IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v114y2026ics014971892500196x.html

Does mentoring frequency matter? Effects on dropout rates and average grades among university students

Author

Listed:
  • Alonso García, Miguel A.
  • González Ortiz de Zárate, Aitana
  • Aliagas, Irene
  • Gómez-Flechoso, Ma Ángeles

Abstract

Mentoring programs are essential in supporting first-year university students by reducing dropout rates and enhancing grades. However, the optimal number of meetings has not been extensively explored. This article examines how the number of meetings influences outcomes across disciplines and demographics. Using a quasi-experimental approach with 9063 students (4 + meetings, n = 3074; ≤3 meetings, n = 2958; 0 meetings, n = 3031), who belonged to different areas of study, we analyzed dropout rates and grades through chi-square tests, phi statistics, ANOVA, and Bonferroni adjustments. Results indicate that more meetings generally lead to lower dropout rates and higher grades. However, exceptions exist in Science and Engineering, ≤ 3 meetings were as effective as 4 + meetings at reducing dropouts; while in Arts, Humanities, Social, and Legal Sciences, they were equally effective at improving grades. These findings suggest institutions can optimize mentoring strategies by tailoring programs to specific student needs, improving educational outcomes and fostering success.

Suggested Citation

  • Alonso García, Miguel A. & González Ortiz de Zárate, Aitana & Aliagas, Irene & Gómez-Flechoso, Ma Ángeles, 2026. "Does mentoring frequency matter? Effects on dropout rates and average grades among university students," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:114:y:2026:i:c:s014971892500196x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2025.102729
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014971892500196X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2025.102729?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:114:y:2026:i:c:s014971892500196x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.