strengths of each foundational model and how they complement each
other. We then present factors that would enhance these models to be more relevant to
power dynamics in mentoring. Finally, we conclude by proposing a new conceptual model
that reflects advances in the field, alongside the supporting literature for each component.
3. Who We Are and Our Guiding Values
In recognition that no theoretical or conceptual work exists in a vacuum, but that
rather it is a direct reflection of the authors behind it, we first start this presentation of
a new model with a statement of who we are. All three authors are considered Early
Career Scholars, having earned PhDs within ten years of this publication. Two of the three
authors identify as Black; two identify as women, one identifies as a man, and one identifies
as queer. Two of the three authors consider social work as their home discipline, while
one is a youth development scholar. All are well-connected to the larger field of youth
mentoring scholars, through both informal and formal connections such as the National
Mentoring Resource Center Research Board. As such, the authors benefited from mentoring
relationships from more senior scholars in the field, many of whom were consulted as part
of this project. In addition to these formal connections to the mentoring literature, all three
have served as mentors and have benefited as mentees. We believe in the power of human
relationships to promote positive outcomes, both from a knowledge of the literature and
lived experience.
In conversations with Drs. Keller, Rhodes, and Spencer, we learned that these three
models were created based on philosophical orientations in their respective fields, their
personal experiences, and what they saw as missing in the field of mentoring during the
mid 2000s (see [
12
]). Since we valued these stories, we begin by documenting our own
values in developing a new model during the mid 2020s. We are guided by three values
stemming from various conceptual frameworks that we view as useful to extend these
models, while also holding fast to the initial intentions of the models.
4. Centering the Pursuit of Social Justice and Recognition of Structural Oppression
To begin with, all youth grapple with some sort of environmental challenges and differ-
ent groups of minoritized youth have faced historical injustices in the United States, which
results in unique and specific barriers for them to overcome in order to achieve productive
Youth 2024,41350
and healthy lives [
13
–
16
]. For example, Black Americans have constantly fought for the
American dream amidst intense adversity dating back to the enslavement of their African
ancestors who were brought to the United States against their will, followed by Jim Crow
segregation, the Civil Rights movement, and the Black Lives Matter movement
[17–20]
.
Further, researchers have documented that youth with minoritized sexual orientations and
gender identities have specific stressors that need to be considered in youth mentoring
relationships in order to best account for their overall health and well-being [21–23].
A substantial body of empirical evidence has consistently confirmed that discrimi-
nation and prejudice are common experiences in the day-to-day lives of the racially and
ethnically minoritized and are particularly accentuated for youth from oppressed back-
grounds [
24
–
27
]. Because adolescence is widely accepted as a developmental period
when youth begin to reflect about their ethnic/racial identity at a deeper level, it is also
expected that youth will become more acutely aware about various manifestations of
ethnic/racial discrimination. According to this empirical literature, ethnic/racial discrim-
ination has several negative effects on youths’ well-being, particularly on adolescents’
self-esteem [
26
,
28
,
29
]. Research also underscores the fact that specific dimensions of eth-
nic/racial identity (e.g., identity exploration, positive affect, public regard) can be protective
factors against the adverse effects of discrimination and systemic racism [
30
,
31
]. Youth
mentoring research illustrates that mentoring can be used to help youth deal with the
discrimination and oppression they may experience in their life due to their ethnic/racial
identity, by cultivating positive elements of ethnic/racial identity [
32
–
36
]. For example, in
Sánchez and colleagues’ study [
35
] examining the role of natural mentors in the lives of
Latinx adolescents, the researchers found that ethnic identity among Latinx adolescents
mediated the association between the quality of the mentoring relationship and change
over time in views of the economic value of pursuing education. The same study found
that the quality of the mentoring relationship between Latinx adolescents and their mentors
was associated with higher levels of exploration and identity affirmation, underscoring
the importance of identity development outlined in Rhodes’ seminal youth mentoring
framework [11].
The idea that mentors can be advocates for social change with regards to racial oppres-
sion has been highlighted in the mentoring literature [
37
–
40
]. For example, frameworks
such as critical mentoring have been developed by highlighting the critical role that mentors
have in facilitating conversations and actions towards promoting the empowerment of
minoritized and otherwise marginalized youth of color [40].
4.1. Utilizing Healing-Centered Engagement
When combining the models, we valued using a healing-centered engagement (HCE)
lens to conceptualize mentoring in a way that promotes the optimal health and well-being
of youth and advances social justice. In “The Future of Healing: Shifting From Trauma
Informed Care to Healing Centered Engagement” [41], Ginwright states:
A healing centered approach to addressing trauma requires a different question
that moves beyond “what happened to you” to “what’s right with you” and
views those exposed to trauma as agents in the creation of their own well-being
rather than victims of traumatic events. (p. 3)
This piece describes four key elements, or principles, of HCE that can enhance formal
mentoring programs.
Ginwright shares in his writings and public talks that the impetus for the HCE ap-
proach was that a young person said to him during a men’s group that “I am more than
what happened to me, I’m not just my trauma”. Given this, one of the principles of HCE is
that it “is asset driven and focuses [on the] well-being we want, rather than symptoms we
want to suppress” [
41
] (p. 4). We believe using an HCE lens can help shift the mentoring
field from primarily focusing on the trauma or behavior that may have brought some youth
to a mentoring program. This can then help mentors recognize that mentees are agents
in the development of their well-being and the mentor is a resource for mentees in the
Youth 2024,41351
process. We believe continuing to have a trauma-informed approach in the mentoring field
is appropriate. However, it cannot be the sole focus, leading some adults who volunteer
to be mentors wanting to learn what happened to their mentee so that they, the mentor,
can “fix” the mentee. It is essential that those who volunteer to be a mentor learn about the
strengths that their mentee possesses that they, the mentor, can be inspired by and nurture.
Focusing more on assets is also likely to support mentees’ thriving. Caldwell and Witt [
42
]
describe thriving as key to positive development, stating that
Thriving entails the engagement of one’s unique talents, interests, and/or aspirations.
In this lies the assumption of one’s self awareness of [their] uniqueness and the
opportunities to purposefully manifest them. Through such engagement, one might
be thought of as actively working toward fulfilling [their] full potential. (p. 2).
We believe that when mentors focus on the mentee’s purpose, aspirations, and talents,
they can also push beyond solely focusing on traumatic experiences that have happened
to mentees, to the unique passions of their mentees. Notably, a second principle of HCE
is that it also asserts the importance of supporting “adult providers with their own heal-
ing”
[41] (p. 4)
, something that can be integrated in the field of mentoring where training
and technical support are already commonplace.
We believe HCE also serves as a call for adapting the foundational models in a way
that moves toward centering mentoring as addressing oppression and pushing toward
social justice for the overall health and well-being of young people. An important principle
of HCE is that it is “explicitly political, rather than clinical”. Ginwright [41] argues that
when people advocate for policies and opportunities that address causes of
trauma, such as lack of access to mental health, these activities contribute to
a sense of purpose, power and control over life situations. All of these are
ingredients necessary to restore well-being and healing. (p. 4)
Because of this, Ginwright argues that adults working with young people must “build
critical reflection and take loving action” (p. 6). Ultimately, when mentors develop critical
reflection, they can partner with mentees to analyze “practices and policies that facilitated
the trauma in the first place”, as well as the structures in society that marginalize young
people (p. 6). HCE also calls for mentors to take action alongside their mentees because, as
Ginwright argues, “building this sense of power and control among traumatized groups
is perhaps one of the most significant features in restoring holistic well-being” (p. 6). We
believe that mentors have an opportunity to shift from a savior mentality to one in which
they are collaborating to build mentees’ sense of power in an inequitable world.
A fourth and final principle of HCE that we believe is key to the mentoring field is that
it focuses on being “culturally grounded and views healing as the restoration of identity”
including the “intersectional nature of identity” [
41
] (p. 4). The focus on promoting positive
identity as related to one’s culture is particularly key for mentees of color, who make up
much of the mentoring population [
43
,
44
]. Ginwright argues that “for youth of color, these
forms of healing can be rooted in culture and serves as an anchor to connect young people
to a shared racial and ethnic identity” that “incorporates culturally grounded rituals, and
activities to restore well-being” [
42
] (p. 4). Being culturally grounded requires cultivating
empathy, cultural humility, and accountability.
4.2. Valuing a Strengths-Based Approach with Young People
As two of the three co-authors of this present paper are social workers by training, a
classic value of the social work profession is also seen as a tenet of this work: the strengths-
based perspective. The strengths-based perspective acknowledges the value that the young
person and their family bring to a mentoring relationship [
45
]. Thus, we value centering
the reciprocal nature of mentoring relationships within an ecological context (see [
4
]). We
recognize that proximal processes are core to the mentoring relationship. Bronfenbrenner
describes how these are what fuel development, with properties like engaging over an
extended amount of time, stating:
Youth 2024,41352
Developmentally effective proximal processes are not unidirectional; there must
be influence in both directions. For interpersonal interaction, this means that ini-
tiatives do not come from one side only; there must be some degree of reciprocity
in the exchange. [46] (p. 798)
The reciprocal nature of mentoring means that there are impacts both on the mentor
and mentee. We recognize that these reciprocal interactions occur in a larger ecology that
influences the mentee, the mentor, and how the two interact with each other over time.
We also value youth voice as central to the youth mentoring relationship, as we believe
that young people have the ability and right to make decisions and set goals within their
relationship, through a recognition of their values from the strengths-based perspective.
4.3. Recognizing Social Capital and All Forms of Community Cultural Wealth
Another factor that is reflected in the foundation models (Keller’s particularly), but
not yet developed, is the young person’s social capital beyond their parents and/or care-
givers. A young person’s access to social capital, or the resources they have available to
them through their social network, comes primarily from their parents, parents’ network,
neighbors, peers and teachers [
47
]. A young person’s social world is thus the network of
people that they know and the resources within those relationships.
Employing a social capital perspective also allows us to consider the structures within
which our social world lies, and how structural oppression may impact young people’s
social worlds and overall well-being [
48
]. For example, teachers often serve as network
brokers, mentors embedded in powerful institutions that either provide bridging capital or
serve as a barrier to resources [
49
]. Teachers are often noted as influential informal mentors
but can also use their power to serve as a barrier to young people, by moving a young
person through the educational system with little support, relying on harsh discipline or
not engaging with the student [50–53].
This recognition of structural oppression at play in the lives of minoritized and
otherwise-marginalized young people shifts us away from deficit-based perspectives that
locate explanations for disparate outcomes in individual abilities, to focus on the systems
of relationships around them. Yosso’s Community Cultural Wealth Model [
54
] goes a step
further, by exposing the centering of White middle-class culture in many conceptualiza-
tions of social capital, which encourages us to view youth who are not in that group as
“culturally poor” (p. 76), not acknowledging the array of knowledge, skills, and abilities
demonstrated by marginalized groups that are drawn from their homes and communities.
The Community Cultural Wealth model [
54
], rooted in Critical Race Theory, delineates
various forms of capital that are nurtured within Black and Brown communities, such as
familial, linguistic, and aspirational capital, with the last defined as “the ability to hold onto
hope in the face of structured inequality and often without the means to make such dreams
a reality” (p. 77). Navigational capital, the ways that minoritized and marginalized young
people respond and adapt to different relational contexts and their associated expectations,
is another demonstrable asset available predominantly to minoritized and marginalized
young people [
48
]. A guiding value of the presented Equity model is thus a recognition of
the larger social world of the young person and a call to recognize a wider array of assets
available to them to cultivate their health and overall well-being.
5. How the Strengths of the Previous Models Complement One Another
An updated version that combines the three foundational mentoring models would
result in a thorough and robust mentoring framework that provides a comprehensive
conceptualization as to how youth mentoring makes an impact on the lives of youth.
Specifically, including Keller’s systemic model of mentoring framework [
10
], Rhodes’s
model of mentoring [
55
] and Spencer’s relational framework of mentoring [
9
] provides
the much-needed conceptualization of how the youth’s social network impacts different
elements of the youth mentoring relationship and leads to positive health outcomes. This
recognition of the social network and social capital of the young person is expanded on in
Youth 2024,41353
the proposed model below. The specific focus of Spencer’s relational processes in youth
mentoring [
9
] provides more detail for Keller’s and Rhodes’s respective models in regard
to the specific interpersonal elements that occur between mentors and mentees in their
relationship. Indeed, Spencer’s identification of the four core relational processes: (a) au-
thenticity, (b) empathy, (c) collaboration, and (d) companionship, provides more insight
into how the mentors and mentees build rapport and maintain a lasting and impactful
relationship. These key relational processes are retained in the proposed model below.
Finally, Rhodes’s model identifies three broad outcome areas: social–emotional develop-
ment, cognitive development, and identity development, providing three tangible and
flexible outcomes to supplement Keller’s and Spencer ’s respective models. The inclusion
of theorized outcomes is important to any model of youth mentoring and is included in the
proposed model below. For a more complete reflection of the three foundational models,
their contributions to the formal youth mentoring literature, and the perspective of their
authors, please see [12].
6. The Equity Model of Formal Youth Mentoring
Although Keller’s systemic model of mentoring [
8
], Rhodes’s model of youth mentor-
ing [
55
], and Spencer’s [
6
] relational processes in youth mentoring are highly influential
models that have stood the test of time, we believe that the field grows when updated
theoretical models are put forward. After deep examination of previous theoretical models,
conversation with their authors, and reflection on what is missing from these important
works, we propose a new Equity Model of Formal Youth Mentoring. Although we believe
there are valuable pieces in here that are applicable to many different iterations of mentor-
ing, the Equity model is most relevant to formal mentoring (as in matching young people
with mentors they do not already know) for adolescents and young adults. We believe that
this model, guided by the above values, promotes equitable support to young people, in
that it may be particularly helpful in supporting minoritized or otherwise marginalized
young people in living healthy and meaningful lives. The following sections walk through
the background literature and give an explanation for the inclusion of each aspect of the
Equity model seen in Figure 1.
Youth 2024, 4, FOR PEER REVIEW 7
Figure 1. The Equity Model of Formal Youth Mentoring.
6.1. Building a Foundational Relationship
The first step in this model, and in any youth mentoring relationship, is building the
foundation. Our emphasis on the three proposed essential activities to build a mentoring
relationship comes directly from Dr. Spencer, who in our conversation noted that, at the
end of the day, it really is about what happens relationally between mentor and mentee
[56]. You will note that this section of the model has arrows pointing to and from all three
of these essential activities, as we believe they support one another and should happen in
tandem with one another.
6.2. Acknowledging the Young Person, Their Power and Voice, and Their Social World
The first essential activity to build a healthy and productive mentoring relationship
is to acknowledge the young person, their strengths, power and voice, their multitude of
identities, and their own social world. The Equity model calls for a recognition of the
young person’s strengths (e.g., navigational capital, resources within existing relation-
ships) as an extension of the strengths-based value. This first essential activity also centers
the young person’s power and voice—a direct call from the healing-centered engagement
perspective, which strives to engage young people as “agents in the creation of their own
well-being” [43] (p. 3). A simple way that a mentor could value a young person’s voice
and choice is by allowing the young person to pick activities for their outings together.
Additionally, a mentoring program could value the voices of the youth in their program
by giving them the opportunity to shape program delivery by creating a youth advisory
board and compensating young people for their time and expertise. We also include a
centering of the young person’s multitude of identities, as this directly ties to some of the
outcomes of interest (cultivating youth-defined identities).
Lastly, this first essential activity calls for mentors and practitioners alike to recognize
the social world of the young person. We know that strong relationships with a network
of caring adults provide a necessary context for young people to thrive and that two out
of every three young people report having a caring non-parental adult that provides them
with support [57,58]. Additionally, recent research illustrates that the caregivers of youth,
Figure 1. The Equity Model of Formal Youth Mentoring.
Youth 2024,41354
6.1. Building a Foundational Relationship
The first step in this model, and in any youth mentoring relationship, is building the
foundation. Our emphasis on the three proposed essential activities to build a mentoring
relationship comes directly from Dr. Spencer, who in our conversation noted that, at the
end of the day, it really is about what happens relationally between mentor and mentee [
56
].
You will note that this section of the model has arrows pointing to and from all three of
these essential activities, as we believe they support one another and should happen in
tandem with one another.
6.2. Acknowledging the Young Person, Their Power and Voice, and Their Social World
The first essential activity to build a healthy and productive mentoring relationship
is to acknowledge the young person, their strengths, power and voice, their multitude
of identities, and their own social world. The Equity model calls for a recognition of the
young person’s strengths (e.g., navigational capital, resources within existing relationships)
as an extension of the strengths-based value. This first essential activity also centers the
young person’s power and voice—a direct call from the healing-centered engagement
perspective, which strives to engage young people as “agents in the creation of their own
well-being” [
43
] (p. 3). A simple way that a mentor could value a young person’s voice
and choice is by allowing the young person to pick activities for their outings together.
Additionally, a mentoring program could value the voices of the youth in their program by
giving them the opportunity to shape program delivery by creating a youth advisory board
and compensating young people for their time and expertise. We also include a centering
of the young person’s multitude of identities, as this directly ties to some of the outcomes
of interest (cultivating youth-defined identities).
Lastly, this first essential activity calls for mentors and practitioners alike to recognize
the social world of the young person. We know that strong relationships with a network of
caring adults provide a necessary context for young people to thrive and that two out of
every three young people report having a caring non-parental adult that provides them
with support [
57
,
58
]. Additionally, recent research illustrates that the caregivers of youth,
specifically Black youth, can be a significant source of support for mentors attempting to
build rapport and develop a strong bond with their mentee [
59
,
60
]. Needed now is a full
and integrated recognition of the social world of the young person that the mentor and
mentoring agency is joining, with all of its strengths and resources. Indeed, the field of
mentoring tends to view the social worlds of minoritized and otherwise marginalized young
people as impoverished, despite the increased likelihood of kin or kin-like relationships [
54
].
These kin and kin-like relationships are associated with a decreased likelihood of reporting
depression and anxiety and need to be recognized as the assets that they are [
61
–
64
]. An
example of what this may look like in action includes completing an ecomap with the
young person, wherein they have the opportunity to tell you about their social world and
who they turn to. Once that information is captured by the mentor, the mentoring program
could seek out these individuals and gauge their interest in collaborating in planning
community events and programming.
6.3. Demonstrating Essential Relational Processes and Cultural Humility
Dr. Spencer has a depth of knowledge on the key relational processes needed to form
a healthy relationship between mentor and mentee. We recommend that readers turn to
the Relational Model of Youth Mentoring for an in-depth examination of the role of authen-
ticity, empathy, collaboration, and companionship [
9
]. The Equity model posits that these
essential relational processes should be demonstrated from the mentor to the mentee as
part of building the foundation of their relationship, alongside a demonstration of cultural
humility. Cultural humility can be conceptualized as a process of critical self-reflection that
includes an individual acknowledging their worldview while also recognizing the value of
others’ perspectives when interacting with people from diverse backgrounds and identities
different to their own [
65
,
66
]. The concept of cultural humility is critical to include into
Youth 2024,41355
the essential relational processes between mentors and mentees, due to the number of
young people with minoritized identities and backgrounds engaged in mentoring relation-
ships with mentors who may not share those same identities, worldviews, or experiences.
Furthermore, Spencer’s model [
9
] illustrates how a lack of cultural humility can be a bar-
rier in youth mentoring relationships featuring individuals with differences in identities.
Therefore, both mentors and mentoring programs should also consider the importance
of cultural humility in developing empathy and taking a non-judgmental approach to
mentoring minoritized youth.
Demonstrating empathy in an early-phase mentoring relationship could include the
mentor taking the mentee’s perspective on something and a mentor demonstrating an
openness to the wants, needs, and experiences of the mentee [
67
]. Authenticity, described
as being able to express genuine feelings, is also important to demonstrate in this founda-
tional phase, as is collaboration, the ability to work together towards a common goal [
9
].
Lastly, companionship—simply enjoying each other and time spent together, is of central
importance in youth mentoring. When describing this key relational process, Dr. Spencer
notes “what kids are looking for is to have fun. In the context of that companionship, there
is a lot of growth that can happen” [
12
]. Ideally, mentors display cultural humility when
interacting with young people by reflecting on their own biases and identities throughout
the relationship, while also being open to different insights and experiences the young
person has in a world they may or may not be able to relate to themselves.
6.4. Building and Maintaining Trust
Another essential activity is building and maintaining trust. Rhodes’ model of youth
mentoring identifies trust as a critical component of a mentoring relationship because it
can facilitate the outcomes of social–emotional development, cognitive development, and
identity development. The model argues that a mentee’s trust in their mentor facilitates
social–emotional development because the mentee now has a space in which they are
comfortable opening up, the mentor has a space where they can help the mentee process
emotions and manage stress, and the mentee experiences a model of a healthy relation-
ship [
55
,
68
]. To a lesser extent, cognitive development is supported by trust because within
these conversations the mentor “provides scaffolding onto which an adolescent can acquire
and refine thinking skills” [
55
], [
68
] (p. 152), [
69
]. Finally, trust can be a catalyst for identity
development, especially for older adolescents who often form trusting relationships around
skill and career development [
69
]. Because of this, a mentor needs to focus on building
trust and also maintaining trust over time.
Mentors’ focus on building and maintaining trust is particularly important for promot-
ing equity, because minoritized young people have experienced adults not being worthy of
trust. Indeed, research illustrates that cultural mistrust can play a role in formal mentoring
relationships between girls of color and White mentors [
70
]. This is why this trust formation
must be in tandem with the other two essential components, including mentors developing
cultural humility and understanding the impacts of inequities on the mentee’s world.
6.5. Mechanisms of Mentoring
In light of a strengths-based acknowledgement of the social world of the young person,
the Equity model first invites mentors to consider which of the mechanisms below they
are in the best position to provide and what below mechanisms could be provided by
someone else. We also invite mentors and practitioners alike to consider what the young
person has identified as their goals and identities of importance before considering which
of these mechanisms are of central importance. Once these broader reflections have been
considered, we believe that the mechanisms of mentoring given below are of most saliency.
6.6. Providing Social Support and Connectedness
The direct provision of social support is still of central importance in youth mentoring.
Social support is broadly defined as “a flow of emotional concern, instrumental aid, infor-
Youth 2024,41356
mation, and/or appraisal between people” [
71
]. Informational support (i.e., advice-giving),
emotional support (e.g., positive appraisal), and instrumental support (i.e., tangible sup-
port, like a ride) are important tenants of a high-quality mentoring relationship and overall
well-being for the young person [
72
]. Within mentoring relationships, those young people
who report receiving informational support from their mentor were more likely to own
a car or bank account [
73
]. Those who report feeling emotionally supported have higher
rates of academic competence [74] and strong academic outcomes [75].
6.7. Expanding Social World
Mentors can also impact the lives of young people by expanding their social world
through the provision of bridging capital, connecting the young person to new resources
and information to which they did not have access before [
76
]. Studies have shown
that bridging mentors (commonly teachers and school personnel) were likely to promote
educational attainment and employment [
50
,
77
–
79
]. Bridging capital can also expand the
young person’s network by providing access to a new pool of adults. As a young person,
having a mentor from outside your network grants you access to their network [37].
6.8. Increasing Network Orientation and Help-Seeking Behaviors
Having a positive relationship with a caring non-parental adult may fuel a young
person’s confidence to seek out support from other adults, thus increasing a network-
oriented mindset [
39
]. This becomes an extension of bridging capital, in that the mentor
may not even need to introduce the young person to the new adult; a successful men-
toring relationship may also help the youth garner the self-confidence and social skills
needed to expand their network on their own [
37
]. Measuring benefits from mentoring
such as increased network orientation and help-seeking behavior helps practitioners and
researchers alike start to capture the “multiplier effect” of positive relationships with adults.
The “multiplier effect”, from social-capital literature, is where access to opportunity begets
access to opportunity [80].
7. Reciprocal Benefits
7.1. Cultivating Youth-Defined Identities and Well-Being
In light of our values of both the strengths-based approach and Healing-Centered
Engagement, the Equity model of youth mentoring calls for two priority outcomes for
young people: the cultivation of youth-defined identities and well-being.
The inclusion of identity formation in the Equity model is a direct nod to the Model of
Youth Mentoring and the body of work establishing identity formation as a central outcome
of mentoring and overall youth development [
55
,
81
–
87
]. We have purposefully chosen
to leave the specific identities to be cultivated open to the young person, as a means of
centering their own individual voice in the mentoring process.
As the youth in the world become more and more diverse in a variety of different
ways (e.g., ethnicity, sexual orientation, ability status, gender identity, and many others) the
identities youth may identify as are constantly expanding and changing, as they navigate
through the world and ask themselves the simple question “Who am I?” As indicated in
Rhodes’ foundational youth mentoring model, identity development is a critical aspect
to consider in youth mentoring relationships [
55
]. This proposed Equity model of youth
mentoring encourages both mentors and mentoring programs to consider the ways in which
mentoring relationships can cultivate identities youth define as important for themselves.
Identity development in general is an important aspect of human development, but specific
identities can play a pivotal role in the lives of young people in helping them navigate the
world and answer the question of who they are in the world.
Although it is important to leave particular identities of interest up to the young
person to decide for themselves, we do want to briefly touch on the role formal youth
mentoring plays in developing different types of identities important for human devel-
opment, specifically ethnic/racial identity development. The importance of considering
Youth 2024,41357
ethnic/racial identity development in a youth mentoring framework cannot be understated,
particularly because it is a critical factor that promotes positive youth development and
enhances protective factors against the deleterious effects of racial and ethnic discrimination
and systemic racism among minoritized youth [
30
,
31
]. For our model we use an integrated
presentation of ethnic/racial identity, due to the relevance of both constructs [
88
]. Eth-
nic/racial identity is defined as “a multidimensional, psychological construct that reflects
the beliefs and attitudes that individuals have about their ethnic/racial group membership,
as well as the processes by which these beliefs and attitudes develop over time” [
86
]. How
youth mentoring can be utilized to cultivate all or specific dimensions of ethnic/racial
identity—as an example of identity development broadly—is explicitly considered, due to
the importance of this construct and the potential of mentoring to have a positive influence
on ethnic/racial identity. It is also important to note that intersectional identities shape the
experiences of navigating society, such that one cannot disconnect overlapping identities or
intersections of oppression. For instance, mentors working with Black girls must recognize
navigating school as a Black girl is uniquely challenging because such mentees experi-
ence gendered racism in which they are punished for subjective judgments of “disrespect”
based on White notions of femininity, hypersexualized, seen as needing less nurturing,
and treated differently, based on multiple markers of their identity (e.g., [
89
–
92
]). As such,
mentors cognizant of this will explicitly recognize how a positive identity as a girl of color
requires a degree of critical consciousness to resist these circumstances and be resilient in
the face of them [93].
The second priority outcome for young people in the Equity model of youth mentoring
is well-being. The well-being of young people has been defined and conceptualized in a
variety of different ways over the years. For the sake of this framework focused on youth
mentoring, we conceptualize youth well-being as a multidimensional construct comprising
several important domains that are critical to healthy youth development and impactful
mentoring relationships with young people [
94
]. The first domain, outlined by Ross and
colleagues [
94
], is good health and optimum nutrition, which includes both the physical
and mental health of the young person. The second domain is connectedness, positive
values, and contribution to society, which encompases having the opportunities for youth
to be connected to positive social networks. The third domain is safety and a supportive
environment, which includes both physical and emotional security. The fourth domain
is learning, competence, education, skills, and employability, which covers all aspects of
discovery and scholarship. And the fifth and final domain of well-being is agency and
resilience, which involves empowerment of youth and providing resources to deal with
adversity. In the case of minoritized youth, the empowerment of youth and resources to
deal with adversity involves the development of skills like critical consciousness. Critical
consciousness can include critical awareness, critical reflection, and critical action that is
facilitated by the nature of a mentoring relationship [95–97].
The consideration of youth-defined identities and skills to navigate society to promote
positive well-being (e.g., cultivation of critical consciousness) speaks to the importance
of critical positive youth development (CPYD) for minoritized and other marginalized
young people receiving mentoring [
98
]. CPYD builds upon the foundation of positive
youth development by explicitly including constructs like critical reflection and political
efficacy along with the foundational components of traditional positive youth development.
Both mentors and mentoring programs are in an important position in their mentee’s life,
acting as a contributor, facilitator, and supporter with respect to the young person’s ability
to critically analyze systems they are navigating and impact those systems either from
inside or outside of them (e.g., finding ways to improve their local school system).
7.2. Mentor Benefits
Although youth mentoring is traditionally focused on benefits of the relationship for
the youth, recent research illustrates that mentors can benefit from the youth mentoring
experience as well [
5
,
99
,
100
], a potential outcome that is not explicitly fleshed out in any of
Youth 2024,41358
the staple models of youth mentoring. An explicit recognition of the benefits to mentors
comes from a strengths-based perspective—that young people have skills, experience
and resources adults can benefit from, and have a lot to give to the relationship. In
particular, researchers have identified how mentors can gain awareness of the dynamics
of social injustice as a result of mentoring marginalized youth, with benefits extending to
mentees, such as increased trust by youth resulting from perceived authenticity through
their mentors increasingly understanding their mentees’ life challenges [
5
,
6
,
37
,
69
]. Further,
a quasi-experimental study of a cultural humility and social justice training for volunteer
mentors serving Black youth indicated that non-Black mentors had greater increases from
pre- to post-training in cultural sensitivity, sociopolitical awareness (i.e., bias awareness
and understanding of the role of sociopolitical context in mentees’ lives) and self-efficacy, to
support their Black mentees, compared to Black mentors [
86
]. This, therefore, suggests there
may be unique benefits for mentors who engage in cross-ethnic/racial relationships with
youth. Moreover, previous research highlights the fact that mentors can develop tangible
skills as a result of being a youth mentor, especially if such experiences are associated with
underserved populations [
4
,
101
,
102
]. This is important to acknowledge, because the ways
in which youth receiving mentoring can add value to the lives of their mentors is a concept
not explicitly identified in the youth mentoring frameworks [37,40].
7.3. Context-Specific Support
The Equity model of youth mentoring also calls for context-specific support for the
mentor across all phases of relationship development, from building a foundational re-
lationship to noting reciprocal benefits. A large motivation of the Equity model is an
acknowledgment that these mentoring relationships do not exist in a vacuum, but rather in
a geographical, political place, which drives the access to, and quality of, relationships for
young people.
Another acknowledgement seen in this section of the model is the example of antiracist
training for mentors [
103
]. Dr. Sánchez and her team have deep knowledge on this subject,
having centered it in their own research in light of the sheer number of cross-race matches
that exist in many formal mentoring programs (see [
43
,
44
]). Indeed, the majority of formal
youth mentoring programs contain a White middle-class mentor and a young person of
color [
44
,
103
]. Given the sheer prevalence of this particular context in youth mentoring,
the Equity model calls for specific training on antiracism. Lastly, developmental training
may be helpful for formal youth mentoring matches that have the specific context of seeing
a large age gap between mentor and mentee or have mentees of any age that do not have
background knowledge on young people. Trainings on what developmental milestones
are expected, normal, and healthy, may help provide support or reassurance for mentors
who struggle with things like inconsistent communication with the young person, the
young person not acting on advice given, or the young person “acting out”, as these are
all developmentally normative [
104
,
105
]. For instance, a mentor working with an early
adolescent should understand that the developmental period of early adolescence comes
with a growing importance placed on peers and belonging, physical development that
impacts coordination, growing curiosity, greater understanding of social inequities, and a
huge variability in the onset of changes, which leads one to compare oneself to others [
106
].
Although an understanding of developmental characteristics is key, mentors must also
recognize that the experience of early adolescent development is variable and largely
shaped by social structures that marginalize minoritized mentees [
107
,
108
]. This means
that the model’s link to antiracist training in tandem with developmental training is key.
Importantly, a key value driving the need for context-specific support throughout
the mentoring relationship is a recognition of the wealth of capital that the young per-
son and their family have. As outlined in Keller’s model [
8
] and other youth mentoring
research
[6,109]
, the mentoring-program support staff play a pivotal role in providing
ongoing support and supervision through regular monitoring and training, which en-
sures mentors can meet the specific needs of minoritized youth. In fact, Spencer and
Youth 2024,41359
colleagues [
110
] found that even if youth had a strong relationship with their mentor, lack
of support from the program could lead to disruptions in the relationship. With support
from the mentoring agency on all contextually specific factors of the mentoring relationship,
we believe that mentors can come to recognize the great strengths of the young person and
their family. These may include, but are certainly not limited to, navigational capital (e.g.,
the skills it takes to navigate complex bureaucratic systems) or aspirational capital (e.g., the
trust that families have in their White mentors, despite long histories of White supremacy
such as those reflected in gentrification, gerrymandering, and the busing crisis).
8. Conclusions
Overall, this article hopes to contribute an updated model of youth mentoring focused
on equity and social justice for minoritized youth, to complement three foundational youth
mentoring models created by Drs. Keller, Spencer, and Rhodes. Specifically, this article
aims to center the factors that minoritized and marginalized youth are up against and
display the tangible ways mentoring programs can be a partner with young people to live
healthy and meaningful lives. The model is meant to be a guide to mentors, mentoring
programs, families, communities, and even young people themselves who are interested
in being an active participant in the mentoring process in a mentoring agency. It is the
authors’ hope that this model is not looked at as a perfect construct, but instead something
that can continuously be built upon and refined for years to come.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, K.V.J., A.N.G. and G.G.; writing—original draft prepara-
tion, K.V.J., A.N.G. and G.G.; writing—review and editing, K.V.J., A.N.G. and G.G.; visualization,
G.G., K.V.J. and A.N.G.; project administration, K.V.J. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is
not applicable to this article.
Acknowledgments: We are grateful for the contributions of Renee Spencer, Tom Keller, and Jean
Rhodes. Without these scholars giving their time and wisdom, this project would not be possible.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
1.
Raposa, E.B.; Rhodes, J.; Stams GJ, J.M.; Card, N.; Burton, S.; Schwartz, S.; Sykes LA, Y.; Kanchewa, S.; Kupersmidt, J.; Hussain, S.
The effects of youth mentoring programs: A meta-analysis of outcome studies. J. Youth Adolesc. 2019,48, 423–443. [CrossRef]
2.
DuBois, D.L.; Holloway, B.E.; Valentine, J.C.; Cooper, H. Effectiveness of mentoring programs for youth: A meta-analytic review.
Am. J. Community Psychol. 2002,30, 157–197. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Race and National Origin. National Institutes of Health. Available on-
line: https://www.nih.gov/nih-style-guide/race-national-origin#:~:text=Minoritized%20populations%20are%20groups%20
that,persecuted%20because%20of%20systemic%20oppression (accessed on 25 August 2024).
4.
Russell, S.T.; Campen, K.V. Diversity and inclusion in youth development: What we can learn from marginalized young people. J.
Youth Dev. 2011,6, 94–106. [CrossRef]
5.
Jones, K.; Parra-Cardona, R.; Sánchez, B.; Vohra-Gupta, S.; Franklin, C. All things considered: Examining mentoring relationships
between White mentors and Black youth in community-based youth mentoring programs. Child Youth Care Forum 2023,52,
997–1017. [CrossRef]
6.
Jones, K.; Parra-Cardona, R.; Sánchez, B.; Vohra-Gupta, S.; Franklin, C. Motivations, program support, and personal growth:
Mentors perspectives on the reciprocal benefits of cross-racial mentoring relationships with Black youth. Child. Youth Serv. Rev.
2023,150, 106996. [CrossRef]
7.
Liao, C.L.; Sánchez, B. Mentoring relationship quality profiles and their association with urban, low-income youth’s academic
outcomes. Youth Soc. 2019,51, 443–462. [CrossRef]
8.
Hurd, N. Promoting positive development among racially and ethnically marginalized youth: Advancing a novel model of
natural mentoring. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 2024,20, 259–284. [CrossRef]
Youth 2024,41360
9. Spencer, R. Understanding the Mentoring Process between Adolescents and Adults. Youth Soc. 2006,37, 287–315. [CrossRef]
10. Keller, T.E. A systemic model of the youth mentoring intervention. J. Prim. Prev. 2005,26, 169–188. [CrossRef]
11. Rhodes, J.; DuBois, D. Mentoring Relationships and Programs for Youth. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2008,17, 254–258. [CrossRef]
12.
Gowdy, G.; Jones, K.; Griffith, A.N. Youth mentoring as a means of supporting mental health for minoritized youth: A reflection
on three theoretical frameworks 20 years later. Youth 2024,4, 1211–1223. [CrossRef]
13. Alexander, M. The New Jim Crow; The New Press: New York, NY, USA, 2011.
14. Delgado, R.; Stefancic, J. Critical Race Theory: An Introduction; NYU Press: New York, NY, USA, 2017.
15. Jones, J.M. Prejudice and Racism, 2nd ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1997.
16.
Young, I.M. Five faces of oppression. In The Community Development Reader; DeFilippis, J., Saegert, S., Eds.; Princeton University:
Princeton, NJ, USA, 2014; pp. 346–355.
17.
Gaylord-Harden, N.; Barbarin, O.; Tolan, P.; Murry, V.; Gaylord-Harden, N. Understanding development of African American
boys and young men: Moving from risks to positive youth development. Am. Psychol. 2018,73, 753–767. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
18.
Jones-Eversley, S.; Adedoyin, A.C.; Robinson, M.A.; Moore, S.E. Protesting Black inequality: A commentary on the Civil Rights
Movement and Black Lives Matter. J. Community Pract. 2017,25, 309–324. [CrossRef]
19.
Stevenson, H.C. Dueling narratives: Racial socialization and literacy as triggers for re-humanizing African American boys, young
men, and their families. In Boys and Men in African American Families, National Symposium on Family Issues 7; Burton, L., Burton, D.,
McHale, S.M., King, V., Van Hook, J., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 55–84. [CrossRef]
20.
Travis, R.; Leech, T. Empowerment-based positive youth development: A new understanding of healthy development for African
American youth. J. Res. Adolesc. 2014,24, 93–116. [CrossRef]
21.
Edwards, K.M.; Scheer, J.R.; Mauer, V.A. Informal and formal mentoring of sexual and gender minority youth: A systematic
review. Sch. Soc. Work. J. 2022,47, 37–71.
22.
Johnson, D.; Gastic, B. Natural mentoring in the lives of sexual minority youth. J. Community Psychol. 2015,43, 395–407. [CrossRef]
23.
Kaufman, M.R.; Lin, C.; Levine, D.; Salcido, M.; Casella, A.; Simon, J.; DuBois, D.L. The formation and benefits of natural
mentoring for African American sexual and gender minority adolescents: A qualitative study. J. Adolesc. Res. 2024,39, 53–76.
[CrossRef]
24.
Cunningham, M.; Mulser, R.M.; Scott, K.; Yates, A. African American adolescents speak: The meaning of racial identity in
the relation between individual race-related stress and depressive symptoms. In Handbook of Children and Prejudice; Springer:
Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 533–550.
25.
Huynh, V.; Fuligni, A. Discrimination hurts: The academic, psychological, and physical well-being of adolescents. J. Res. Adolesc.
2010,20, 916–941. [CrossRef]
26.
Priest, N.; Paradies, Y.; Trenerry, B.; Truong, M.; Karlsen, S.; Kelly, Y. A systematic review of studies examining the relationship
between reported racism and health and wellbeing for children and young people. Soc. Sci. Med. 2013,95, 115–127. [CrossRef]
27.
Seaton, E.K.; Douglass, S. School diversity and racial discrimination among African-American adolescents. Cult. Divers. Ethn.
Minor. Psychol. 2014,20, 156–165. [CrossRef]
28.
Lo, C.C.; Hopson, L.M.; Simpson, G.M.; Cheng, T.C. Racial/ethnic differences in emotional health: A longitudinal study of
immigrants’ adolescent children. Community Ment. Health J. 2017,53, 92–101. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
29.
Pascoe, E.; Richman, L. Perceived discrimination and health: A meta-analytic review. Psychol. Bull. 2009,135, 531–554. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
30.
Neblett, E.W., Jr.; Rivas-Drake, D.; Umaña-Taylor, A.J. The promise of racial and ethnic protective factors in promoting ethnic
minority youth development. Child Dev. Perspect. 2012,6, 295–303. [CrossRef]
31.
Rivas-Drake, D.; Seaton, E.; Markstrom, C.; Quintana, S.; Syed, M.; Lee, R.; Schwartz, S.; Umaña-Taylor, A.; French, S.; Yip, T.
Ethnic and racial identity in adolescence: Implications for psychosocial, academic, and health outcomes. Child Dev. 2014,85,
40–57. [CrossRef]
32.
Gordon, D.M.; Iwamoto, D.; Ward, N.; Potts, R.; Boyd, E. Mentoring urban Black middle-school male students: Implications for
academic achievement. J. Negro Educ. 2009,78, 277–289.
33.
Hurd, N.M.; Sánchez, B.; Zimmerman, M.A.; Caldwell, C.H. Natural mentors, racial identity, and educational attainment among
African American adolescents: Exploring pathways to success. Child Dev. 2012,83, 1196–1212. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
34.
Kaplan, C.P.; Turner, S.G.; Piotrkowski, C.; Silber, E. Club Amigas: A promising response to the needs of adolescent Latinas. Child
Fam. Soc. Work. 2009,14, 213–221. [CrossRef]
35.
Sánchez, B.; Anderson, A.J.; Carter, J.S.; Mroczkowski, A.L.; Monjaras-Gaytan, L.Y.; DuBois, D.L. Helping me helps us: The role of
natural mentors in the ethnic identity and academic outcomes of Latinx adolescents. Dev. Psychol. 2020,56, 208–220. [CrossRef]
36.
Sánchez, B.; Hurd, N.M.; Neblett, E.W.; Vaclavik, D. Mentoring for Black male youth: A systematic review of the research. Adolesc.
Res. Rev. 2018,3, 259–278. [CrossRef]
37.
Albright, J.; Hurd, N.; Hussain, S. Applying a social justice lens to youth mentoring: A Review of the literature and recommenda-
tions for practice. Am. J. Community Psychol. 2017,59, 363–381. [CrossRef]
38.
Liang, B.; Bogat, G.; Duffy, N. Gender in mentoring relationships. In Handbook of Youth Mentoring; DuBois, D.L., Karcher, M.J.,
Eds.; SAGE Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2014; pp. 159–174. [CrossRef]
39.
Schwartz, S.E.O.; Rhodes, J.E. From treatment to empowerment: New approaches to youth mentoring. Am. J. Community Psychol.
2016,58, 150–157. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Youth 2024,41361
40. Weiston-Serdan, T. Critical Mentoring: A Practical Guide; Stylus Publishing, LLC.: Sterling, VA, USA, 2017.
41.
Ginwright, S. The future of healing: Shifting from trauma-informed care to healing centered engagement. Occas. Pap. 2018,25,
25–32. Available online: https://kinshipcarersvictoria.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/OP-Ginwright-S-2018-Future-of-
healing-care.pdf (accessed on 12 June 2024).
42.
Caldwell, L.L.; Witt, P.A. Ten principles of youth development. In Youth Development: Principles and Practices in Out-of-School Time
Settings; Witt, P.A., Caldwell, L.L., Eds.; 1807 North Federal Drive, 61801; Sagamore-Venture: Champaign, IL, USA, 2018; pp. 1–25.
43.
Garringer, M.; Benning, C. Who Mentored You? A Study Examining the Role Mentors Have Played in the Lives of Americans Over the
Last Half Century; MENTOR: National Mentoring Partnership: Boston, MA, USA, 2023.
44.
Garringer, M.; McQuillin, S.; McDaniel, H. Examining Youth Mentoring Services Across America: Findings from the 2016 National
Mentoring Program Survey; MENTOR: National Mentoring Partnership: Boston, MA, USA. 2017. Available online: https:
//files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED605698.pdf (accessed on 25 August 2024).
45. Saleebey, D. The Strengths Perspective in Social Work Practice: Power in the People; Longman: London, UK, 1992.
46.
Bronfenbrenner, U.; Morris, P.A. The bioecological model of human development. In Handbook of Child Psychology, 6th ed.; Lerner,
R., Damon, W., Eds.; Theoretical models of human development; John Wiley & Sons Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2006; Volume 1,
pp. 793–828.
47.
White, M.; Glick, J. Generation Status, Social Capital, and the Routes out of High School. Sociol. Forum 2000,15, 671–691.
[CrossRef]
48.
Phelan, P.; Davidson, A.L.; Yu, H.C. Students’ multiple worlds: Navigating the borders of family, peer, and school cultures. In
Cultural Diversity: Implications for Education; Phelan, P., Davidson, A.L., Eds.; Teachers College Press: New York, NY, USA, 1991;
pp. 52–88.
49.
Stanton-Salazar, R.D. A social capital framework for the study of institutional agents and their role in the empowerment of
low-status students and youth. Youth Soc. 2011,43, 1066–1109. [CrossRef]
50.
Erickson, L.D.; McDonald, S.; Elder, G.H. Informal mentors and education: Complementary or compensatory resources? Sociol.
Educ. 2009,82, 344–367. [CrossRef]
51. Ewart, I. White teachers as a risk factor in the healthy development of black youth. Moja Interdiscip. J. Afr. Stud. 2020,1, 41–50.
52.
Riddle, T.; Sinclair, S. Racial disparities in school-based disciplinary actions are associated with county-level rates of racial bias.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019,116, 8255–8260. [CrossRef]
53.
Steketee, A.; Williams, M.T.; Valencia, B.T.; Printz, D.; Hooper, L.M. Racial and language microaggressions in the school ecology.
Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2021,16, 1075–1098. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
54.
Yosso, T.J. Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race Ethn. Educ. 2005,8,
69–91. [CrossRef]
55.
Rhodes, J. A model of youth mentoring. In Handbook of Youth Mentoring; DuBois, D.L., Karcher, M.J., Eds.; SAGE: Thousand Oaks,
CA, USA, 2005; pp. 30–43. [CrossRef]
56. Spencer, R.; Boston University, Boston, MA, USA. Personal communication, 17 March 2023.
57.
Bruce, M.; Bridgeland, J. The Mentoring Effect: Young People’s Perspectives on the Outcomes and Availability of Mentoring; Civic
Enterprises with Hart Research Associates for MENTOR: The National Mentoring Partnership: Boston, MA, USA. 2014. Available
online: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Mentoring-Effect:-Young-People’s-Perspectives-A-Bruce-Bridgeland/
42544a3fc5390a18d33d7f8f688f2697f8cd344c (accessed on 25 August 2024).
58.
Meltzer, A.; Muir, K.; Craig, L. The role of trusted adults in young people’s social and economic lives. Youth Soc. 2016,50, 575–592.
[CrossRef]
59.
Jones, K.; Parra-Cardona, R.; Sánchez, B.; Vohra-Gupta, S.; Franklin, C. Forming an alliance: Mentor’s perspectives on the role of
family and social networks in cross-racial mentoring relationships with Black youth. J. Ethn. Cult. Divers. Soc. Work. 2023, 1–12.
[CrossRef]
60.
Mitchell Dove, L. Black Youths’ Perspectives: Importance of Family and Caregiver Involvement in the Mentor-Mentee Relation-
ship. Healthcare 2022,10, 2181. [CrossRef]
61.
Gowdy, G.; Gillis, T. Impacts of core and capital informal mentoring on minoritized youth: Use of a quasi-experimental design.
Poster Presentation Given at the Society for Social Work and Research, Anaheim, CA, USA. 2023.
62. Loury, L. All in the extended family: Effects of grandparents, aunts, and uncles on educational attainment. Am. Econ. Rev. 2006,
96, 275–278. [CrossRef]
63.
Scott, E.D., Jr.; Deutsch, N.L. Conferring kinship: Examining fictive kinship status in a Black adolescent’s natural mentoring
relationship. J. Black Psychol. 2021,47, 317–353. [CrossRef]
64.
Young, A.A. The redeemed old head: Articulating a sense of public self and social purpose. Symb. Interact. 2007,30, 347–374.
[CrossRef]
65.
Fisher-Borne, M.; Cain, J.M.; Martin, S.L. From mastery to accountability: Cultural humility as an alternative to cultural
competence. Soc. Work. Educ. 2015,34, 165–181. [CrossRef]
66. Foronda, C. A theory of cultural humility. J. Transcult. Nurs. 2020,31, 7–12. [CrossRef]
67.
Spencer, R.; Pryce, J.; Barry, J.; Walsh, J.; Basualdo-Delmonico, A. Deconstructing empathy: A qualitative examination of mentor
perspective-taking and adaptability in youth mentoring relationships. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2020,114, 105043. [CrossRef]
Youth 2024,41362
68.
Rhodes, J. The critical ingredient: Caring youth-staff relationships in after-school settings. New Dir. Youth Dev. 2004,2004, 145–161.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
69. Rhodes, J. Stand by Me: The Risks and Rewards of Mentoring Today’s Youth; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2002.
[CrossRef]
70.
Sánchez, B.; Pryce, J.; Silverthorn, N.; Deane, K.L.; DuBois, D.L. Do mentor support for ethnic–racial identity and mentee cultural
mistrust matter for girls of color? A preliminary investigation. Cult. Divers. Ethn. Minor. Psychol. 2019,25, 505–514. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
71. House, J.S. Work Stress and Social Support; Addison-Wesley: Boston, MA, USA, 1981.
72. Gottlieb, B.H.; Bergen, A.E. Social support concepts and measures. J. Psychosom. Res. 2010,69, 511–520. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
73.
Greeson JK, P.; Usher, L.; Grinstein-Weiss, M. One adult who is crazy about you: Can natural mentoring relationships increase
assets among young adults with and without foster care experience? Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2010,32, 565–577. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
74.
Sterrett, E.M.; Jones, D.J.; McKee, L.G.; Kincaid, C. Supportive non-parental adults and adolescent psychosocial functioning:
Using social support as a theoretical framework. Am. J. Community Psychol. 2011,48, 284–295. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
75.
Wentzel, K.R.; Russell, S.; Baker, S. Emotional support and expectations from parents, teachers, and peers predict adolescent
competence at school. J. Educ. Psychol. 2016,108, 242–255. [CrossRef]
76.
Sullivan, P.J.; Larson, R.W. Connecting youth to high-resource adults: Lessons from effective youth programs. J. Adolesc. Res.
2010,25, 99–123. [CrossRef]
77.
Hagler, M.; Rhodes, J. The long-term impact of natural mentoring relationships: A counter-factual analysis. Am. J. Community
Psychol. 2018,62, 175–188. [CrossRef]
78.
Chu, P.; Saucier, D.; Hafner, E. Meta-Analysis of the relationships between social support and well-being in children and
adolescents. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 2010,29, 624–645. [CrossRef]
79.
Brewster, A.; Bowen, G. Teacher support and the school engagement of Latino middle and high school students at risk of school
failure. Child Adolesc. Soc. Work. J. 2004,21, 47–67. [CrossRef]
80.
Crul, M.; Schneider, J.; Keskiner, E.; Lelie, F. The multiplier effect: How the accumulation of cultural and social capital explains
steep upward social mobility of children of low-educated immigrants. Ethn. Racial Stud. 2017,40, 321–333. [CrossRef]
81.
Chavous, T.; Rivas-Drake, D.; Smalls, C.; Griffin, T.; Cogburn, C. Gender matters, too: The influences of school racial discrimination
and racial identity on academic engagement outcomes among African American adolescents. Dev. Psychol. 2008,44, 637–654.
[CrossRef]
82.
Cross, W.; Seaton, E.; Yip, T.; Lee, R.; Rivas, D.; Gee, G.; Roth, W.; Ngo, B. Identity work: Enactment of racial-ethnic identity in
everyday life. Identity 2017,17, 1–12. [CrossRef]
83.
Leath, S.; Mathews, C.; Harrison, A.; Chavous, T. Racial identity, racial discrimination, and classroom engagement outcomes
among Black girls and boys in predominantly Black and predominantly White school districts. Am. Educ. Res. J. 2019,56,
1318–1352. [CrossRef]
84.
Oyserman, D. Identity-based motivation: Implications for action-readiness, procedural-readiness, and consumer behavior. J.
Consum. Psychol. 2009,19, 250–260. [CrossRef]
85.
Peifer, J.; Lawrence, E.; Williams, J.; Leyton-Armakan, J. The culture of mentoring: Ethnocultural empathy and ethnic identity in
mentoring for minority girls. Cult. Divers. Ethn. Minor. Psychol. 2016,22, 440–446. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
86.
Umaña-Taylor, A.; Quintana, S.; Lee, R.; Cross, W.; Rivas-Drake, D.; Schwartz, S.; Syed, M.; Yip, T.; Seaton, E. Ethnic and racial
identity during adolescence and into young adulthood: An integrated conceptualization. Child Dev. 2014,85, 21–39. [CrossRef]
87.
Velez, G.; Spencer, M.B. Phenomenology and intersectionality: Using PVEST as a frame for adolescent identity formation amid
intersecting ecological systems of inequality. New Dir. Child Adolesc. Dev. 2018,2018, 75–90. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
88.
Mirpuri, S.; Ray, C.; Hassan, A.; Aladin, M.; Wang, Y.; Yip, T. Ethnic/Racial identity as a moderator of the relationship between
discrimination and adolescent outcomes. In Handbook of Children and Prejudice: Integrating Research, Practice, and Policy; Fitzgerald,
H., Johnson, D., Qin, D., Villarruel, F., Norder, J., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 477–499. [CrossRef]
89.
Apugo, D.; Castro, A.J.; Dougherty, S.A. Taught in the matrix: A review of Black girls’ experiences in U.S. schools. Rev. Educ. Res.
2023,93, 559–593. [CrossRef]
90.
Epstein, R.; Blake, J.; González, T. Girlhood Interrupted: The Erasure of Black Girls’ Childhood; Georgetown Law Center on
Poverty and Inequality. 2017. Available online: https://genderjusticeandopportunity.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/20
20/06/girlhood-interrupted.pdf (accessed on 25 August 2024).
91.
Griffith, A.N. “They do us wrong”: Bringing together Black adolescent girls’ voices on school staff’s differential treatment. J.
Black Psychol. 2023,49, 598–645. [CrossRef]
92.
Neal-Jackson, A. A meta-ethnographic review of the experiences of African American girls and young women in K–12 education.
Rev. Educ. Res. 2018,88, 508–546. [CrossRef]
93.
Clonan-Roy, K.; Jacobs, C.E.; Nakkula, M.J. Towards a model of positive youth development specific to girls of color: Perspectives
on development, resilience, and empowerment. Gend. Issues 2016,33, 96–121. [CrossRef]
94.
Ross, D.A.; Hinton, R.; Melles-Brewer, M.; Engel, D.; Zeck, W.; Fagan, L.; Herat, J.; Phaladi, G.; Imbago-Jácome, D.; Anyona, P.;
et al. Adolescent well-being: A definition and conceptual framework. J. Adolesc. Health 2020,67, 472–476. [CrossRef]
Youth 2024,41363
95.
Christens, B.D.; Winn, L.T.; Duke, A.M. Empowerment and critical consciousness: A conceptual cross-fertilization. Adolesc. Res.
Rev. 2016,1, 15–27. [CrossRef]
96.
Jemal, A. Critical consciousness: A critique and critical analysis of the literature. Urban Rev. 2017,49, 602–626. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
97.
Heberle, A.E.; Rapa, L.J.; Farago, F. Critical consciousness in children and adolescents: A systematic review, critical assessment,
and recommendations for future research. Psychol. Bull. 2020,146, 525–551. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
98.
Gonzalez, M.; Kokozos, M.; Byrd, C.M.; McKee, K.E. Critical positive youth development: A framework for centering critical
consciousness. J. Youth Dev. 2020,15, 24–43. [CrossRef]
99.
Anderson, A.J.; Sánchez, B.; Meyer, G.; Sales, B.P. Supporting adults to support youth: An evaluation of two social justice
trainings. J. Community Psychol. 2018,46, 1092–1106. [CrossRef]
100.
Duron, J.; Williams-Butler, A.; Schmidt, A.; Colon, L. Mentors’ experiences of mentoring justice-involved adolescents: A narrative
of developing cultural consciousness through connection. J. Community Psychol. 2020,48, 2309–2325. [CrossRef]
101.
Meltzer, A.; Saunders, I. Cultivating supportive communities for young people: Mentor pathways into and following a youth
mentoring program. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2020,110, 104815. [CrossRef]
102.
Worker, S.M.; Espinoza, D.M.; Kok, C.M.; Go, C.; Miller, J.C. Volunteer outcomes and impact: The contributions and consequences
of volunteering in 4-H. J. Youth Dev. 2020,15, 6–31. [CrossRef]
103.
Sánchez, B.; Anderson, A.J.; Weiston-Serdan, T.; Catlett, B.S. Anti-racism education and training for adult mentors who work
with BIPOC adolescents. J. Adolesc. Res. 2021,36, 686–716. [CrossRef]
104.
Malti, T.; Noam, G.G. Social-emotional development: From theory to practice. Eur. J. Dev. Psychol. 2016,13, 652–665. [CrossRef]
105.
Noam, G.G.; Malti, T.; Karcher, M.J. Mentoring relationships in developmental perspective. In Handbook of Youth Mentoring;
DuBois, D., Karcher, M.J., Eds.; SAGE Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2014; pp. 99–116. [CrossRef]
106.
Brinegar, K.; Caskey, M.M. Developmental Characteristics of Young Adolescents: Research Summary. Association for Middle
Level Education. 2022. Available online: https://www.amle.org/developmental-characteristics-of-young- adolescents/ (accessed
on 25 August 2024).
107.
Busey, C.L.; Gainer, J. Arrested development: How This We Believe utilizes colorblind narratives and racialization to socially
construct early adolescent development. Urban Rev. 2022,54, 85–112. [CrossRef]
108.
Harrison, L.M.; Hurd, E.; Brinegar, K.M. Exploring the convergence of developmentalism and cultural responsiveness. In Equity
and Cultural Responsiveness in the Middle Grades; Brinegar, K.M., Harrison, L.M., Hurd, E., Eds.; Information Age Publishing:
Charlotte, NC, USA, 2019; pp. 3–21.
109.
Karcher, M.J.; Sass, D.A.; Herrera, C.; DuBois, D.L.; Heubach, J.; Grossman, J.B. Pathways by which case managers’ match support
influences youth mentoring outcomes: Testing the systemic model of youth mentoring. J. Community Psychol. 2023,51, 3243–3264.
[CrossRef]
110.
Spencer, R.; Gowdy, G.; Drew, A.L.; McCormack, M.J.; Keller, T.E. It takes a village to break up a match: A systemic analysis of
formal youth mentoring relationship endings. Child Youth Care Forum 2020,49, 97–120. [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
