The presentation focuses on mentors in a Hungarian mentoring programme. Mentoring is applied in various educational contexts at all levels of education. Understanding the process of mentoring through an example of a programme is common in scientific discourse (e.g. Orsós, 2018; Godó, 2021; Comfort, 2024), the aim of the paper is to connect its findings to the literature on mentoring and their intercultural aspects.

The mentoring in the analysed initiative aims to provide equitable intervention in the Hungarian education system. This mentor programme involves primary school pupils (as mentees) from rural, peripheral areas of the country (Godó, 2021). The participating elementary institutions mostly include children of lower socioeconomic status and from disadvantaged backgrounds. Roma pupils are also overrepresented in these schools. In the Hungarian education system, the educational situation of Roma students is deteriorating across all levels (Kende, 2021). Roma students are more likely to drop out (Kende, 2021) and become early school leavers (Kende & Szalai, 2018); moreover, segregation presents a significant barrier to accessing quality education (Kende, 2021). The analysed programme aims at preventing early school leaving, via supplying more formalized career orientation that students of low socio-economic background lack (Bereményi, 2023).

The mentor programme provides mentoring with the help of university students (mentors). They must complete mentor training and participate in supervising courses at the university when being part of the programme. This paper focuses on mentors’ perceptions of being part of the programme. Literature highlights that there are variables that influence mentors’ perceived success in the process of mentoring (Spencer, 2007; Beltman, Helker & Fischer, 2019), one of them is their cultural and ethnic similarities with their mentees (Garcia-Murillo, et al., 2022; Monjaras-Gaytan, & Sánchez, 2023; Conor, 2024). We can assume that mentors of similar socio-economic and cultural backgrounds to the mentees are to be found in the programme. They are part of underrepresented student groups (Varga et al., 2021) in tertiary education who face various structural obstructions when going through mobility (Bereményi, Durst & Nyírő, 2023). The main aspect of the analysis of this presentation is mentors’ belonging to more than one cultural space, their bicultural identity is addressed (DeAnda, 1984; LaFromboise, Coleman & Gerton, 1993; Nguyen & Benet-Martínez, 2013). Based on the literature their involvement (and possible overrepresentation) can be explained by the reconciliation of their habitus through being part of supportive programmes and giving back to their (perceived or real) community (Bereményi, Durst & Nyírő, 2023).

This paper inquires about the role of bicultural identity in being a mentor. What types of mentoring did bicultural and monocultural mentors receive in their lives? How do bicultural and monocultural mentors perceive their roles and development? What characterises bicultural mentors’ aims with mentoring and their relationships with their mentees? To address these questions a mixed-method research strategy is applied. The research presented has been carried out in two phases: a questionnaire format and in-depth interview-based research took place. In this presentation mentors from a Hungarian university are introduced, focusing on their experience in mentoring both in their life paths and in the analysed programme. Discussing their life paths in educational institutions we focus on the early experience of being a mentee – either in form of natural mentoring or in formalized programmes. Conclusions about bicultural mentors’ experience in the programme are aimed to be drawn.

The research focuses on mentors at a Hungarian university. This paper relies on mixed-method data: the results of a questionnaire format research are supplemented with a qualitative data collection procedure. The first phase of the research aimed at revealing information on mentors in the programme, it was carried out in 2022. focusing on (alumni) mentors, who practiced between Autumn 2019 to Spring 2022 (P=180; S=50). Respondents participated in the research without any compensation and agreed to be involved in the data collection. Participation was anonymous and data collection and storing of respondents’ data followed the ethical guidelines and research norms. The applied research tool consisted of 27 closed-, and open-ended items. Data has been analysed via descriptive statistics; qualitative, open-ended items have been coded via content analysis. Based on respondents’ demographic variables subsamples were created focusing on mentors’ perceptions of belonging to more than one cultural identity (bicultural SBICULT=15, and monocultural SMONOCULT=35 mentors are present in the sample). The second phase of the data collection was carried out in between December 2024 and January 2025. Active mentors of the programme at the university in the 1st semester of 2024/2025 were targeted in the sampling procedure (P=59; S=25). Participation in the research was voluntary, all mentors of the programme were informed about the possibility to join the research. The applied research tool is a semi-structured in-depth interview consisting of 6 sections and a sum of 28 topics and 16 structured questions on demographic data. The sampling procedure focused on involving mentors from each of 9 primary schools (mentoring fields), mentors with long-, and short-term mentoring duration, and bi-, and monocultural mentors. In this presentation, we focus on the last aspect and highlight the role of bicultural identity in the mentoring process. Interviews underwent thematic analysis. In this presentation, we rely on themes regarding participants’ experience in their education, and their involvement in formal and/or natural mentoring. Besides, themes regarding their perceptions of being mentors and mentoring, and their mentoring aims are the focus of this inquiry. This paper applies the quantitative and quantified data of the questionnaire format research to depict tendencies. Results of the interview format data collection phase are used as illustrations and analysed with qualitative strategy. The research has been approved by the rectorate of the university and licensed by the Research Ethics Committee of the faculty.

The research aims to present differences between bicultural mentors and those of the majority of society. The two-folded research strategy allows us to present the findings with triangulation. Based on the results of the first data collection, cultural identity is believed to be a basis for the differentiation of mentors’ demands towards their work. Mentors from both subsamples have set out high mentoring goals, bicultural mentors aimed even higher goals than their peers when joining the programme, but they could complete these with higher success than monocultural mentors. Evaluation of the mentoring process was also linked to the chosen independent variable. Bicultural mentors have evaluated their emotional, social, and professional development (outcome of being a mentor) as more beneficial than their monocultural peers. The results of the second data collection phase align with the findings of the questionnaire, they further nuance or explain some of the results. The interviews reveal that there are essential institutional actors (teachers, coaches etc.) who either served as natural mentors or mentors in structured mentoring programmes in the lives of bicultural mentors. These “mentor role models” often shape bicultural mentors’ beliefs about their functions in the analysed programme. It is often highlighted in the interviews that these actors were of the majority society, we can assume, the participants are pioneers in becoming mentors to children similar to them. The results share instances in which bicultural mentors could be credible role models for their mentees and share their experience of upward social mobility with them. Future research shall address some of the limitations of this presentation: it would be necessary to extend the research to other universities in Hungary and internationally; also, based on the results questionnaire format research could be developed, targeting larger, representative samples in the programme.

Beltman, S., Helker, K., & Fischer, S. (2019). ’I really enjoy it’: Emotional Engagement of University Peer Mentors. International Journal of Emotional Education, 11(2), 50-70. Bereményi, B.Á. (2023). Between choices and “going with the flow”. Career guidance and Roma young people in Hungary. Int J Educ Vocat Guidance, 23, 555–575. Bereményi, Á., Durst, J., & Nyírő, Z. (2023). Reconciling habitus through third spaces: how do Roma and non-Roma first-in-family graduates negotiate the costs of social mobility in Hungary? Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 54(3), 460–478. Conor, C. L. (2024). Natural mentoring for males of color transitioning to college. Equity in Education & Society, 1–33. Comfort, C. (2024). 'Evidence-based Good Practice for Youth Mentoring Programmes', International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, S18, 195-207. de Anda, D. (1984). Bicultural socialization: Factors affecting the minority experience. Social Work, 29(2), 101–107. doi: 10.1093/sw/29.2.101 Garcia-Murillo, Y., et al. (2022). Natural mentoring among college students of color: Considerations for their ethnic‐racial identity and psychological well‐being. Community Psychology, 51, 3348-3365. Godó, K. (2021). Big brother mentoring in the let's teach for Hungary program. Central European Journal of Educational Research, 3(3), 114–141. Kende, A. (2021). Comparative overview of the capacity of the education systems of the CEE countries to provide inclusive education for Roma pupils. Working Papers Series, 2021/3. Budapest: CEU. Kende, A., & Szalai, J. (2018). Pathway to early school leaving in Hungary. In Van Praag, L., Nouwen, W., Van Caudenberg, R., Clycq, N., & Timmerman, C. (eds.). Comparative Perspectives on Early School Leaving in the European Union (pp. 33–46). London, UK: Routledge. LaFromboise, T., Coleman, H. L. K., & Gerton, J. (1993). Psychological impact of biculturalism: evidence and theory. Psychology Bulletin, 114(3), 395-412. Monjaras-Gaytan, L. Y., & Sánchez, B. (2023). Historically underrepresented college students and natural mentoring relationships: A systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review, 149. Nguyen, A. M. D., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2013). Biculturalism and adjustment: A metaanalysis. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(1), 122-159. Spencer, R. (2007). “It’s Not What I Expected”: A Qualitative Study of Youth Mentoring Relationship Failures. Journal of Adolescent Research, 22(4), 331-354. Orsós, A. (2018). Tutor And Mentoring System in the WHSZ. In Schaffer, J., & Szemenyei, M. (Eds.). Success and Challenges, (pp. 133-150), Pécs, Hungary: PTE BTK. Varga, A. et al. (2021). Diversity and Inclusion in Higher Education. Training and Practice Journal of Educational Sciences, 19(1-2), 70-81.