What Works in Mentoring? Program Elements that Boost Academic Attrition and Success

Guerreiro, M., & Jesus, S. N. de. (2025). The role of peer mentoring program elements in promoting academic success and preventing student dropout in higher education: a systematic literature review. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 49(5), 671–687. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2025.2484768

Introduction

Student attrition and academic success are key concerns for higher education. Peer mentoring programs are a popular strategy to address these, but it is often unclear which components are most effective. A recent systematic review by Guerreiro and Jesus (2025) analyzed twenty-three studies to identify common program elements and determine which ones lead to the most significant positive outcomes. The study highlights the “mentoring paradox,” where conflicting evidence makes it difficult to pinpoint the most effective practices.

Methods

The authors conducted a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines, searching databases such as EBSCO, Web of Science, and Scopus for studies published between 2018 and 2024. The search combined terms related to mentoring, higher education, and academic outcomes. Studies were included if they focused on peer mentoring programs for university students and reported on academic success or student dropout. The authors then extracted data on program characteristics and used thematic analysis to identify patterns. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used to assess the quality and bias of the included studies.

Results

The review of twenty-three studies showed that a formal mentoring model with voluntary participation was consistently associated with positive outcomes for both academic success and student dropout prevention. Programs without financial incentives but with strong institutional support were more likely to show significant increases in academic success. In contrast, mentor selection based solely on high academic standing was present in all studies that reported non-significant results. The review was inconclusive on the impact of other elements like mentor training and major-based matching, as they appeared in both successful and unsuccessful programs.

Discussion

This review offers crucial insights into the elements of effective peer mentoring. The finding that formal programs with voluntary participation are most effective highlights the importance of structured relationships and participant motivation. Institutional support from faculty, rather than financial incentives, also proved more impactful, suggesting programs should focus on integrating with the academic environment. A key finding suggests that selecting mentors based only on academic performance may hinder effectiveness. This calls for a re-evaluation of recruitment criteria to include qualities like soft skills and a genuine desire to help. 

Implications for Mentoring Programs

Based on the findings, programs should prioritize formal programs with voluntary participation to maximize effectiveness. It is also important to secure institutional support from faculty and administrators over offering financial incentives. Finally, the study suggests using a holistic screening process for mentors that goes beyond academic performance, considering factors such as soft skills and life experience. Further research is needed to refine these recommendations, especially concerning mentor training and matching criteria.

Read the full paper here