Content uploaded by Georgia Hall
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Georgia Hall on Nov 23, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Sponsored by: National Association of Extension 4-H Agents (NAE4HA)
Journal of Youth Development
Bridging Research & Practice
Volume 10, No. 2, Summer 2015
ISSN 2325
-
4009 (Print)
ISSN 2325-4017 (Online)
Summer 2015
Volume 10 Number 2
Editor’s Comments:
Welcome to the Summer Issue of the Journal of Youth Development. Our opening Feature
Article highlights the current longitudinal, mixed-method study with Boy Scouts of America
being conducted by Richard Lerner and his team at Tufts University. Additional Feature Articles
discuss working with special populations in the camp setting, the use of photovoice to address
health disparities and best practices of out-of-school time programs serving immigrant and
refugee youth. A variety of youth programming and research strategies are included within the
remainder of Manuscripts.
Manuscripts for the Spring 2016 and Summer 2016 issues are now being accepted in the
following areas:
• Feature Articles ~ informational, explanatory, or critical analysis and interpretation of major
trends in the field or comprehensive reviews. Include clear implications for youth development
research, practice and programming. 2,000-5,000 words
• Program Articles ~ discuss programs and outcomes or describe promising programs and pilot
projects that have clear implications for youth development research, practice and programming.
1,500-4,000 words
• Research and Evaluation Strategies ~ describe innovative methodologies and strategies in
the collection and analysis of quantitative or qualitative research and evaluation data.
1,500-4,500 words
• Resource Reviews ~ present analyses of materials, such as books, curricula or videos.
300-800 words
Contact patricia.dawson@oregonstate.edu for details.
Publication Committee
Patricia Dawson, Editor
Oregon State University
NAE4-HA Representative:
Elijah Wilson
University of Kentucky
Cooperative Extension
Committee Members:
Bob Barcelona
University of New Hampshire
M. Deborah Bialeschki
American Camp Association
Dale Blyth
University of Minnesota
Michael Conn
Educational Research Center of
America
Nancy L. Deutsch
University of Virginia
Theresa Ferrari
The Ohio State University
Michelle Alberti Gambone
Youth Development Strategies, Inc.
Seana Hasson
YMCA of the USA
Kenneth R. Jones
University of Kentucky
Lisa Lauxman
National 4-H Headquarters
Rich Lerner
Tufts University
Christine McCauley
Ohannessian
University of Connecticut
Karen Pittman
The Forum for Youth
Investment
Kali Trzesniewski
University of California, Davis
Kate Walker
University of Minnesota
1
Volume 10, Number 2
Summer 2015
Contents
Feature Articles
“You Can Quit Me But I’m Not Going to Quit You:” A Focus Group Study of Leaders’
Perceptions of Their Positive Influences on Youth in Boy Scouts of America
[Article 151002FA001]………………………………………………………………………….………………….….
Page 5
Hershberg, Rachel M.; Chase, Paul A.; Champine, Robey B.; Hilliard, Lacey J.; Wang, Jun;
Lerner, Richard M.
As part of a longitudinal, mixed-method study with Boy Scouts of America, we conducted five
focus groups with a diverse group of 46 program leaders in order to better understand their
perceptions of how they influence youth. Drawing from grounded theory analysis methods, we
found that leaders believed they promoted positive youth outcomes, including character and
self-confidence, through caring youth-leader relationships and facilitating opportunities for
youth to participate in and lead skill-building activities and apply skills in different contexts.
Leaders differed in the particular outcomes that they emphasized. Implications of these findings
for future research and practice are discussed.
Communication, Coping, and Connections: Campers’ and Parents’ Perspectives of
Self-Efficacy and Benefits of Participation in Deployment Support Camps
[Article 151002FA002] ……………………………………………………………..…………………………….……
Page 31
Clary, Christy D.; Ferrari, Theresa M.
Military youth have unique challenges, particularly when a parent is deployed. Camp
participation has been linked to multiple positive outcomes, thus camps have become popular
as a setting for addressing these youth’s unique needs. With limited existing research on
outcomes related to participation, this study explored to what extent participation in OMK
camps affected military youth’s self-efficacy for communication, coping, and social skills.
Participants responded to an online instrument three months after camp. Both campers and
parents reported the largest increase in self-efficacy for communication skills, followed by social
skills, and then coping skills. Open-ended responses overwhelmingly supported that developing
friendships was one of the greatest benefits of attending a camp. The results are consistent
with the literature regarding the importance of connectedness. Recommendations for
conducting camps are offered. These finding may also be useful to those working with other
special populations in the camp setting.
Where PYD Meets CBPR: A Photovoice Program for Latino Immigrant Youth
[Article 151002FA003] ……………………………………………………………..………………………………....
Page 55
Andrade, Elizabeth; Cubilla I.C.; Sojo-Lara, G.; Cleary, S.D.; Edberg, M.C.; Simmons, L.K.
Community engagement in identifying issues of collective concern to address health disparities
is an approach that is central to conducting community-based participatory research. It is
2
particularly important for youth to be engaged in dialogue around issues that affect their lives.
Participation of this nature is understood, within a Positive Youth Development (PYD) approach,
to be an element of primary prevention vis a vis health risks. Photovoice has been an
increasingly used methodology to enable youth to identify and address issues relevant to their
daily experiences. We implemented a six-week Photovoice project guided by a PYD approach
with Latino immigrant youth (n=12) from Langley Park, MD. This article describes the
experiences of facilitators in implementing the program, testing a new curriculum, and also
presents results related to changes in PYD assets among participants. We also offer
recommendations for future Photovoice programs with similar populations and aims.
Practices and Approaches of Out-of-School Time Programs Serving Immigrant and
Refugee Youth
[Article 151002FA004] …………………………………………………………..…………………………………....
Page 72
Hall, Georgia; Porche, Michelle V.; Grossman, Jennifer; Smashnaya, Sviatlana
Opportunity to participate in an out-of-school time program may be a meaningful support
mechanism towards school success and healthy development for immigrant and refugee
children. This study extends existing research on best practices by examining the on-the-ground
experiences of supporting immigrant and refugee youth in out-of-school time programs.
Findings from semi-structured interviews with program directors in 17 Massachusetts and New
Hampshire programs suggest a number of program strategies that were responsive to the
needs of immigrant and refugee students, including support for the use of native language as
well as English, knowing about and celebrating the heritage of the students’ homeland,
including on staff or in leadership individuals with shared immigrant background, and giving
consideration to the academic priorities of parents. The development of such intentional
approaches to working with immigrant and refugee youth during the out-of-school time hours
will encourage enrollment of, and enhance effectiveness with, this vulnerable population.
Program Articles
Science Saturdays: A Ground Up Approach to Partnering with Content-Rich
Corporate Volunteers
[Article 151002PA001] …………………………………………………………..…………………………………..
Page 88
Ripberger, Chad; Blalock, Lydia B.
This article discusses the pilot year of a 4-H Science project in which Mercer County 4-H
partnered with content-rich corporate volunteers of a global STEM corporation to plan and
implement six Science Saturdays for 4
th
-7
th
grade youth from Trenton and surrounding urban
neighborhoods. The program was a ground up initiative designed and implemented by a core
group (mostly women), which expanded to include 31 corporate volunteers by the end of the
pilot year (2013-2014). The Science Saturdays were held once a month with each session
focused on a different theme and included demonstrations or experiments along with other
supporting activities. While all four program goals were met during the pilot year, results from
the 4-H Science Common Measures survey did not reveal significant increases or improvements
in youth outcome objectives. Findings and implications are discussed, as well as current and
future programming.
Excel Initiative: Excellence in Youth Programming
[Article 151002PA002] ……………………………………..…………………………..………………………….…
Page
96
Borden, Lynne M.; Hawley, Kyle R.; Mentzer, C. Eddy
The Excellence in Youth Programming (Excel) Initiative strives to support youth programs in
delivering high quality programs. The backbone of Excel is the Youth Development
Observational Tool (YDOT) which allows for the virtual assessment of program staff who work
3
with children and youth ages 9-18 years. The YDOT also allows Excel to provide structured
feedback to programs. Excel has several unique features, including a virtual platform and a
focus on the relationships between adults and youth participating in after-school programs.
Offering structured assessment and interaction online eliminates expenses, provides convenient
access for programs around the globe, and allows for unobtrusive assessment of worker-youth
interactions. Excel is also integrated into a broader network of resources, tools, and research
for those working with children and youth ages 9-18.
Measurable Changes in Pre-Post Test Scores in Iraqi 4-H Leader’s Knowledge of
Animal Science Production Principles
[Article 151002PA003] ……………………………………………………………..……………….………..…...…
Page 102
Smith, Justen O.; Kock, Tim; Garcia, Zurishaddai A.; Suyundikov, Anvar
The 4-H volunteer program is a new concept to the people of Iraq, for decades the country has
been closed to western ideas. Iraqi culture and the Arabic customs have not embraced the
volunteer concept and even more the concept of scientific animal production technologies
designed to increase profitability for producers. In 2011 the USAID-
Inma
Agribusiness program
teamed with the Iraq 4-H program to create youth and community entrepreneurship
opportunities for widowed families. Iraq 4-H provided the youth members and adult volunteers
and Inma provided the financial capital (livestock) and the animal science training program for
the volunteers. The purpose of this study was to measure the knowledge level gained through
intensive animal science training for Iraqi 4-H volunteers. Researchers designed and
implemented a pre and post test to measure the knowledge of fifteen volunteers who
participated in the three day course. The pretest exposed a general lack of animal science
knowledge of all volunteers; over 80% of the participants incorrectly answered the questions.
However, the post-test indicated positive change in the participants understanding of animal
science production principles.
Research and Evaluation Strategies
Breaking it Down: Defining the Framework & Evaluating the Impact of a Peer
Education Program
[Article 151002RS001] ……………………………………………………………..………………………..…..…
Page 112
Blackburn, Kathleen Burke; Greene, Imaani; Malloy, Shintele; Himelstein, Rima; Hanlon,
Alexandra; Ibrahim, Jennifer K.
Evaluation in the field of youth development continues to evolve. Youth development programs
vary significantly in their focus, setting and outcomes. Community-based programs seeking to
create or strengthen their evaluation methods and tools may have difficulty identifying what to
measure and how to capture anticipated outcomes. This article focuses on a youth
development program combining service learning and peer education, serving urban
adolescents ages 14 to 19. The purposes of this study are: 1) to illustrate a strategy used to
clarify and align core activities, anticipated outcomes and evaluation tools, and 2) to provide an
overview of the updated data collection instruments created by the program.
Resource Review
YA4-H! Youth Advocates for Health: Teens as Teachers
[Article 151002RR001] ……………………………………………………………..…………………….…..….…
Page 121
Flesch, Jeffrey M.; Lile, Joy R.; Arnold, Mary E.
Although the research literature speaks to the necessity of having a high-quality training
curriculum for teens as teachers (TAT) programs, there are very few TAT training curricula
available to practitioners. This review provides practitioners with a preview of the
Youth
Advocates for Health
(YA4-H!) TAT training curriculum. The YA4-H! TAT training curriculum
4
exposes teens to several domains necessary to teach younger youth effectively, such as getting
to know their audience, preparing to teach, teaching tips and tools, reflection and evaluation
time, and recruitment strategies to help practitioners select youth to teach. Drawing from
published research including Lee and Murdock’s (2001) work on best practices for preparing
teen teachers to teach, this review presents an overview of the lesson categories included in
the YA4-H! TAT training curriculum.
5
“You Can Quit Me But I’m Not Going to Quit You:”
A Focus Group Study of Leaders’ Perceptions of
Their Positive Influences on Youth in
Boy Scouts of America
Rachel M. Hershberg
Institute of Applied Research in Youth Development
Tufts University
Medford, MA
rachel.hershberg@tufts.edu
Paul A. Chase
Institute of Applied Research in Youth Development
Tufts University
Medford, MA
Robey B. Champine
Institute of Applied Research in Youth Development
Tufts University
Medford, MA
Lacey J. Hilliard
Institute of Applied Research in Youth Development
Tufts University
Medford, MA
Jun Wang
Institute of Applied Research in Youth Development
Tufts University
Medford, MA
Richard M. Lerner
Institute of Applied Research in Youth Development
Tufts University
Medford, MA
6
Volume 10, Number 2, Summer 2015 Article 151002FA001
“You Can Quit Me But I’m Not Going to Quit You:”
A Focus Group Study of Leaders’ Perceptions of
Their Positive Influences on Youth in
Boy Scouts of America
Rachel M. Hershberg, Paul A. Chase, Robey B. Champine, Lacey J. Hilliard,
Jun Wang, and Richard M. Lerner
Tufts University
Abstract: As part of a longitudinal, mixed-method study with Boy
Scouts of America, we conducted five focus groups with a diverse
group of 46 program leaders in order to better understand their
perceptions of how they influence youth. Drawing from grounded
theory analysis methods, we found that leaders believed they
promoted positive youth outcomes, including character and self-
confidence, through caring youth-leader relationships and facilitating
opportunities for youth to participate in and lead skill-building
activities and apply skills in different contexts. Leaders differed in
the particular outcomes that they emphasized. Implications of these
findings for future research and practice are discussed.
Introduction
Each year, millions of American children participate in out-of-school time (OST) programs
(Vandell, Larson, Mahoney, & Watts, 2015). According to the Positive Youth Development (PYD)
perspective, high-quality OST programs (e.g., Scouting, 4-H, or Boys & Girls Clubs) may
constitute key developmental assets in the ecology of youth. These assets have the potential to
promote positive and healthy outcomes, including improved psychological and physical health,
academic achievement, civic engagement, enhanced personal motivation and future orientation,
among others (Benson, Scales, & Syvertsen, 2011; Lerner, Lerner, Bowers, & Geldhof, 2015).
Given the increasing participation of youth across the U.S. in OST programs, there is a growing
interest among scholars and practitioners in research about specific OST program contexts, and
about what facets of these contexts contribute to what outcomes, among what specific
populations of youth (Vandell et al., 2015)
The PYD literature suggests that the highest quality and most effective OST programs
incorporate at least three key program features (termed the “Big Three” by Lerner, 2004): in
the context of safe and supervised spaces (Theokas, Lerner, Phelps, & Lerner, 2006), they
provide youth with opportunities to develop and sustain positive relationships with adult
7
mentors, to develop important life and leadership skills, and to apply these skills through
participation in valued activities (see Blum, 2003; Lerner et al., 2015; Roth & Brooks-Gunn,
2003). This research emphasizes in particular the influences of caring relationships between
youth and adult mentors on youth outcomes (Rhodes & Lowe, 2009; Sullivan & Larson, 2010).
According to Rhodes and Lowe (2009), adults in OST programs are in a unique position to
provide emotional support, guidance, and advice to youth in their care, and may function in a
mentor capacity through building mutual commitment, respect, and trust (Rhodes & Lowe,
2009). Positive youth outcomes associated with mentoring relationships include increased self-
esteem and confidence (Rhodes & Lowe, 2009).
Given that youth-leader relationships appear to function as an important means through which
program participation positively impacts young people’s health and well-being, more needs to
be known about the processes that occur in successful youth-leader relationships within specific
OST program contexts (Larson, 2006). In other words, how do staff and adult leaders within
and across specific OST programs help to cultivate young participants’ healthy cognitive,
emotional, and social growth? Do the processes in which leaders engage to positively influence
youth differ depending on the program context and characteristics and experiences of youth
served in these contexts?
The present research sought to contribute to addressing these questions as part of an ongoing
longitudinal and mixed-method collaborative assessment of the impact of the Boy Scouts of
America (BSA) program on youth: the Character and Merit Project (CAMP; see Hilliard et al.,
2014). Specifically, the CAMP Study is a partnership with the leadership of BSA in the greater
Philadelphia region, the Cradle of Liberty (COL) council (we note that our partner organization
elected to be identified in this publication). With the COL, we developed the larger CAMP Study
to assess:
1. whether BSA constitutes a high-quality OST program that positively influences character
and other Positive Youth Development (PYD) outcomes; and
2. how BSA program components may influence these outcomes in youth.
In the current investigation, we sought to contribute to the knowledge base pertinent to, and
theory development about, the processes through which youth-leader relationships in the
context of BSA may contribute to positive youth outcomes. In a program such as BSA, adult
leaders’ perspectives and understandings may be essential to optimizing the positive impacts of
the program on the youth served therein, as these leaders are integral to the program and are
charged with its delivery. We, therefore, focused on leaders’ perspectives of these relationships,
and of how the BSA context may positively influence youth. In addition, we aimed to learn more
about leaders’ perceptions of their influences on youth within a specific arm of BSA programs in
Philadelphia serving ethnic minority youth from lower-income and urban communities:
ScoutReach. The ScoutReach program differs from the traditional program because meetings
typically take place right after school (as compared to during evenings), are led by paid staff (as
compared to parent volunteers), and have minimal parent involvement. Accordingly, we
conducted five focus groups with leaders from the COL, including three focus groups with just
ScoutReach leaders, to elicit their perspectives about their influences on youth outcomes as well
as the ways in which the BSA and ScoutReach program contexts may influence youth. This
investigation is an important contribution to research and practice with BSA programs in
particular, as much of the research with BSA has focused on broadly exploring potential impacts
of Scouting on the prosocial development of youth (e.g., Harris Interactive, 2003; Jang,
Johnson, & Kim, 2012; Louis Harris & Associates, 1998; Polson, Kim, Jang, Johnson, & Smith,
2013), neglecting to consider potentially distinct processes and outcomes, or perspectives about
8
these processes and outcomes, among different groups of leaders who participate in the
program. As such, despite making important contributions to the research on OST program
influences on youth outcomes, this literature lacks in-depth or qualitative information about the
specific processes through which components of BSA (e.g., leader-Scout interactions, BSA
curriculum, or BSA activities, such as camping, outdoor recreation, etc.) may potentially
influence specific developmental outcomes (e.g., PYD or character development) among specific
groups of Scouts (e.g., ScoutReach youth). In addition, few in-depth qualitative studies have
been conducted with leaders in BSA (or in similar youth-serving programs) to explore their
understandings of their roles and/or the ways in which they, and the program, work together to
influence PYD (Larson, 2000, 2006).
This gap in the research is of concern because previous studies with youth-serving practitioners
and youth involved in other OST programs found that practitioners, youth, and scholars often
do not use the same terms when describing the characteristics and attributes that comprise
PYD (King et al., 2005). Discrepancies between program leaders’ understandings of the
processes through which they influence youth and those described in the PYD literature would
suggest that both sources of knowledge need to be enhanced to more accurately reflect the
other (King et al., 2005). Leaders’ conceptions of how they positively influence youth could, for
example, inform future PYD research and measurement techniques, as well as research and
policy priorities related to promoting optimal developmental outcomes among America’s diverse
youth, and in the very OST program contexts that rely on the participation of adult leaders.
Thus, in order to elucidate the processes through which specific OST programs may impact
youth, it is essential to explore diverse leaders’ understandings of how they influence youth,
and to ascertain if (as we shall report) leaders’ perceptions align with existing research on
effective youth development programs (e.g., see Lerner, 2004; Lerner et al., 2015).
The Current Investigation
Accordingly, the aim of this investigation was to contribute to the knowledge base pertinent to,
and theory development about, the processes through which youth-leader relationships in BSA
activities may contribute to positive youth outcomes by focusing on the perspectives of a
diverse group of leaders in BSA. We focused on the perspectives of different groups of leaders
within the COL, with different histories in BSA and serving different groups of youth (as
described below), to generate more in-depth information about the various kinds of youth-
leader relationships within this organization and the processes through which they may
positively influence youth outcomes for different groups of youth. The specific research
questions guiding this investigation were:
1. what are leaders’ perceptions of their influences on positive outcomes in youth, and how
do they correspond with findings from other research about effective practice in youth
development programs?;
2. what, if any, variations can be identified in leaders’ descriptions of the ways in which
they promote positive youth outcomes within the context of BSA?; and
3. given the recent innovation of ScoutReach as a vehicle of BSA program delivery to
predominantly ethnic minority, urban youth, how do ScoutReach leaders’ perceptions of
the impact of BSA on positive youth outcomes compare to those of other leaders?
To address these questions, we conducted iterative analyses of five focus groups with leaders.
We drew from a constructivist grounded theory approach (Charmaz, 2006). As we describe
below, we were able to identify parallels between leaders’ descriptions of their views of how
9
they may influence positive youth outcomes in BSA and PYD scholarship on how youth may
develop positively in OST programs (e.g., Lerner, 2004; Lerner et al., 2015).
Method
The five focus groups were conducted in the context of the CAMP Study (see Hilliard et al.,
2014 for more information). The COL implements its programs following the national mission of
BSA, which emphasizes youth character building and training in leadership as well as
responsible citizenship (BSA, 2014). The COL serves 10,000 Scouts throughout the Council, and
its programs are facilitated by mainly volunteer leaders from 250 packs throughout the region.
In addition, the COL includes various staff members who provide support to volunteer leaders
throughout the region.
Participants
The five focus groups we facilitated as part of the CAMP Study were conducted between
October 2012 and May 2013. One focus group included leaders identified by BSA as
“exemplary,” another group included leaders who volunteer at the district level (referred to
herein as district leaders), and three focus groups were conducted with leaders from the
ScoutReach division of BSA. The leaders in the “exemplary” group were identified by volunteers
who have worked in the COL for many years, and visit packs in the COL on a regular basis.
According to these volunteers, leaders were identified as “exemplary” because their packs
and/or troops had met many of BSA’s benchmarks under their leadership (e.g., a significant
percentage of their Scouts participated in BSA summer camp, met fundraising goals through
popcorn sales, and advanced from one level of Scouting to the next). In addition, the
experienced volunteers subjectively identified these leaders to be of “high quality” (C. Bolger,
personal communication, October 25, 2012). These “exemplary” leaders had a range of
experience in Scouting, spanning months, years, and decades. Of the 14 “exemplary” leaders
who participated in the focus group, 11 were European American and three were African
American. In addition, ten were male and four were female.
District leaders are experienced volunteer leaders who also serve youth throughout the BSA
program. These leaders work at the district level, which means that they volunteer their time to
assist many Cub Scout packs and Boy Scout troops throughout one of the twelve regional
districts in the greater Philadelphia area. We recruited these leaders for participation in the
focus groups because we believed that their insights would be beneficial in light of the potential
long-term, intraindividual (within-person) changes that they may have observed in boys who
participated in the program for many years. Of these 14 participants, 12 were European
American and two were African American. This group included 13 male and one female
participant.
Finally, we conducted three focus groups with ScoutReach leaders to examine their perceptions
of their influences, and the influence of BSA, on the PYD outcomes of the youth they served.
Eighteen leaders participated across these three groups; 14 were African American, three were
European American, and one was Latino. Twelve of these participants were female and six were
male. In total, 46 BSA leaders across the COL participated in focus groups. Of this sample of
participants, 37% were female and 44% were African American or Latino.
Procedure
All of the focus groups took place at sites throughout the greater Philadelphia area, where
leaders in the COL meet for monthly “round table” discussions as part of their leadership in the
10
BSA. Round table meetings provide an opportunity for leaders in different arms of the COL to
come together and learn about new trainings, share ideas from their work with Scouts, and plan
for district- or council-wide activities.
We developed a semi-structured focus group interview protocol to guide our focus group
discussions. The interview protocol included questions about the adult leaders’ experiences in
Scouting, how they believed they influenced Scout outcomes, and what outcomes they believed
they impacted in the context of BSA. We also asked leaders about any potential challenges they
experienced in implementing the BSA program. Sample questions included: “How do you think
that Scouting impacts kids?” and “What are some of the challenges that you experience in
Scouting?”
Prior to facilitating focus groups and moving through our semi-structured protocol, participants
signed consent forms indicating their willingness to participate and be video-recorded. Each
focus group lasted approximately one hour. Although our interview protocol addressed the
same topics in each of the five focus groups, in light of the interactive nature of focus group
discussions (Kitzinger, 1995), different topics arose in each group that were followed up with
clarifying questions. For example, in the focus group with “exemplary leaders,” co-facilitators
inquired about what attributes an ideal pack and leader possess, given discussions that
emerged about high-quality leaders. In addition, in response to questions about challenges to
delivering BSA, ScoutReach leaders engaged in detailed discussions about how they viewed
some of the main challenges they experienced in implementing BSA activities as potentially
unique to the lives of ScoutReach youth (e.g., safety concerns). These discussions were, as
well, followed up with clarifying questions. Shortly after focus groups were conducted, audio
recordings of the sessions were sent to a transcription service. Upon receipt, transcripts were
checked for errors and corrected accordingly.
Plan of Analysis
Three of the co-authors (Hershberg, Chase, & Champine) iteratively analyzed the data, drawing
from a constructivist grounded theory approach (Charmaz, 2006). We began immersing
ourselves in the data by reading through each of the five transcripts from the focus groups and
discussing the topics that arose within and across focus groups. Next, we decided to more
systematically focus on data excerpts wherein participants discussed components of BSA that
they believed impacted youth development, their interactions with youth in BSA, and the
positive outcomes they believed youth developed through participation in BSA. Through
reviewing these focus group excerpts of interest, we agreed that we also needed to include
sections from transcripts wherein leaders discussed challenges they experienced to
implementing BSA programs and activities, as these data often included leaders’ descriptions of
challenges they confronted in delivering a high-quality Scouting program to youth. These
descriptions explained, in part, leaders’ understanding of which components of BSA influenced
outcomes in youth. We excluded data from transcripts that focused on, for example, technical
aspects of being an adult leader in Scouts (e.g., strategies that leaders used to increase parent
participation).
After selecting data excerpts of interest, we engaged in an open-coding of the data that was
directed toward identifying:
1. leaders’ descriptions of the processes in which they engaged to influence positive
outcomes in Scouts;
2. program components that leaders believed have positive impacts on youth outcomes;
and
3. specific positive outcomes leaders identified.
11
We defined positive outcomes broadly, as any positive characteristic or behavior in Scouts to
which leaders referred when they discussed how Scouting, and their interactions with youth in
Scouting, positively influenced youth.
Throughout the open-coding process, we each engaged in multiple forms of memo writing to
identify and reflect on our assumptions of the data, and assist with moving our analysis from
being descriptive to more abstract and explanatory (Charmaz, 2006; Strauss & Corbin, 1998).
This step was an important part of our analysis, and increased the trustworthiness of our
findings (Morrow, 2005), as each of the three co-authors involved in data analysis had been a
part of the CAMP Study since August 2012, and had ideas about what processes leaders might
identify as influencing positive outcomes in the youth they served. We reviewed our reflective
memos together throughout the analysis to remain open to identifying and exploring terms,
concepts, and processes presented by participants in their own words that may not reflect the
PYD language (following the example of King, et al., 2005).
Finally, analytical memo-writing enabled each author to identify the more salient themes, or
connections among codes (Braun & Clarke, 2006), within and across the three groups of
participants. Through this process of memoing and discussing each other’s memos, we agreed
that there were, indeed, important shared understandings articulated by leaders across each
focus group regarding how they and the BSA program were perceived to impact positive youth
outcomes, as well as important variations between groups (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). We also
developed a visual diagram (in keeping with grounded theory methods, Charmaz, 2006) that
best represented our jointly constructed understandings of leaders’ views about the general
processes through which they and the program influenced positive outcomes in Scouts, as well
as their views about which outcomes they influenced in youth.
Specifically, through our analysis we generated a model of potential BSA program influences on
PYD in the youth they serve that corresponds with the “Big Three” conception of effective youth
development programs, as described in detail below (see Figure 1).
12
Figure 1
A conceptual model of how characteristics of the BSA program and program leaders are
perceived (by leaders) to influence the positive development of Scouts.
Program
Characteristics
Leader
Characteristics
Caring/
nurturing
Supportive
Hold youth to
high
standards
Natural
learning
Peer
mentoring
Merit
badges
Contributing
to -
Challenges/Intervening
Conditions:
1.
Socio-demographic
differences across
Scouts
2. Differences in settings
of BSA program
Delivery
“The Big
Three”
1.
2. Opportunities to
develop important
life/leadership skills
“leadership in
Scouting is every day
for every boy”
3. Opportunities to
Apply skills in valued
Activities, and across
contexts
“it’s a classroom”
without walls”
1.
Opportunities to
develop/sustain
positive relations
with adult leaders
“it’s that unspoken
relationship of
expectations and
standards”
Indicators
of PYD
Thus increasing
-
Strong relationships
“brotherhood”
Perseverance
Academic
achievement
Character
Confidence
Hopeful
future
13
Results
The aim of this investigation was to contribute to the knowledge base pertinent to, and to the
development of theory about, how leaders across one region of BSA, with different histories
and experiences in Scouting, may understand their influences and programmatic influences on
positive youth outcomes. We also aimed to identify potential variations in leaders’
understandings of these influences, and sought to understand these influences in the context of
both BSA and in relation to the PYD literature (e.g., Lerner, 2004). Specifically, we assessed if
leaders’ understanding corresponded to the model of youth development program influences on
attributes of PYD, such as character (Lerner et al., 2015), reported in reviews of OST literatures
(e.g., Blum, 2003; Lerner et al., 2015; Roth & Brooks-Gunn, 2003). We assessed if leaders’
perceptions corresponded to the “Big Three” model of effective youth development programs in
particular (Lerner, 2004). We also focused on understanding if, and in what ways, ScoutReach
leaders’ experiences and perspectives differed from those of other leaders.
We present below our findings pertinent to each of the research questions. Specifically, we
provide examples of the core general processes and some of the positive youth outcomes we
identified in our analyses, highlighting similarities across focus groups. We note below that
some leaders described the PYD-promoting processes of which they are a part as intertwined
with the BSA program context in which they and the youth interact. We, therefore, point out
some of the specific BSA program components, such as the BSA curriculum, Scout Law, and
Scout Oath
1
that leaders identified as promoting positive youth outcomes. We then identify
variations in leaders’ descriptions of how they influence PYD and, specifically, how ScoutReach
leaders’ descriptions differ from those of “exemplary” and district leaders.
In Figure 1, through our conceptual model, we represent these main findings, which correspond
to the “Big Three” characteristics of youth-serving programs described in the PYD literature
(Lerner, 2004). As depicted in this figure, we found that leaders believed they influenced youth,
through interactions between them and the BSA context (e.g., the BSA curriculum, the merit
badge system, the nature-based context of many Scouting activities). Leaders described that in
the context of BSA programs, and through their own interactions with the BSA curriculum and
program components, they were able to engage in supportive relationships with youth, engage
youth in skill building activities, and encourage application of these skills in and outside of
Scouting.
Leaders across groups reported engaging in these same general processes, and through these
processes, promoting most of the same positive outcomes (e.g., character, confidence, hopeful
future orientations, perseverance, academic competence) in Scouts. However, there were also
variations or nuances in the specifics of the processes and outcomes emphasized by different
groups of leaders, which appeared to be related to variation in leaders’ experiences in Scouting,
and to variations among the youth each group of leaders served in Scouting. These nuances
also reflected the distinct challenges each set of leaders confronts as they delivered the BSA
program to Scouts, and are represented in our model as “intervening conditions,” drawing from
the constructivist grounded theory analysis method (Charmaz, 2006). In particular, ScoutReach
leaders, uniquely, described challenges associated with delivering BSA to youth in an urban
1
The Scout Oath (or Promise) is: “On my honor I will do my best, To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law; To help other people at all times; To keep myself physically strong, mentally
awake, and morally straight.” The Scout Law is: A Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly,
courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent” (BSA, 2014).”
14
setting. These leaders also discussed their beliefs that providing BSA to these youth was
especially important because many of them lacked positive role models in their lives. We also
found that variations in leaders’ descriptions of the PYD-promoting processes and outcomes
they believed they facilitated for youth helped to explain the particular facets of youth-leader
relationships, within the context of BSA programs, that may be related to specific outcomes for
specific youth. We describe these findings in detail below and, when possible, use illustrative
quotes collected from the focus groups.
Leaders’ General Perceptions of Their Influences on PYD: Correspondence
with the “Big Three” Model
The first Research Question addressed leaders’ perceptions of their influences on positive
outcomes in youth, and if they corresponded to the PYD literature about the features of OST
programs that are effective in promoting PYD (e.g., King et al., 2005; Lerner, 2004). As noted,
through our analysis of the five focus groups, we found that BSA leaders had shared
understandings of the general processes through which they influenced PYD and character
outcomes in Scouts, and that these understandings reflected much of what PYD researchers
have described as “the Big Three” (Lerner, 2004). That is, we found that leaders understand
themselves to influence positive youth outcomes through:
1. engaging in “caring” relationships with Scouts;
2. providing Scouts with opportunities to learn new skills and scaffold or “lead” younger
peers’ skill development; and
3. providing opportunities for Scouts to apply these skills during Scout meetings, in “natural
learning environments,” and in other contexts, such as schools.
Through engaging in these processes in the context of the Scouting program, each set of
leaders in this study agreed that they are contributing to a variety of outcomes, such as Scouts’
increased self-confidence, independence, leadership skills, happiness, sense of brotherhood,
problem-solving abilities, self-regulation skills, and academic competencies. These leaders also
agreed that components of the BSA program (e.g., the merit badge system, teamwork
activities, Scout Oath), and the ways in which leaders deliver this program to Scouts (e.g.,
explaining the “real-life” meaning behind each badge and attribute in the Scout Oath),
contribute to Scouts’ application of the skills they learn in Scouting to other contexts (e.g., at
home and school). In the words of one district leader, although BSA meetings occur only
weekly, “leadership in Scouting is every day for every boy.”
Caring Youth-Leader Relationships
In each of the five focus groups, leaders identified that developing caring relationships with
youth was one of the main ways in which they had a positive impact on Scouts’ development.
Although some of the details of what comprised these youth-leader relationships varied both
within and across focus groups, all leaders expressed that caring and support were features of
the relationships they developed and attempted to maintain with youth through their
participation in BSA. For example, one ScoutReach leader explained:
You’ll be surprised how many...after years go by, [are like] “I really like her because
she took the time just to smile at me. She took the time just to say I care.” That
little one hangs on your shoulder, he will think of you for years and years to come
because no other man, uncles, cousins...[or anybody] else, did that for him. “A
teacher, a man of this stature took the time out for me? Little old me?”
15
Across focus groups, leaders also shared similar views about how caring youth-leader
relationships function to positively impact youth. Both ScoutReach and district leaders shared,
for example, how caring for Scouts means holding them to high expectations and standards,
which encourages them to try and be their best. One ScoutReach leader explained: “It’s that
unspoken relationship of expectations and standards, and you know...I don’t have children, but
I guess because there’s that parental aspect that we talked about earlier...they still need that
nurturing. We give it to them.”
Echoing these sentiments, a district leader explained further how components of the BSA
context facilitate this supportive and caring youth-leader relationship, and related outcomes in
Scouts, such as perseverance. In response to the facilitator’s question of how Scouting impacts
youth, a leader noted: “[It] gives them an opportunity to grow at the pace they’re comfortable
with, with very specific, positive role models and positive guidelines and positive objectives.”
Another leader in that same group shared how, within this supportive Scouting context, leaders
provide encouragement in various ways. He illustrated this common feature of youth-leader
relationships further by asking his fellow leaders: “How many of us have said ‘Just keep
trying?’” Participants in this district leader focus group responded with nods of agreement. A
participant in the “exemplary” leader focus group also shared his views that a supportive and
“good” leader in BSA “tries to understand what each youth is going through during a critical
period of his life, and to be patient with him, rather than judgmental, if and when he falls short
of expectations or short of living up to the Scout Oath and Law.”
In short, leaders across focus groups shared the view that one of the main ways they perceive
themselves as influencing positive outcomes in Scouts is through caring about them and
showing they care. Leaders demonstrate their concerns for the Scouts they serve by “holding
them to high standards,” telling them to “just keep trying,” and through “being patient with
them” when they may fall short of leaders’ expectations. These findings align with one of the
“Big Three” characteristics of effective youth programs described earlier; that is, that programs
should aim to foster the development of positive and sustained relationships between youth and
adults (Lerner, 2004). These findings also suggest that adult leaders in Scouting may act as role
models or mentors within the context of community-based, after-school programs (Bowers et
al., 2010; Lerner, Lerner, & Benson, 2011). The developmental benefits associated with
mentoring may derive from the support and role-modeling provided as part of these youth-adult
relationships, described, as well, by the leaders in this study (Rhodes & Lowe, 2009; Rhodes,
Spencer, Keller, Liang, & Noam, 2006). As described in the following section, these components
of caring youth-leader relationships appear to work in tandem with the opportunities provided
in BSA for enhancing various skills to promote positive outcomes in youth.
Opportunities for the Development of Leadership, Character, and Life Skills
In addition to describing the content and function of caring youth-leader relationships in BSA,
across focus groups, leaders shared similar examples of how the BSA activities and curriculum
they delivered to Scouts provided numerous opportunities for youth to scaffold their younger
peers and develop leadership, character, and life skills. We identified that leaders also linked
engaging in these activities to the development of self-regulation skills and positive youth
attributes, such as tolerance, as described below. In their descriptions of these opportunities for
skill development, leaders provided many examples of the PYD-promoting processes they
facilitate for youth, and of the PYD outcomes they perceive as resulting from these processes.
16
Scaffolding and Leadership Development Opportunities in BSA
Leaders across focus groups frequently referred to the leadership development opportunities
they facilitated for youth when they described how BSA promoted positive outcomes.
Specifically, leaders across focus groups described how youth were given opportunities to take
the lead in activities throughout their participation in Scouting, which enabled them to become
leaders in other facets of their lives. All leaders also described how leadership development
becomes even more core to Scouting as youth transition from Cub Scouts to Boy Scouts (which
usually occurs as 5
th
graders transition to 6
th
Grade).
A ScoutReach leader shared what this support looks like during a BSA meeting: “Normally, we
allow our older boys to kind of run the snack, pass out the snack, and do these responsibilities.”
Another leader shared: “Sometimes what I’ll do is, depending on my activity, I’ll put the
Webelos [Scouts in 5
th
Grade] in charge of the little ones to make them become – like the steps
they need to transition to the Boy Scout aspect of taking charge and leading.” Similarly, a
district leader shared his observation that leadership opportunities must be provided throughout
youth experiences in Scouting: “I think the leadership is an important part – what they’re
learning coming up through the program. The leadership is developed over a period of time, by
watching the older boys and mimicking them.” Another “exemplary” leader explained that she
believed this youth-led and general leadership focus of Boy Scouts was vital to the success of
troops and packs with whom she works, explaining that, for this reason, “this year for the first
time ever, we [Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts] sold camp cards together [i.e., restaurant coupons],
we sold popcorn together... so you have the bigger kids mentoring the little kids.”
Although leaders agreed that BSA promotes youth leadership through providing opportunities
for older youth to mentor their younger peers, they were also clear that good adult leaders
must be present to facilitate this process. For example, one district leader noted that:
You need adults for a couple of reasons. You need adults to be good examples. You
need adults to keep an eye on them, and for certain obvious legal reasons, like they
can’t drive themselves around. But we’re trying to create leadership qualities in
them. We’re trying to make them be the ones that demonstrate leadership. Then
you just have to herd the young ones into the group and let them feed off of the
older ones. In a well-run troop, that’s the model. The boys run the meetings. The
boys delegate responsibilities. They have patrol leaders. They take care of things.
The adults just do the things that adults have to do.
Another district leader, expressing his agreement, noted: “the adults set the tone.” Thus, across
focus groups, leaders expressed that adults are an important part of BSA, even as youth
transition from Cub to Boy Scouts, or from 5
th
to 6
th
Grade. Adults are important not only for
practical reasons (e.g., providing transportation of youth from one meeting to the next), but
because they, as one district leader expressed, “set the tone” for the character development
activities and processes in which youth are expected to engage through Scouting.
Character Development Opportunities and Related Outcomes in BSA
Character, like leadership, is an attribute that BSA explicitly targets in its curriculum and
activities, and the skill-building opportunities provided therein. One district leader explained:
“…once a week, they repeat the Scout Law. If you keep repeating that, it becomes part of you.”
Another leader explained the substance of the Scout Law and how leaders believe they play a
part in the process of character development through the Scout law. He noted:
17
The Scout law has the point – I mean that’s the character and stuff, right there.
When you can stand up and look at a guy and say, ‘Well, he’s trustworthy, he’s
loyal, and he’s always helpful’ - You go down the list and say, ‘Wow, there it is.’ It’s
right there. I mean it’s really neat when you see all of those things pop out of a kid
because of what he’s been involved with. And of course, you sit there and you say
it, but you also talk about it. Like the Scout Master’s Minute and you do the Scout
Master Minute
2
at the end of the meeting. You stand up there, and you talk about
some of these points. You really hit home with a story or something. It sinks in after
a while.
Character development was also identified as one of the main outcomes leaders try to influence
through their relationships with youth. Specifically, leaders noted that they try to influence
character in youth through modeling good character themselves. An “exemplary” leader
explained that adult leaders in BSA influence character by: “Having people who will serve as the
role models...You have to – the leader who, when he or she says, ‘I’m going to be there,’ is
there...I mean, that goes a long way in demonstrating trustworthy.” Another “exemplary”
leader underscored that, in order to influence character in youth, leaders cannot be “holding
them [the Scouts] to different standards than you apply to yourself.”
In addition to communicating the meaning behind the character-based curriculum in BSA (e.g.,
the Scout Oath), and modeling character in their own lives, leaders shared the understanding
that character develops through the prevention of problem behaviors and the promotion of self-
regulation skills. Leaders also described how these processes and outcomes are meant to be
facilitated by the Scouting context. One leader noted: “Cubs also have to accomplish X number
of tasks in order to advance. It gives them a goal to seek. They have to advance in a certain
way. In other words, they have to focus on what they’re doing in order to achieve the different
level.” Another leader explained:
The one thing that everybody in the world can have if they want is dedication and
perseverance. That’s the two things. If you want to excel in Scouting, you just have
to excel in those two qualities. Everything else will be within your reach. You don’t
have to be the fastest or the strongest, or smartest, or anything. You have to excel
in dedication and perseverance. That’s something we can give to every kid.
Along these same lines, ScoutReach leaders believed that Scouts develop character through
engaging in fun, skill-developing activities that influence them to build strengths and disengage
from problem behaviors, as “good behavior” is a requirement of being in ScoutReach. As one
leader noted: “They want to be a Boy Scout, so they don’t get in trouble.” Through attending
enjoyable ScoutReach meetings, these leaders perceive that youth develop a desire to maintain
their participation in Scouting, and to fulfill this desire they avoid getting in trouble.
In addition, leaders believed that youth are encouraged to maintain their participation in
Scouting because the program provides them with the opportunity to “try new things” that they
may not experience outside the Scouting context, and in an environment in which they feel
“safe” exploring. For example, a ScoutReach leader shared: “They actually feel safe in the
environment. It’s okay to mess up.” A district leader also indicated: “There’s never a fail.
2
The “Scoutmaster’s Minute” is when, at the close of every weekly meeting, the leading adult volunteer
(Scoutmaster) shares a short parable with all of the Scouts in order to teach a BSA virtue such as loyalty
or honesty.
18
There’s only pass or incomplete. You can always complete it at your own pace. That’s the other
beauty of it is, even though there’s sort of some age-specific things, you’re encouraged to
advance according to your capabilities.”
Leaders also explained the idea that having opportunities to fail in a safe environment, while
being encouraged to develop new skills, also provides youth with opportunities to experience
successes and rewards. All leaders indicated that they believed Scouts’ experiences of multiple
successes within the context of Scouting resulted in youth having increased self-confidence, a
core outcome mentioned throughout focus group discussions. In describing changes she
witnessed in a Scout who “came out of his shell” through Scouting, one ScoutReach leader
observed that:
We had to really pull out of him the questions we were asking him. But ever since
he made that birdfeeder and put it out my window, he’s just [changed]... since he
made that birdfeeder and put it up there, he feels like now he can do just about
anything.
Expressing similar views, a district leader explained: “It’s not graded on an essay. It’s not
graded on – they don’t get an 80. They don’t get an A, B, C. They earn the patch. They do, and
they accomplish, and that is very different. It’s rich in reward. It’s very accessible.” Another
district leader also shared his perception that the “reward” system contributed to improved self-
esteem for youth in Scouting: “... Once they learn these values that work and get them
acceptance, and appreciation and approval, they feel a lot better about themselves. I think
that’s the heart of it.”
As illustrated above, leaders in ScoutReach as well as district and “exemplary” leaders, shared
the belief that engaging in a program within a safe environment that provided youth with
opportunities to set and pursue goals, gain new skills, and be rewarded for them (e.g., through
the merit badge system), led to the development of character and related positive outcomes,
such as enhanced self-regulation and self-confidence. The importance of having access to a
safe and supervised environment is echoed in the developmental literature on the components
of effective youth programming (Lerner, Alberts, Jelicic, & Smith, 2006; Lerner & Thompson,
2002; Theokas et al., 2006). Leaders also shared the belief that opportunities for engaging in
these processes and developing these outcomes
should
be provided to all youth, in line with
what they view as BSA’s commitment to promoting inclusiveness and tolerance. As one leader
explained:
Scouts has always been the place where young people can go that maybe think
they’re different, feel different, and not be different. Scouts is where I personally
learned that we’re all green. We’re all khaki. It doesn’t matter where you’re from or
what you look like, or what color your skin is. I learned that in Scouts.
A ScoutReach leader also indicated that Scouts should be for everyone, and that inclusiveness
was something she also tried to model for Scouts: “They know to be a Cub Scout, all you need
to do is be yourself, be respectable, and be a good citizen”
Opportunities for Life Skill Development
In addition to developing leadership and character, as well as enhancing self-regulation and
self-esteem, BSA was described by leaders as providing many opportunities for the
development of life skills. For example, one ScoutReach leader noted:
19
I teach them how to do a fire drill, how to do CPR, all of that stuff. We teach them
all of that stuff. Also something they like a lot is, I make believe I’m 911. “This is
911? What’s your emergency.” “There’s a crazy person,” [they say], then you [go],
“is he inside?” So you make it like it’s a real call, and they have a blast.
District leaders also spent much of their focus group discussing all of the valuable life skills
youth can learn in Scouting. For instance, one leader shared: “Kids that I’ve seen coming
through our troop, whether they’re Eagle Scouts or whether they’ve been in a program two
years or something like that, they generally know how to cook, and things, which are good
skills.”
Opportunities to Apply Skills Learned in Scouting across Contexts
Participants in all of the focus groups provided examples of how youth apply the skills they
learn in BSA in a variety of Scouting activities, as well in other contexts. They also believed that
the positive outcomes they develop through Scouting impact other contexts. The context that
was referenced most frequently was school. For example, one ScoutReach leader shared:
“They’re into first aid. We made each one of our boys – well, they made, little first aid kits.
When we want to go out to the schoolyard at lunchtime, they take those first aid kits out, and if
anyone falls or gets scraped, they see – you know. So I let them put it in action.” Another
ScoutReach leader indicated that:
You are teaching them something but then you’re saying, ‘Hey, now apply it. Build
the tent. Figure out how to make a path. Make a plan. You’re going to be in the
woods for two weeks. How are you going to eat? How are you going to wash?’ So
we teach them the skills and then immediately tell them or show them, or make
them apply it.
District leaders, in particular, emphasized how skills learned in Scouting could influence
academic competencies as well. As one leader noted:
Our grading system teaches the boy that if you try enough, you’re going to get it.
That translates into, I think, greater effort when it comes to academics. So the kid
that is, perhaps, the D/C student because of sheer effort, then they start becoming
an A and B student. It doesn’t always happen, all right, but it does give the kid a
roadmap to success in academics. It’s usually right through effort, and that’s where
it all comes – I mean we reward effort.
Variations in Leaders’ Descriptions of PYD in BSA
The second Research Question focused on exploring possible variations in leaders’ descriptions
of the ways in which they promote positive youth outcomes within the context of BSA.
Accordingly, in addition to shared understandings of their perceived influences and program
influences on Scout outcomes, we identified differences between each set of leaders in regard
to the particular processes and outcomes they emphasized. Just as ScoutReach leaders drew
from their specific experiences in BSA as they described how the attributes of the Scouts they
served (and of their communities) influenced their delivery of BSA to youth, district leaders
reflected on their experiences serving Cub and Boy Scouts over many years, and provided a
“long view” about how they believed Scouting impacts youth. In addition, “exemplary” leaders
drew from their own experiences as they presented their views of the components of “good”
adult leadership in Scouting that enabled packs to excel.
20
Although there were differences between each set of leaders in the descriptions they provided,
“exemplary” and district leaders were more similar to each other than either group was to
ScoutReach leaders. As described in more detail in the subsequent section, ScoutReach leaders
uniquely focused on challenges they experienced in delivering the BSA curriculum in urban
settings. We provide select excerpts from these data to illustrate these nuances (pointing out
similarities among leader groups throughout). We note that, in these excerpts, potential links
among specific leader-generated processes, and the PYD outcomes they promote, become
clearer.
“You can quit me, but I’m not [going] to quit you”
In focus groups with ScoutReach leaders, more so than in the other groups, the desire to
provide needed “nurturing” and support, as well as confirmation to the youth that they
“believed in them,” was a recurring theme. For example, one leader said: “It’s a great
opportunity for the kids, as well as for us leaders, just to help influence kids in a positive way.
At the end of the day, they need that nurturing. They need it so desperately. They – for a lot of
our boys, there are no men.”
Related to ScoutReach leaders’ focus on the importance of providing nurturing, support, and
encouragement to the youth they served was their unique focus on how, through Scouting,
youth developed more positive and hopeful future orientations. One ScoutReach leader
explained why the outcome of becoming hopeful was important, especially for ScoutReach
youth: “there are so many kids who like, even with Obama being President...there are so many
kids that truly would have never thought that it could be me, you know. They need those role
models.” Thus, ScoutReach leaders expressed their perceptions that the youth they serve are in
need of leaders who can develop strong and supportive relationships with youth, and, through
these relationships, model character as well as who the youth can hope to become in the
future. According to ScoutReach leaders, BSA provides youth with the opportunities to develop
these important relationships and, in turn, these positive outcomes.
ScoutReach leaders noted, however, that delivering BSA to youth with these needs, and in
urban settings that are far removed from nature, is not without its challenges. However, one
ScoutReach leader perceived a positive impact of delivering BSA to youth in urban Philadelphia:
It’s like, what could they be doing in a house by themselves, some of the dangers?
You know, house fires or making food by themselves... I just love the fact that I
know they’re safe. They’re not allowed to leave the room without me. Oh, you have
to go to the bathroom? We’re all going to the bathroom. They need to be safe.
Thus, despite potential challenges associated with delivering BSA as an after-school program in
schools in downtown Philadelphia, ScoutReach leaders also perceived the availability of
ScoutReach to youth in the “inner city” as a strength of the program.
“It’s our classroom without walls”
The challenges described by ScoutReach leaders of being tasked with delivering BSA in an
urban setting directly contrasts with the emphasis by district leaders on the “natural learning”
component of Scouting. District leaders described their experiences in BSA as revolving around
learning in nature:
21
It’s our classroom without walls, it’s the outdoors. We accomplish most, we learn
most when we are taking that patrol and putting them in an outdoor environment,
engaging in outdoor activities that are distant from what they’re doing, especially in
this day and age. It’s not in front of a computer. It’s not in front of a TV. It’s not
playing a video game. It’s not listening to music. It’s being outside. It’s a whole
new level of experience.
Similarly, another district leader reflected how, over time, boys in Scouts become better
equipped to handle the outdoors than “boys from the city.” Without intending to, this leader
identified a potential difference between the skills youth in Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts develop,
as compared to their peers in the ScoutReach arm of BSA.
Another leader in this group noted how the “natural” component of Scouting may have a double
meaning. He explained that youth in BSA are perceived as experiencing “natural learning,”
through being exposed to opportunities to learn and develop skills in the outdoors, and, as well,
through being given opportunities to apply the skills they learn to real-life problem-solving
tasks. In this leader’s words:
They learn how to respect the outdoors and our natural resources... it gives them
the opportunity to put into practice the positive training that they get at home,
morals, principles, and all of that - where they actually get to be around a group of
their peers, where they can put all of that into practice.
“Having a moral ready”
“Exemplary” leaders, more so than leaders in the other focus groups, focused their discussions
on how they try to influence character in the youth they served. For instance, one leader noted
to the others:
You guys have been in Scouting so long, obviously the folks in this room have that
innately. If a boy came to you, you would know what to say. You’d have a story.
You’ve have an answer. You’d have a moral for him.
Thus, one character development process in which these “exemplary” leaders felt well-equipped
to engage was finding the moral in the stories and lessons they shared with youth, and clearly
communicating this moral as part of their youth-leader relationships. Although this particular
leader was confident in his experienced co-participants’ abilities to infuse their conversations
with youth with moral lessons, he was not so confident about other, less-experienced leaders’
abilities to do so.
In addition, this leader and his co-participants shared stories of challenges they experienced in
recruiting adult volunteers whom they considered to be models of good character for youth.
Importantly, parent recruitment was a challenge mentioned by leaders across focus groups.
However, “exemplary” leaders spent more time voicing concerns related to finding parent
leaders whom they viewed as reflecting the character focus of BSA and modeling it for youth.
As one leader shared: “We’re trying. We’re trying all different things to get the parents to stay
honest, and be helpful.” Describing the character-related challenges he observed in parent
volunteers, another leader remarked: “’Do as I say’ doesn’t really fly in the Scouts. It’s got to be
‘do as I do.’” Despite noting these particular leadership challenges in BSA, and that BSA cannot
be delivered without the volunteerism of parents who reflect “good” character, all “exemplary”
leaders shared the belief that BSA was a successful character development program. Moreover,
all “exemplary” leaders believed that the longer youth remained in BSA, the more character
22
they developed. In the words of one leader: “The beauty of Boy Scouts is that the journey and
the destination ought to have equal weight.”
ScoutReach-Specific Findings
The third Research Question focused on potential differences between ScoutReach leaders’
experiences and views of how they influence the youth they serve compared to the perceptions
articulated by “exemplary” and district-level leaders. Accordingly, we highlight some of the
ScoutReach-specific findings from our analysis of variations in focus group data. We refer back
to some of the excerpts presented above as we address how ScoutReach leaders’ views of PYD
in the youth they serve compare to views expressed by district and “exemplary” leaders. We
focus on two main findings of differences between ScoutReach leaders’ views and those of the
other leaders, noting that other descriptions of PYD processes and perceived outcomes by
ScoutReach leaders matched up with descriptions provided by district and “exemplary” leaders
(e.g., of the role of scaffolding and leadership opportunities, as well as activity participation, in
the development of positive youth outcomes). Specifically, through our analysis, we found that
ScoutReach leaders’ descriptions departed from those of other leaders when they:
1. described the details of their caring relationships with youth, and
2. described how the setting of ScoutReach affected implementation of the BSA program.
ScoutReach Leaders’ Perceptions of Caring Youth-Leader Relationships
ScoutReach leaders specifically focused on the nurturing they provided to the youth through
their youth-leader relationships as addressing a deficit, or in the words of one leader, the reality
that for some youth in her pack “there were no men” in their lives outside of Scouting.
Similarly, although all leaders addressed how Scouting tries to teach boys to aim high and
follow through on their activities and goals, the importance of inspiring youth to become leaders
and high-achieving young people, despite the odds they faced in their daily lives, was unique to
descriptions provided by ScoutReach leaders. As one leader explained: “You are a role model
for what they can achieve.” Addressing the race-related challenges that her Scouts experienced,
another leader explained that although there is an African American president, the youth in
ScoutReach still resist believing that they, too, could be president one day.
Similarly, another leader noted: “It’s like at my school, we have an assistant principal, Dr.
Smith, you know, and when I first introduced him to the kids, he’s like ‘you don’t have to have
them call me Dr. Smith. They can call me Mr. Smith.’ I was like, ‘no, they need to know that a
minority man can be a doctor.”
Thus, these leaders explained that it was not common for these youth to see minority men
becoming leaders and/or successful professionals. Perhaps, in contrast to the views of district
and “exemplary” leaders, ScoutReach leaders viewed the relationships they developed with
youth as not only contributing to their character development and other positive outcomes, but
as opening their minds to more hopeful futures and possibilities, despite the systemic
inequalities they experience in the U.S.
ScoutReach Leaders’ Views of Delivering BSA in Urban Philadelphia
In addition to these nuances in ScoutReach leaders’ descriptions of how they have tried to
influence PYD, these leaders discussed challenges of delivering BSA to youth in an urban
setting. One leader indicated that, because of the realities of being in an urban setting, there is
23
more violence near the schools where she delivers the program and a lack of accessible natural
surroundings.
These features of ScoutReach, she explained, pose barriers to leaders’ facilitation of many of
the activities for which Scouts are supposed to receive merit badges. As she noted: “We teach
inner city, and it’s really hard to go outside at all, it’s a really dangerous area. We have been
able to do other activities, like instead of going fishing, my co-leader and I print out pictures of
fish.” Thus, this leader attempts to compensate for the challenges posed by delivering Scouting
in urban Philadelphia by encouraging her Scouts to “go fishing” in the classroom.
Despite these limitations of delivering the program in an urban area, other leaders
acknowledged that it was because the program was provided in schools in downtown
Philadelphia, that youth who are not typically “reached” by BSA had the opportunity to join the
program. These leaders also identified that, because the program was delivered at schools (as
compared to in churches and community centers, where non-ScoutReach packs typically meet),
youth could be a part of BSA in safe and structured environments. One leader noted that she
loves “the fact that [she] knows they’re safe,” acknowledging the risks they may encounter in
their communities or if they were to be home alone after school. Thus, according to ScoutReach
leaders, the urban components of ScoutReach provide both challenges to ScoutReach leaders’
ability to deliver the BSA program with fidelity, but also appear to increase their confidence in
the program as a much needed vehicle for promoting positive youth and character outcomes.
Discussion
The aim of this investigation was to contribute to the knowledge base about how diverse
leaders within OST programs perceive their influences and programmatic influences on PYD and
character outcomes in the youth they serve, and to examine these perceptions in reference to
some of the existing literature about effective youth development programs. Although literature
in the PYD field attests to the importance of OST programs for promoting PYD, and of the
important roles that adult leaders play in these OST programs (Lerner, 2004), only a few
studies have focused on leaders’ perceptions of the PYD-promoting processes that take place in
the OST programs of which they are a part (e.g., Carruthers & Busser, 2000; King et al., 2005).
Moreover, only a small body of research has explored whether different groups of leaders from
across a national-youth serving organization have shared understandings of their positive
influences on youth.
Accordingly, we conducted five focus groups with leaders in the COL of BSA, in the greater
Philadelphia area. Research questions guiding our implementation of focus groups, and the
components of the grounded theory analysis we conducted, included:
1. what are leaders’ perceptions of their influences on positive outcomes in youth, and do
they correspond to the extant literature about processes of influence in OST programs
associated with effective practice (i.e., the “Big Three” attributes of youth development
programs; Lerner, 2004)?;
2. what, if any, variations can be identified in leaders’ descriptions of the ways in which
they promote positive youth outcomes within the context of BSA?; and
3. given the recent innovation of ScoutReach as a vehicle of BSA program delivery to
predominantly ethnic minority, urban youth, how do ScoutReach leaders’ perceptions of
the impact of BSA on positive youth outcomes compare to those of other leaders?
24
Through our analysis, we identified that leaders had shared understandings of the general
processes through which they influenced PYD and character outcomes in Scouts, and that these
understandings reflected much of what PYD scholars write about in the literature and refer to
as “the Big Three” (Lerner, 2004). We specifically identified that leaders understand themselves
to influence positive youth outcomes in the context of BSA through:
1. engaging in “caring” relationships with Scouts;
2. providing Scouts with opportunities to learn new skills and scaffold, or “lead,” younger
peers’ skill development; and
3. providing opportunities for Scouts to apply these skills during Scout meetings, in “natural
learning environments,” and in other contexts, such as schools.
Through fostering these processes in the context of the Scouting program, each set of leaders
in this study agreed that they contribute to the promotion of multiple positive outcomes in the
Scouts they serve, including enhanced self-confidence, leadership skills, self-regulation skills,
and academic competencies. These leaders also shared the belief that components of the BSA
program (e.g., the merit badge system and Scout Law), and the ways in which leaders deliver
this program to Scouts (e.g., explaining the meaning behind the merit badge system and each
attribute in the Scout Law), contribute to youth enacting the skills they gain in Scouting and in
other contexts (e.g., at home and school).
Based on analyses of leaders’ focus group discussions, we, thus, generated some evidence
suggesting that BSA in the COL is successful in promoting PYD through facilitating supportive
youth-leader relationships and providing opportunities for youth skill development and skill
application in valued activities. Moreover, we learned that, despite the scope of BSA in greater
Philadelphia and the different histories and experiences of leaders, there is shared knowledge
about how leaders in this program should and do influence youth. In addition, we learned that
leaders’ own theories about how they influence youth are consistent with PYD literature, and
enhance this knowledge by contextualizing it in the setting of this particular OST program.
In their own words, leaders in this study articulated that the “caring” relationships they form
with youth are one of the most important features of BSA programs, and one of the most
influential ways in which they promote positive outcomes in youth. Leaders also provided
numerous examples of the skill-building activities they facilitate for youth, and the outcomes
they believe to be promoted through these activities. Finally, leaders shared many positive
stories from their own experiences about how they observed positive changes in youth that
they understood as resulting from their participation in Scouting activities and applying the skills
to additional BSA experiences and in other contexts. ScoutReach and district leaders provided
examples of how youth gained confidence in themselves and enhanced their abilities to better
regulate their behaviors and reach goals through being exposed to the positive and encouraging
environment of BSA.
In addition to having shared understandings about the ways in which they influence youth,
leaders across focus groups presented similar examples of the barriers they encountered to
delivering the BSA program. For example, leaders across groups described the frustration of low
parent participation in Scouting. For “exemplary” leaders, however, frustration with parents also
related to their observations that parents were not equally equipped to model character for
youth. ScoutReach leaders emphasized challenges of modeling additional positive outcomes for
youth, such as hopeful future orientations. These leaders described how they modeled and
taught youth that they should and could have high aspirations for their futures. However, this
25
message was difficult for some Scouts, given all the challenges they experience as part of their
day-to-day lives.
Thus, differences between leaders’ descriptions of how they promoted PYD among the youth
they served reflected individual variation in these youth, as well as individual variation in
leaders’ backgrounds and knowledge bases. As scholars in the PYD field posit, the goal of youth
development research is to understand what mutually beneficial person-context relations
promote what positive outcomes, and for what youth (Bornstein, 2006; Lerner et al., 2015).
Uncovering the diversity of youth experiences and PYD processes is a key aim of PYD research.
This study suggests that this aim is also a key consideration of youth-serving practitioners in
high-quality programs. However, findings also suggest that more research is needed about how
to deliver a standardized national OST program curriculum, such as the BSA curriculum, in a
way that it sensitive to and addresses these instances of diversity. Needs assessments could
provide BSA with a sense of what additional resources are necessary for an optimized program
to be implemented in urban communities. Additional systematic support, for example, such as a
ScoutReach specific alternative activities handbook (i.e., an urban Scouter’s guidebook) with
options that match the resources of urban contexts, could be used to augment the standard
BSA curriculum. Although we have heard of such manuals being used at some point by different
urban Scouting programs in the U.S., no such resource was circulated throughout BSA
programs at the national level or within the COL during this investigation (BSA, 2014).
The importance of such guidance and flexibility in program implementation in urban, high-
poverty contexts has been shown to be effective for other youth programs such as the Youth
Engaged in Leadership and Learning program (Anyon, & Naughton, 2003). Various ScoutReach
leaders could contribute to the urban Scouter’s guidebook, sharing modified programs such as
“going fishing in the classroom,” in which ScoutReach leaders taught seemingly out-of-reach
Scouting skills by thorough planning and ingenuity.
Although ScoutReach leaders were well aware of the needs of the youth they serve, and of how
these needs may be similar to and different from the needs of Scouts in other arms of BSA,
they were tasked with implementing the same BSA curriculum in their urban after-school
program setting that district leaders identified as designed to be delivered in the outdoors.
ScoutReach leaders acknowledged, however, that the other facets of the BSA curriculum were a
good fit with the needs of the youth they served, and that their Scouts would not be exposed to
such a program if not for the after-school component of ScoutReach. Specifically, ScoutReach
leaders noted that their Scouts, who would likely be excluded from Scouting due to a lack of
“safe” spaces for Scout meetings in their communities, are being exposed to
some
of the
character-development components of the program because it is being delivered in schools in
downtown Philadelphia.
Thus, despite the poor fit of the “natural learning” component of Scouting to the setting in
which ScoutReach is being delivered, ScoutReach leaders all expressed appreciation for the
existence of ScoutReach, and confirmed that, through this program, ScoutReach youth were
being exposed to PYD-promoting processes and outcomes. ScoutReach leaders also confirmed
that the youth they serve are developing some of the same positive outcomes as youth in other
arms of BSA (e.g., life skills, increased self-confidence and perseverance), as well as other
outcomes that may be more specific to the needs of the youth in ScoutReach, such as more
hopeful future orientations.
26
Therefore, from ScoutReach leaders, as well as district and “exemplary” leaders, we learned
that they believe that the main components of BSA – caring relationships with leaders, skill-
building activities (e.g., building birdcages), and opportunities to apply newly developed skills to
real-life problems (e.g., supplying first aid care during recess) – are successfully being delivered
to youth in the program, despite socio-demographic and contextual differences. We also
learned that some of the observed positive influences of BSA are influencing youth outcomes
even when youth are not attending BSA meetings or activities. In particular, leaders shared the
view that, because of Scouting, youth are doing their best to succeed in other facets of their
lives, and are learning to persevere and accomplish their goals.
Future Directions
Leaders’ descriptions have enhanced understanding of the processes through which positive
outcomes in youth from a diversity of backgrounds may be promoted in BSA. In addition, we
have a better understanding of some of the distinct challenges leaders (within the same youth-
serving organization) experience to promoting these strengths in the youth they serve. The
knowledge gained from leaders also suggests that the field of PYD is moving in the right
direction as it attempts to understand the diverse processes through which youth come to
experience thriving and well-being, despite challenges they may encounter in different facets of
their lives. Although some leaders described how Scouting promotes positive outcomes through
preventing negative behaviors and, thus, took more of a deficit orientation in their description
of the influence of BSA on youth, most of the examples leaders gave focused on how Scouting
cultivates youth strengths. We suggest, therefore, that leaders in this study likewise reflected
an orientation to influencing youth outcomes that is in line with PYD research on high-quality
OST programs (e.g., Lerner, 2004).
The findings from this study also support previous research with youth from lower-SES
backgrounds, highlighting the importance of providing (and sustaining) access to high-quality
youth programs for this population (Mahoney, Vandell, Simpkins, & Zarrett, 2009). In addition,
this study suggests that providing youth from “higher-risk” communities with caring
relationships with adults not only enables youth to “believe in themselves,” and to “hold
themselves to high standards,” but may impact their future orientations. Hopeful future
orientations are associated with important life outcomes for youth of color and youth from low-
SES backgrounds (Diemer & Blustein, 2007; Schmid & Lopez, 2010). Therefore, future research
should continue to investigate the extent to which OST programs may influence hopeful future
orientation among youth of color, and youth from low-SES communities.
In this investigation, we also learned that leaders across different arms of BSA identify
leadership development as an important process and outcome related to the positive
development of the youth in BSA, as they move through Boy Scouts (between 6
th
and 12
th
Grade). Researchers in the PYD field have also identified that leadership development is
strongly associated with PYD across a diversity of young people (Lerner, 2004). Unfortunately,
for youth in the ScoutReach arm of BSA, Boy Scouts is only available on a limited basis (i.e., the
elementary school years). Findings from this study, thus, suggest that providing adolescents
with leadership development opportunities should be as much of a priority as providing these
youth with access to nurturing relationships and opportunities for other types of skill
development when they are in elementary school.
However, these implications for future research must be tempered in light of the limitations of
the present research. One limitation is that two of the three groups of leaders (district leaders
27
and “exemplary” leaders) volunteered with young people in Cub and Boy Scouts, that is, with
youth in elementary school and middle/high school, respectively. Thus, leaders reflected on
PYD-related processes and outcomes across different age groups of youth, rather than solely
focusing on the development of youth in middle childhood or during adolescence. However,
leaders typically specified the age group of youth to which they were referring throughout their
descriptions of PYD in BSA. They were aware that the overall CAMP Study, of which this
investigation is a part, is a longitudinal examination of positive development in Cub Scouts.
Nevertheless, more data from leaders who work only with Cub Scouts could help us identify
some of the leader-generated PYD processes that are perceived as being specific to Cub Scouts,
the population of interest in the larger CAMP Study.
An additional limitation of this study is that ScoutReach leaders are paid leaders in BSA,
whereas district leaders and “exemplary” leaders are volunteers. This variation could have
influenced leaders’ descriptions of the strengths and challenges they identified when they
described the ways in which they deliver BSA to youth. It is possible, for example, that
ScoutReach leaders were reluctant to divulge information about challenges they confront in
BSA, due to their financial reliance on their positions as paid BSA leaders. We did not allow BSA
staff to be present during the ScoutReach focus groups, explaining that their responses would
be confidential. Nevertheless, it is possible that their positions as paid employees in the COL
factored into the discussions that ensued in these groups. Similarly, a collaborator on the CAMP
Study, who was also a COL staff member, was present for the focus group with “exemplary”
leaders, which may have influenced the information they divulged. It is possible that a different
constellation of focus group facilitators and participants would have yielded more (or less)
information from leaders about the ways in which they influence PYD in Scouts, and about
challenges they experience therein.
However, because focus groups leverage group discussions to generate knowledge and
information, the data generated is always a reflection of the characteristics of participants and
of the group dynamics between them (Kitzinger, 1995). Nevertheless, and despite the
information gained from this study, the influence of the individual characteristics of participants
on the data presented suggest that our findings are not generalizable to all leaders in the COL,
or to all leaders in high-quality OST programs in the U.S. However, they do provide important
information from a sample of leaders in the COL about how they may influence the youth they
serve. In addition, future studies can now triangulate the results of this investigation with
quantitative data we have collected from Scouts who have also participated in the CAMP Study
over the last two and a half years, including 4-waves of their self-reported positive and
character related outcomes (e.g., helpfulness, friendliness, rule-following, see Hilliard et al.,
2014 for more information). Through triangulating these data, we will be able to generate
holistic information about how positive outcomes may develop among Scouts in the COL. In
addition, we will be able to triangulate the current findings with youth interviews from the
CAMP Study to determine whether leaders’ and Scouts’ perceptions of youth-leader
relationships and the influences of BSA programs on youth are commensurate with one
another.
Conclusions
We believe that the information generated through these focus groups provide valuable and
contextualized information about how leaders in a national youth-serving organization influence
positive outcomes in the youth they serve. We have also identified important information about
how individual and group differences may factor into the implementation of a national OST
28
program. Furthermore, the findings from this study suggest that, when these differences are
attended to and leveraged, more information about what processes promote what specific
positive outcomes, for what youth, and in what settings, can be gleaned and put into action.
The information we generated suggests that, whereas BSA is, indeed, a high-quality youth
development program that is making a real difference in the lives of the youth it serves (e.g.,
through promoting “the Big Three,” Lerner, 2004), there is still room for improvement. By
adapting curricula and activities to better meet the challenges, and match the strengths,
experienced by the increasingly diverse youth who participate in the program, BSA and other
national OST programs may be more effective at enabling youth to thrive, and, thus, to
positively contribute to themselves, to others, and to society (Lerner et al., 2015).
Acknowledgement: This research was supported by a grant to Richard M. Lerner from the John
Templeton Foundation. Address correspondence to: Rachel M. Hershberg, 308 Lincoln Filene Hall, Tufts
University, Medford, MA 02155. Email: rachel.hershberg@tufts.edu.
References
Anyon, Y., & Naughton, S. (2003). Youth Empowerment: The Contributions and Challenges of
Youth-Led Research in a High-Poverty,
Urban Community
, 1-8.
Benson, P.L., Scales, P.C., & Syvertsen, A.K. (2011). The contribution of the developmental
assets framework to positive youth development theory and practice.
Advances in child
development and behavior
,
41
, 197-230.
Blum, R.W. (2003). Positive youth development: A strategy for improving health. In. F. Jacobs,
D. Wertlieb, & R.M. Lerner (Eds.),
Handbook of applied developmental science: Vol. 2.
Promoting positive child, adolescent, and family development through research, policies, and
programs
(pp. 237-252). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bornstein, M.H. (2006). Parenting science and practice. In K.A. Renninger, I.E. Sigel (Vol. Eds.),
Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 4: Child psychology in practice
(6
th
ed., pp. 893-949).
Editors-in-Chief: W. Damon, & R.M. Lerner. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Boy Scouts of America. (2014). Retrieved September 2nd, 2014, from http://www.scouting.org/
Bowers, E.P., Li, Y., Kiely, M.K., Brittian, A., Lerner, J.V., & Lerner, R.M. (2010). The five Cs
model of positive youth development: A longitudinal analysis of confirmatory factor structure
and measurement invariance.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 720-735.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology.
Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3
(2), 77-101.
Carruthers, C.P., & Busser, J.A. (2000). A qualitative outcome study of Boys and Girls Club
program leaders, club members, and parents.
Journal of Park and Recreation Administration,
18
(1),
50-67.
Charmaz, K. (2006).
Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative
analysis
. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008).
Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
29
Diemer, M.A., & Blustein, D.L. (2007). Vocational hope and vocational identity: Urban
adolescents’ career development.
Journal of Career Assessment
,
15
(1), 98-118.
Harris Interactive. (2003).
Volunteer outcomes study
. Irving, TX: Boy Scouts of America
National Office.
Hilliard, L.J., Hershberg, R.M., Wang, J., Bowers, E.P., Chase, P.A., Champine, R.B., ...Ferris, K.
(2014). Program innovations and character in Cub Scouts: Findings from year 1 of a mixed-
methods, longitudinal study.
Journal of Youth Development
, 9, 4-30
.
Jang, S.J., Johnson, B.R., & Kim, Y. (2012).
Eagle Scouts: Merit beyond the badge.
Institute for
Studies of Religion, Baylor University. Retrieved from
http://www.orgsites.com/oh/troop447/EagleScoutMeritBeyondtheBadge.pdf
King, P.E., Dowling, E.M., Mueller, R.A., White, K., Schultz, W., Osborn, P., …Scales, P.C.
(2005). Thriving in adolescence: The voices of youth-serving practitioners, parents, and early
and late adolescents.
The Journal of Early Adolescence, 25
(1), 94-112.
Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups.
British Medical Journal, 311,
299-302.
Larson, R.W. (2000). Toward a psychology of positive youth development.
American
Psychologist, 55
(1),
170–183.
Larson, R.W. (2006). Positive youth development, willful adolescents, and mentoring.
Journal of
Community Psychology, 34
(6), 677-689.
Lerner, R.M. (2004).
Liberty: Thriving and civic engagement among America’s youth.
Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Lerner, R.M., Alberts, A.E., Jelicic, H., & Smith, L.M. (2006). Young people are resources to be
developed: Promoting positive youth development through adult-youth relations and community
assets. In E.G. Clary & J.E. Rhodes (Eds.),
Mobilizing adults for positive youth development:
Strategies for closing the gap between beliefs and behaviors
(pp. 19-39). Minneapolis, MN:
Search Institute.
Lerner, R.M., Lerner, J.V., & Benson, J.B. (2011). Positive youth development: Research and
applications for promoting thriving in adolescence. In R.M. Lerner, J.V. Lerner, & J.B. Benson
(Eds.),
Advances in Child Development and Behavior
.
Lerner, R.M., Lerner, J.V., Bowers, E., & Geldhof, G.J. (2015). Positive youth development: A
relational developmental systems model. In W.F. Overton & P.C. Molenaar (Eds.),
Theory and
Method
. Volume 1 of the
Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science
(7th ed.).
Editor-in-chief: R.M. Lerner. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Lerner, R.M., & Thompson, L.S. (2002). Promoting healthy adolescent behavior and
development: Issues in the design and evaluation of effective youth programs.
Journal of
Pediatric Nursing, 17
(5), 338-344.
Louis Harris & Associates. (1998).
A year in the life of a Cub Scout…Boy Scout…Venturer:
Strengthening youth, families, and neighborhoods.
New York, NY: Louis Harris & Associates,
Inc. Retrieved from http://www.scouting.org/FILESTORE/marketing/pdf/02-303.pdf/
30
Mahoney, J.L., Vandell, D.L., Simpkins, S., & Zarrett, N. (2009). Adolescent out-of-school
activities. In R.M. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.),
Handbook of adolescent psychology: Contextual
influences on adolescent development
(3rd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 228–267). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Morrow, S.L. (2005). Quality and trustworthiness in qualitative research in counseling
psychology.
Journal of counseling psychology, 52
(2), 250.
Polson, E.C., Kim, Y.I., Jang, S.J., Johnson, B.R., & Smith, B. (2013). Being prepared and
staying connected: Scouting's influence on social capital and community involvement.
Social
Science Quarterly
,
94
, 758-776.
Rhodes, J.E., & Lowe, S.R. (2009). Mentoring in adolescence. In R.M. Lerner & L. Steinberg
(Eds.),
Handbook of adolescent psychology: Vol. 2. Contextual influences on adolescent
development
(3
rd
ed., pp. 152-190). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Rhodes, J.E., Spencer, R., Keller, T.E., Liang, B., & Noam, G. (2006). A model for the influence
of mentoring relationships on youth development.
Journal of Community Psychology, 34
(6),
691-707.
Roth, J.L., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2003). Youth development programs: Risk, prevention and
policy.
The Journal of Adolescent Health: Official Publication of the Society for Adolescent
Medicine
,
32
, 170–182.
Schmid, K.L., & Lopez, S.J. (2010). Positive pathways to adulthood: the role of hope in
adolescents' constructions of their futures.
Advances in Child Development and Behavior
,
41
,
69-88.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998).
Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sullivan, P.J., & Larson, R.W. (2010). Connecting youth to high-resource adults: Lessons from
effective youth programs.
Journal of Adolescent Research, 25
(1), 99-123.
Theokas, C., Lerner, J.V., Phelps, E., & Lerner, R.M. (2006). Cacophony and change in youth
after school activities: Findings from the 4-H study of positive youth development.
Journal of
Youth Development, 1
(1),
Vandell, D.L., Larson, R.W, Mahoney, J.L., & Watts, T.W. (2015). Children’s organized activities.
In M.H. Bornstein & T. Leventhal (Eds.),
Handbook of child psychology and developmental
science, Vol. 4:
Ecological settings and processes in developmental systems
(7th ed., pp. 305-
344). Editor-in-chief: R.M. Lerner. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.
von Eye, A., Lerner, J.V., Arbeit, M.R., Weiner, M.B., Chase, P., & Agans, J.P. (2011). The role
of ecological assets in positive and problematic developmental trajectories.
Journal of
Adolescence, 34
(6), 1151-1165.
© Copyright of Journal of Youth Development ~ Bridging Research and Practice. Content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without copyright holder’s express written
permission. Contact Editor at: patricia.dawson@oregonstate.edu for details. However, users may print,
download or email articles for individual use.
ISSN 2325-4009 (Print); ISSN 2325-4017 (Online)
31
Communication, Coping, and Connections:
Campers’ and Parents’ Perspectives of Self-Efficacy and
Benefits of Participation in Deployment Support Camps
Christy D. Clary
Ohio State University Extension, Brown County
Georgetown, Ohio
clary.42@osu.edu
Theresa M. Ferrari
Ohio State University Extension
Columbus, Ohio
ferrari.8@osu.edu
32
Volume 10, Number 2, Summer 2015 Article 151002FA002
Communication, Coping, and Connections:
Campers’ and Parents’ Perspectives of Self-Efficacy and
Benefits of Participation in Deployment Support Camps
Christy D. Clary and Theresa M. Ferrari
Ohio State University Extension
Abstract: Military youth have unique challenges, particularly when
a parent is deployed. Camp participation has been linked to multiple
positive outcomes, thus camps have become popular as a setting for
addressing these youth’s unique needs. With limited existing
research on outcomes related to participation, this study explored to
what extent participation in OMK camps affected military youth’s
self-efficacy for communication, coping, and social skills. Participants
responded to an online instrument three months after camp. Both
campers and parents reported the largest increase in self-efficacy
for communication skills, followed by social skills, and then coping
skills. Open-ended responses overwhelmingly supported that
developing friendships was one of the greatest benefits of attending
a camp. The results are consistent with the literature regarding the
importance of connectedness. Recommendations for conducting
camps are offered. These finding may also be useful to those
working with other special populations in the camp setting.
Introduction
U.S. military deployments have occurred at an unprecedented rate in the past decade
(Department of Defense, 2010). An estimated 2 million children in military families have been
affected by deployment. In response, programs have been created to support military children
and youth during deployment. For the past 10 years, the U.S. Army collaborated with 4-H to
support youth who are impacted by deployment through a program titled Operation: Military
Kids (OMK). OMK was designed especially for those who had a family member in the National
Guard or Reserves and were geographically dispersed throughout their respective states, as
they are often lacking in support resources. Programs such as OMK are recognized for providing
support for children of military personnel (Easterbrooks, Ginsburg, & Lerner, 2013; Huebner,
Mancini, Bowen, & Orthner, 2009; Lara-Cinisomo, Chandra, Burns, & Lau, 2013), but there is a
lack of published research describing their effects.
33
Through collaboration with the 4-H program, camps for military youth have been conducted in
some states for as long as 10 years. 4-H has a well-established camping program in many
states that was readily adapted to this audience. Since 2009, with funding from the Department
of Defense (DoD), grants have been made available to conduct camps that addressed needs of
youth who have experienced the deployment of a family member. To date, evaluation data
have been collected from campers at the conclusion of these residential camp sessions.
However, while this method may document immediate reactions, it does not capture longer-
term effects. As one way to address this gap in the literature, we conducted a study that
collected data three months after camp participation, with both campers and parents as
respondents. Specifically, the study reported here was designed to explore the extent to which
participation in OMK camps affected military youth’s self-efficacy for communication, coping,
and social skills.
Review of Literature
Deployment
Military youth have challenges that set them apart from their peers. When a parent is deployed,
they may experience changes such as taking on more responsibilities at home, changes to
everyday activities, and disruption of family routines (Bailey, Lang, Schoppe-Sullivan, & Ferrari,
2015; Knobloch, Pusateri, Ebata, & McGlaughlin, 2015). Upon return, military families must
renegotiate boundaries (Bowling & Sherman, 2008; Drummet, Coleman, & Cable, 2003; Lara-
Cinisomo et al., 2013; Mmari, Roche, Sudhinaraset, & Blum, 2009). During deployment, some
military youth experience worry, greater anxiety, and emotional difficulties (Castenada et al.,
2008; Knobloch et al., 2015; Lester et al., 2010; Mmari et al., 2009) and more stress (Flake,
Davis, Johnson, & Middleton, 2009; Gorman, Eide, & Hisle-Gorman, 2010). Adolescents may
worry not only about the deployed parent, but the parent who remains at home (Knobloch et
al., 2015; Mmari et al., 2009). There may be increased behavior problems (Barker & Berry,
2009), problems at school (Pfefferbaum, Houston, Sherman, & Melson, 2011; Richardson et al.,
2011), and increased family conflict (Knobloch et al., 2015). However, a meta-analysis of 16
studies of children of deployed service members showed small effect sizes and mixed results
(Card et al., 2011). The authors of this meta-analysis caution that these results do not mean
that children are unaffected by deployment. Rather, the issues may be with measurement and
instrumentation.
Although it is easy to recognize all the changes and challenges that military youth face, it is also
important to recognize the strengths they have and the resilience they demonstrate. Effectively
dealing with challenging circumstances may be a catalyst for growth (Easterbrooks et al.,
2013). Both youth and adults have reported strengthened relationships and family cohesion
(Knobloch et al., 2015; Knobloch & Theiss, 2012) and increased independence and autonomy
(Castenada et al., 2008; Knobloch et al., 2015; Knobloch & Theiss, 2012; Mmari et al., 2009) as
a result of deployment. Pride in their deployed parent’s service is also a positive theme that has
been reported (Ferrari, & Leonard, 2007; Houston et al., 2009; Knobloch et al., 2015). Other
outcomes include being prepared for future deployments (Huebner, & Mancini, 2010; Knobloch
et al., 2015) and having new or unique experiences as a military family (Knobloch et al., 2015).
Many factors could affect whether outcomes are positive or negative. It is possible that
deployment effects vary by age, gender, and number and length of deployments experienced
(Chandra, Martin, Hawkins, & Richardson, 2010). The effects may be different for reserve
component families because they may have less access to resources and social support
34
compared with active duty families located on or near military installations (Castenada et al.,
2008; Lara-Cinisomo et al., 2013; Park, 2011). Other factors include individual and contextual
factors such as personal characteristics, coping style, social support, parent and family
functioning, and the availability of community supports (Card et al., 2011). The issues faced by
military youth co-occur with normative developmental changes (Millburn, & Lightfoot, 2013).
Even if deployment by itself does not have a negative effect on outcomes, it is possible that it
may reduce youth well-being when combined with other risk factors (Lucier-Greer, O’Neal,
Arnold, Mancini, & Wickrama, 2014).
Camp as a Setting for Positive Youth Development
Why is a camp setting chosen to reach military youth? Camp participation has been linked to
positive outcomes including growth in self-esteem, social skills, positive behaviors and attitudes,
responsibility, physical abilities, and creative thinking (Baughman, Garst, & Furhman, 2009;
Garst, Browne, & Bialeschki, 2011; Thurber, Scanlin, Scheuler, & Henderson, 2007). Camps can
create a supportive environment that allow youth to take risks, try new things, and become
more confident (Arnold, Bourdeau, & Nagele, 2005). Campers, parents, and staff endorse these
positive outcomes (Thurber et al., 2007).
In particular, camps are a way to bring together those who share similar situations. The
literature contains reports of using the camp setting as a means to bring together those with
the same chronic illnesses and health conditions, such as cancer (Conrad, & Altmaier, 2009;
Gillard, & Watts, 2013; Martiniuk, 2003), HIV/AIDS (Gillard, Witt, & Watts, 2011), and spina
bifida (Holbein et al., 2013), among others, and with shared life circumstances such as
bereavement (Creed, Ruffin, & Ward, 2001; Nabors et al., 2004). A systematic review of 21
studies of camps for children with chronic illnesses showed a high level of satisfaction and
improvements in social-related outcomes, but noted some methodological limitations (Moola,
Faulkner, White, & Kirsh, 2013). Features related to social support include fostering a sense of
belonging and participants having the sense that they could relate to other campers (Gillard, &
Watts, 2013; Roberson, 2010). Roberson (2010) concluded that “condition-specific” camps may
offer certain benefits not offered by attending camps with a broad range of participants (p.
258).
Camps for Military Youth
The positive youth development outcomes derived from camp participation align with those
desired for military youth who are coping with the negative aspects of deployment (Huebner, &
Mancini, 2005, 2010). Thus, camps have gained popularity as a setting to conduct programs to
address military youth’s unique needs. At least three groups have sponsored camp initiatives for
this audience: the National Military Family Association’s Operation Purple camps; Camp Corral,
which is sponsored by Golden Corral; and two initiatives through 4-H: deployment and
reintegration support camps and military teen adventure camps.
Ferrari and Leonard (2007) surveyed campers attending an Operation Purple camp. They found
that campers benefited by finding a sense of belonging, building self-confidence, and learning
to help others in the same situation. Campers’ comments indicated that, overall, after camp
they viewed deployment more positively, and attending camp helped them to feel proud of their
parents’ service.
Chandra and her colleagues (Chandra, Lara-Cinisomo, Burns, & Griffin, 2012) studied Operation
Purple camps, which were week-long camps targeted to youth with deployed parents. Camps
focused on communication, military culture, sense of service, and engagement in outdoor
35
activities. There were no significant differences between youth who attended camp and those
who did not. At the three-month follow up, parents of campers reported a significant increase in
their child’s ability to make himself or herself feel better and greater improvement in their
interactions with their child compared with no-camp parents. From open-ended comments,
Chandra et al. (2012) also found there were what they described as secondary benefits to
attending an Operation Purple Camp, such as parents reporting that youth were more confident
and more independent, and both parents and youth reporting that youth had improved coping
skills.
Marek and her colleagues (Marek, Hollingsworth, Zhang, & Brock, 2011; Marek, O’Rourke, &
Moore, 2013) used several subscales from the American Camp Association (ACA) Youth
Outcomes Battery to measure camper outcomes from attending camps. These camps were all
supported by DoD grants to the 4-H programs in their respective states. Campers were between
the ages of 6 and 17 (with instruments for 6 to 10 and 11 to 17). Participants in these camps
perceived gains in independence, competence, responsibility, friendship, and teamwork; their
scores were at or above national norms for all areas except friendship skills. The majority of
campers indicated that attending camp reduced their stress. Those who reported a reduction in
stress also reported greater improvements in friendship skills, independence, competence,
responsibility, and teamwork. Among older youth, Marek et al. (2011, 2013) found that females
reported more positive changes than male campers.
Through a deployment support camp grant to 4-H in 2011, Hill and Francis (2014) conducted
several camps in the state of Utah. They targeted areas of the state with high deployment
rates. The camps emphasized communication, self-efficacy, competence, relationships, and
resilience. They found that 100% of campers said they would return if the camp were offered in
future years. As with the Marek et al. (2011, 2013) studies, Hill and Francis used the ACA Youth
Outcomes Battery. Their results mirrored those obtained by Marek et al. (2011, 2013).
Le (2014) reported on military teen adventure camps conducted in Colorado and Hawaii where
the participants were between the ages of 13 and 18. Camps used a mindfulness curriculum
that was embedded into camp activities. The mindfulness activities were ranked as the most
useful in dealing with stress. The provision of free time was ranked by the majority of
participants as most useful in terms of helping to make new friends and form strong
connections. About one-third of participants indicated mindfulness and other activities were also
helpful for making friends. Teens were highly satisfied with their camp experience.
Overall, campers attending camps for military youth and their parents have been satisfied with
the camp experience and report positive effects of participation. A variety of measures have
been used to study the outcomes of interest. Most studies of camps were conducted at the
conclusion of the camp session and most collected data only from campers, with the exception
of the study of Operation Purple camps (Chandra et al., 2012). In this study, campers and
parents were surveyed at the beginning of camp, at the conclusion, and three months later.
The desire to learn more about the effects of camp participation on military youth motivated the
current study.
Relevant Theories
Resilience
The challenges presented by a parent’s deployment can place military youth at risk for negative
outcomes. Resilience theory can be useful for those who work with military youth, because the
36
goal is for them to be able to handle adversity and grow from their experience. Developing
resilience depends first on exposure to risk or adverse circumstances and then coping
successfully with the risk (Fergus, & Zimmerman, 2005; MacDermid, Samper, Schwarz, Nishida,
& Nyaronga, 2008). Another way to describe resilience is “good outcomes in spite of serious
threats” (Masten, 2001, p. 227). Authors emphasize that resilience is not a fixed trait; it is a
dynamic process and there are multiple paths to resilience (Fergus, & Zimmerman, 2005;
Masten, & Obradovic, 2006).
Resilience is affected by both internal and external factors (MacDermid Wadsworth, 2010;
MacDermid et al., 2008; Richardson, 2002). Fergus and Zimmerman (2005) categorize the
positive factors that promote resilience as
assets
and
resources
. Assets such as competence,
coping skills, and self-efficacy reside within the individual. Resources are external to the
individual and include parental support, adult mentoring, or community organizations that
promote positive youth development. These factors may interact in complex ways to foster
positive outcomes.
Like positive youth development, resilience is focused on strengths rather than deficits, with an
emphasis on positive development, resources, and understanding healthy development in spite
of risk exposure (Masten, 2014). Fergus and Zimmerman (2005) recommend a focus on
developing the assets and resources of youth exposed to risk. For instance, if youth are more
persistent, they may be more resilient when faced with challenges (Lucier-Greer et al., 2014).
Social interventions with peers and caring adults have proven to be the most successful in
building resilient assets in youth (MacDermid Wadsworth, 2010; MacDermid et al., 2008).
Camps can be considered one such resource, and thus hold promise as a context for supporting
resilience.
Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy theory provides another conceptual framework for this study. Authors suggest that
understanding how to foster self-efficacy is necessary in order to support and enhance military
youth’s ability to thrive in the face of adversity (Cozza, & Lerner, 2013). Self-efficacy is a
person’s belief in his or her capability to complete tasks (Bandura, 2006). A higher level of self-
efficacy can improve an individual’s ability to handle and adapt to challenging situations. Self-
efficacy is quite malleable, subject to influence from multiple sources of information. Bandura
(1997) identified four sources that influence the development of efficacious beliefs: mastery
experiences, vicarious experiences, verbal or social persuasion, and one’s emotional and
physiological state (see Figure 1). Self-efficacy is task specific, that is, one can have high
efficacy in one area, but have low self-efficacy in another. Therefore, researchers must define
the area of interest.
Research about self-
efficacy is extensive, but few studies have looked at self
setting, and no known studies have looked at military youth’s self
increasing military youth’s self-
efficacy for deployment
social skills, they will become more resilient in dealing with everyday issues and also with those
stressors unique to having a parent serving in the military.
The goal when working with military youth is to capitalize on their strengths and build
resilience, which aligns with the recommendation to use a strengths
2011). Camps provide the opportunity to meet others experiencing
particularly important in states where the military population is largely geographically dispersed
from any military installations. In 2012, OMK camps intentionally targeted four areas: self
efficacy, communication, coping, an
incorporated the targeted areas into the design of the camp program.
The youth participants in this study attended one of two five
in one of two states (Ohio and India
same age. The camps were staffed by teenage and young adult camp counselors under the
guidance of adult staff. The camps were offered for a low cost due to funding from grants and
donations. At
their respective camps, OMK camp directors used multiple opportunities to embed
the targeted skills into the design of the camp environment and the activities. Although the
activities differed, there were some common themes. Many activities were designed t
Sources of
Self-
Efficacy
Beliefs
37
Figure 1
Sources of Self-Efficacy
efficacy is extensive, but few studies have looked at self
-
efficacy in a camp
setting, and no known studies have looked at military youth’s self
-
efficacy. The belief is that by
efficacy for deployment
-
related communication, coping, and
social skills, they will become more resilient in dealing with everyday issues and also with those
stressors unique to having a parent serving in the military.
Study Context
The goal when working with military youth is to capitalize on their strengths and build
resilience, which aligns with the recommendation to use a strengths
-
based approach (Park,
2011). Camps provide the opportunity to meet others experiencing
a similar situation, which is
particularly important in states where the military population is largely geographically dispersed
from any military installations. In 2012, OMK camps intentionally targeted four areas: self
efficacy, communication, coping, an
d social skills. Camp directors could choose how they
incorporated the targeted areas into the design of the camp program.
The youth participants in this study attended one of two five
-day, four-
night residential camps
in one of two states (Ohio and India
na). Campers slept in cabins with 8 to 10 other youth of the
same age. The camps were staffed by teenage and young adult camp counselors under the
guidance of adult staff. The camps were offered for a low cost due to funding from grants and
their respective camps, OMK camp directors used multiple opportunities to embed
the targeted skills into the design of the camp environment and the activities. Although the
activities differed, there were some common themes. Many activities were designed t
Actual performance or
mastery experiences
Vicarious experiences
•
Comparisons with and
observation of others
Verbal or social
persuasion
•
Feedback from others
One’s emotional &
physiological state
•
Feelings about the tas
efficacy in a camp
efficacy. The belief is that by
related communication, coping, and
social skills, they will become more resilient in dealing with everyday issues and also with those
The goal when working with military youth is to capitalize on their strengths and build
based approach (Park,
a similar situation, which is
particularly important in states where the military population is largely geographically dispersed
from any military installations. In 2012, OMK camps intentionally targeted four areas: self
-
d social skills. Camp directors could choose how they
night residential camps
na). Campers slept in cabins with 8 to 10 other youth of the
same age. The camps were staffed by teenage and young adult camp counselors under the
guidance of adult staff. The camps were offered for a low cost due to funding from grants and
their respective camps, OMK camp directors used multiple opportunities to embed
the targeted skills into the design of the camp environment and the activities. Although the
activities differed, there were some common themes. Many activities were designed t
o facilitate
Actual performance or
mastery experiences
Vicarious experiences
Comparisons with and
observation of others
Verbal or social
persuasion
Feedback from others
One’s emotional &
physiological state
Feelings about the tas
k
38
teamwork and cohesion. For example, as a way to enhance teamwork (i.e., social skills),
various icebreakers and teambuilding activities were part of the opening day of camp. These
fun activities were designed to create a welcoming environment that facilitates immediate
belonging to the camp community.
Other activities were specific to the military audience, such as devoting a portion of the
program for military service personnel from different branches of service to have a structured
time to interact with the campers. This aspect of the program was designed to communicate
about military values and instill pride in being a military kid. Some aspects of military culture
were more subtle such as service members teaching about flag reveille and retreat and staffing
an operations tent that served as a hub for supplies and communications, much like its military
counterpart.
Many of the activities also offered a degree of novelty and challenge, such as water activities on
the lake. By placing campers in situations where they are tackling challenging activities and
living and working with others, the camp experience promotes a sense of accomplishment and
fosters the development of responsibility, adaptation to change, cooperation, and self-efficacy.
Other activities on the schedule would be considered typical camp activities, such as crafts and
campfires. These activities, along with everyday activities such as mealtimes and cabin time, are
times when campers experience camp traditions, have fun, and develop connections to each
other.
Methodology
The purpose of this study was to determine to what extent military youth who attended
deployment support camps reported greater self-efficacy regarding their ability to:
1. Communicate about being a military child,
2. Cope with obstacles related to being in a military family, and
3. Handle the social aspects of their life.
Participants
The participants were military youth (
n
= 35) who attended one of the 2012 OMK camps
offered in two states (Indiana and Ohio) and their parents or guardians (
n
= 48), for a 20%
and 27% response rate, respectively (see Table 1).
Table 1
Camper and Parent Participants by Location
Total Number
of
Camp Participants
Campers
Parents
Indiana (
N
= 43)
n
= 13
(30%)
n
= 12
(28%)
Ohio (
N
= 133)
n
= 22
(17%)
n
= 36
(28%)
Total (
N
= 176)
n
= 35
(20%)
n
= 48
(27%)
39
The campers ranged in age from 9 to 15, with 12 being the average age of respondents; 60%
of campers were female. Approximately half (51%) were first-year campers; an additional 20%
had attended camp for two years. The remainder of campers had participated between three
and seven years. Approximately one in three campers (29%) had experienced one deployment.
One quarter (26%) had experienced four or more deployments. Although all branches were
represented, half of the campers (49%) were connected to a service member in the Army
National Guard. For the majority of campers (77%), their father was the service member; a few
had an older sibling and a few were from dual-service member families.
Instrumentation
We created a self-efficacy instrument for military youth because self-efficacy is task specific and
no existing instruments were available to measure the concepts of interest (Clary, 2013). In
addition to demographic questions, the instrument contained items regarding deployment-
related communication, coping, and social skills.
Communication.
Communication self-efficacy (11 items) included being able to express
feelings, and the ability to explain to others including parents, peers, and the public about
deployment.
Coping.
Coping self-efficacy (11 items) included their ability to handle added responsibilities
while a parent is deployed, to understand the stress related to not knowing what their deployed
parent is facing, to cope without having the added support of the deployed parent, and to
successfully seek out support.
Social.
The social self-efficacy (17 items) items included aspects of feeling more connected to
other military youth, the ability to discuss with friends what youth are going through, feeling
part of a group, and the ability to make new friends.
We developed the items for the military self-efficacy scales based upon Bandura’s (2006)
Guide
for Constructing Self-Efficacy Scales.
Bandura (2006) recommended a 100-point response scale,
but the instrument for this youth population used an 11-point scale as recommended by Muris
(2001). There were two parallel forms, one for youth and one for parents. The scale for all
items was 0 –
not confident,
5 –
moderately confident,
10 –
highly confident.
Reliability
coefficients ranged from .87 to .97 (see Table 2). These scores fall within the good to excellent
range (George, & Mallery, 2003).
Table 2
Reliability Coefficients for Self-Efficacy Scales
Self
-
Efficacy
Scale
Number of
Items
Campers
Parents
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Communication
11
.87
.97
.93
.96
Social
17
.90
.96
.96
.96
Coping
11
.94
.97
.93
.96
The instrument format was a retrospective post-then-pre, which allows for comparisons but
avoids response shift bias (Marshall, Higginbotham, Harris, & Lee, 2007; Pratt, McGuigan, &
Katzev, 2000). We also asked several open-ended questions to gain further insight into
perceptions of camp participation and its influence on the aforementioned skills.
40
Data Collection
We surveyed participants approximately three months after camp. To collect data we used a
modified version of Dillman’s (2000) Tailored Design Method. Data were collected using the
Qualtrics web-based survey software. Research shows that self-report paper-and-pencil and
Internet data collection methods are generally equivalent (Weigold, Weigold, & Russell, 2013).
Data Analysis
After running descriptive statistics, paired
t
-tests between the post and pretest were conducted
for both respondent groups. We reviewed open-ended responses for major themes and
representative quotes that would give more meaning to the quantitative analysis.
Results
We computed means for each self-efficacy item and computed the difference between post and
pre scores. Then we conducted paired
t
-tests of the difference pre and post self-efficacy scores
for both campers and parents. There were significant differences for campers across all but
seven items, two each in communication and social skills, and three in coping. The paired
t
-tests for parents showed that all items were statistically significant. We also reviewed the
findings to determine specific areas with the greatest increase in self-efficacy from pre to post
and areas with the least increase.
Communication
In the area of communication self-efficacy campers’ pre means ranged from 4.97 to 7.20,
whereas post means ranged from 6.11 to 9.65. Parents rated their child’s communication self-
efficacy items from 6.13 to 7.62 at pre and 7.73 to 9.51 at post. Both campers and parents
indicated self-efficacy was highest for pride in being from a military family. Youth also
experienced the greatest increase in self-efficacy for this item. The differences between post
and pre were significant for all items for parents and all but two items for campers. All items
were at least assessed at a moderate level of self-efficacy at post. There were very few items
with a mean below 7.00. Items with the lowest self-efficacy were talking to someone they just
met and to community members. Table 3 displays these results for campers and parents for all
three areas.
41
Table 3
Communication Self-Efficacy: Comparison of Post and Pre Means for Campers and
Parents
Campers
Parents
M
Post
M
Pre
Differe
nce
M
Post
M
Pre
Difference
Tell others about reasons for pride in being
from a military family
9.65
6.68
2.97***
9.51
7.62
1.89***
Tell parents when wanting them to be more
involved in activities
8.66
7.20
1.46*
9.23
7.54
1.69***
Talk to parents about feelings related to
deployment
8.24
6.62
1.68**
9.02
7.25
1.77***
Talk to a friend when I am worried about
my military family member
7.68
6.00
1.68*
8.28
6.57
1.72***
Talk to
an adult when worried about family
member who is in the military
7.55
6.64
0.91
8.87
7.09
1.79***
Talk to friends about feelings related to
deployment
7.48
5.64
1.85*
8.34
6.53
1.81***
Explain to community members what it
means to be a military youth
7.26
5.23
2.03***
8.17
6.38
1.79***
Talk to teachers about being from a military
family
7.11
5.79
1.32
8.04
6.60
1.45***
Tell friends about what I don’t like about
being from a military family
7.09
5.50
1.59*
8.09
7.00
1.09**
Talk with someone just met
about what it’s
like to be a youth in a military family
6.94
5.44
1.50*
7.73
6.31
1.42***
Explain to community members feelings
about deployment
6.11
4.97
1.14*
7.92
6.13
1.79***
Grand
M
1.64
1.65
*
p
<.05 **
p
<.01 ***
p
<.001
Coping
Campers coping self-efficacy ranged from 4.94 to 7.31 for pre scores, with a range of 6.58 to
8.85 for post scores (Table 4). Parents rated their child’s coping self-efficacy items from 5.58 to
7.60 at pre, increasing at post to 6.96 to 8.83. Both campers and parents indicated self-efficacy
was highest for handling responsibilities and accepting that the deployed family member will
miss important events. Handling responsibilities had the greatest increase. The differences
between post and pre were significant for all items for parents and all but three items for
campers. All ratings were at least a moderate level of self-efficacy; there were very few items
with a mean below 7.00. Items with the lowest self-efficacy for campers were getting others to
take an interest and according to parents was their child giving themselves a pep talk. Both also
rated asking for help when stressed relatively low.
42
Table 4
Coping Self-Efficacy
Campers
Parents
M
Post
M
Pre
Differ
ence
M
Post
M
Pre
Differe
nce
Handle added
responsibilities such as chores
at home when military family member is
away from home
8.85
7.06
1.79**
8.60
6.56
2.04***
Accept that deployed family member will miss
events that are important to me
8.49
7.31
1.17*
8.83
6.80
2.02***
Understand what cannot
be controlled when
it comes to being part of a military family
8.37
6.89
1.49**
7.68
6.23
1.45***
Control feelings when worried about military
family member
8.24
6.79
1.46**
8.00
6.11
1.89***
Understand what can be controlled when it
comes to being part of a military family
8.24
6.88
1.35**
7.75
6.13
1.63***
Control feelings when worried about military
family member being deployed
8.38
7.03
1.34*
7.54
6.06
1.48***
Find a family member to help with a problem
8.34
7.13
1.22*
8.87
7.60
1.28***
Succeed in getting rid of unhappy or bad
thoughts about family member being
deployed
8.12
7.12
1.00*
7.19
5.98
1.21***
Succeed in not worrying about how things will
change when family member returns from
deployment
8.03
6.97
1.06*
7.40
6.31
1.08***
Succeed in becoming calm again when very
scared
7.97
6.52
1.46**
7.38
6.13
1.25***
Succeed in not worrying about things that
might happen because of deployment
7.82
6.53
1.29*
7.19
5.98
1.21***
Prevent self from becoming nervous
7.68
6.26
1.41**
7.10
6.04
1.06***
Succeed in not worrying about how things will
change during a deployment
7.56
6.71
0.85
7.27
6.06
1.21***
Give self a pep talk when feeling low
7.44
6.66
0.78
6.96
5.77
1.19***
Find an adult to help with a problem
7.41
6.29
1.12*
8.36
6.89
1.47***
Ask for help when feeling stressed because of
deployment
7.13
6.24
0.88
7.13
5.85
1.27***
Get people from community to take an
interest in things involved in
6.58
4.94
1.64**
7.33
6.17
1.17***
Grand
M
1.57
1.57
*
p
<.05 **
p
<.01 ***
p
<.001
Social
For social self-efficacy, campers ranged from pre scores of 4.76 to 7.88 and 6.53 to 9.54 for
post values (Table 5). Parents rated social self-efficacy items before camp from 6.34 to 8.28,
whereas the post camp scores ranged from 7.69 to 9.74. Both campers and parents indicated
self-efficacy was highest for working well with others in their age group and for making friends
with other military youth. These items also had the greatest increase from pre to post. Only one
43
item fell below a mean of 7.00. Campers indicated the lowest self-efficacy for talking to
someone they don’t know well.
Table 5
Social Self-Efficacy
Campers
Parents
M
Post
M
Pre
Differe
nce
M
Post
M
Pre
Differe
nce
Work well in a group of people of own age
9.54
7.71
2.34***
9.74
8.06
1.68***
Make and keep friends of the same sex
--
--
--
9.49
8.28
1.21***
Make friends with other military youth
9.46
7.11
2.34***
9.30
6.64
2.66***
Succeed in staying friends with other
military youth
9.11
6.71
2.40***
8.47
6.34
2.13***
Make and keep friends who are boys
8.88
7.18
1.71***
---
--
--
Talk with friends about being part of a
military family
8.84
6.74
1.80***
9.13
7.02
2.10***
Make and keep friends who are girls
8.74
7.88
0.85
---
--
--
Make and keep friends of the
opposite sex
--
--
--
8.47
7.53
1.21***
Find a friend to help when I am having
problems with other friends
8.46
7.37
1.09**
8.44
7.04
1.37***
Find adults to help when having trouble
with friends
7.89
6.31
1.57**
8.65
7.23
1.42***
Stay connected to
other military youth
7.89
6.69
1.20*
8.21
6.55
1.66***
Succeed in preventing arguments with
people of own age
7.15
6.44
0.71
8.24
7.53
1.21***
Talk to a person who don’t know well
6.53
4.76
1.77**
7.69
6.75
0.094**
Grand
M
1.25
1.41
*
p
<.05 **
p
<.01 ***
p
<.001
Greatest Benefits of Attending Camp
Open-ended responses overwhelmingly supported that making new friends and seeing friends
from previous years were the greatest benefits of attending camp. Both campers and parents
mentioned elements of connection, communication, and coping. Parents also noted more
general benefits, such as independence, that come from attending a camp. One parent’s
comment touched on many of the aspects examined in this study.
They understand they are not alone, that there are resources and people that
understand their situation and can help. They get to meet other kids just like them and
share similar feelings. They are filled with pride and know how special their soldiers are
to everyone. They learn how to communicate with others their feelings and fear.
44
Table 6 includes some representative quotes regarding camp benefits.
Table 6
Representative Responses Regarding Camp Benefits
Campers
Connection
The best thing about attending OMK is meeting the other kids who
understand what it’s like to have family in the military.
Connection
OMK has helped me feel more connected to other military youth, because
where I live there are no teens who have family in the military. So this is
great to be able to meet other people who also had family in the military.
Communication
I learned I am not the only one going through this, so I’m more able to
speak [about deployment and being from a military family].
Communication/
Coping
I can talk to my parents about other things pertaining to deployment.
Connection/
Social
OMK camp helped me by helping me get to know someone I did not know
for my whole life. It has helped me by working together with a person you
don’t even like, but by the end of the day, I have gotten to know the person
more and started making new friends to be able to talk about being in a
military family.
Parents
Connection
It is our ONLY opportunity to get together with military youth. Our [f
amily
readiness group] is located over an hour away and our company is spread
throughout the state. This makes spending time with other [military] youth
difficult. Camps offer us that connection.
Connection/
Coping/
Independence
She made good friends and
her separation anxiety has gotten much better.
She was really nervous about going to camp, but the staff and her friends
have made her really comfortable.
Fun/Coping
The best part was the high adventure activities, it showed her how well she
can do, and that she can take risks and enjoy the outcomes.
Contribution
I’ve seen him grow up through several years of camp, from the first year
when he was nervous about what it would be like, to now, when he would
like to volunteer as a counselor when he’s too old to attend [as a camper].
Discussion
This study explored the extent to which participation in OMK camps affected military youth’s
self-efficacy for communication, coping, and social skills. As the research on camps for military
youth is relatively limited, the present study extended the literature by examining the outcomes
of participation in a camp program designed to meet their unique needs. Because no known
studies of military youth self-efficacy were found, an instrument was created to examine self-
efficacy for issues related to deployment. Both youth and parent perspectives were studied,
which addresses the need for multiple informants (Park, 2011).
Overall, military youth campers and their parents felt that attending a camp made a positive
impact on campers’ self-efficacy for communication, coping, and social skills as they related to
deployment. Some items increased two or more points (on an 11-point scale). Campers and
parents both perceived the highest mean increase to be in youth’s self-efficacy for
communication skills. An increase in communication skills is a finding that aligns with past
45
research on military youth’s camp participation (Chandra et al., 2012). Communication skills
enable children to communicate about their deployment experiences (Lara-Cinisomo et al.,
2013; Lester et al., 2011). Communication is critical when new roles and relationships are
negotiated, which occurs during deployment and reintegration. The camp setting provides
multiple opportunities to communicate with peers.
Another area of increase reported by both campers and parents was self-efficacy for making
and keeping friends. Likewise, they thought that the overwhelming benefit of attending camp
was the connections they built with others who understood them, a phenomenon referred to as
“linked lives” (Easterbrooks et al., 2013). The majority of the camp participants were from
National Guard or Reserve families, who have limited opportunities to interact with other
military youth, and attending camp provided a means to meet others who share their military
family experience. Maternal support has been shown to be a protective factor for adjustment
for youth in military families (Morris, & Age, 2009), and it is reasonable to assume that peers
may also be a resource for support. Our results align with others who have noted the positive
impact of the social connectedness youth feel with other military youth (Chandra et al., 2011;
Easterbrooks et al., 2013; Ferrari, & Leonard, 2007; Huebne & Mancini, 2005; Mmari,
Bradshaw, Sudhinaraset, & Blum, 2010). This sense of belonging also occurs in other camps
with condition-specific audiences (Roberson, 2010). Connections are an important part of
building resilience (Easterbrooks et al., 2013; Ginsburg & Jablow, 2011), which is a goal when
working with military youth.
As well, making new friends is a common theme found in camp research (American Camp
Association, 2005; Arnold et al., 2005; Bialeschki, Henderson, & James, 2007; Garst & Bruce,
2003; Garst et al., 2011). This is important because studies have shown that friendships have
the potential to serve as protection against difficulties that result from negative experiences
(Adams, Santo, & Bukowski, 2011). Youth benefit from talking with those who can relate to the
challenges they are experiencing (Easterbrooks et al., 2013; Houston et al., 2009; Wilson,
Wilkum, Chernichky, MacDermid Wadsworth, & Broniarczyk, 2011). When they have developed
connections with others who share a similar situation such as deployment, they achieve a
common bond and social support. Friends can promote resilience by sharing resources and
modeling positive coping strategies (Easterbrooks et al., 2013). Exposure to “similar others” is a
camp feature that normalizes one’s experience (Gillard & Watts, 2013, p. 895). As Gillard et al.
(2011) have noted, the unstructured and informal interactions that are built into the camp
setting provide an ideal environment for developing positive relationships.
Parents perceived significant increases in self-efficacy for their campers. This finding is
consistent with positive changes documented in other studies of camps for military youth
(Chandra et al., 2012), 4-H camps (Garst & Bruce, 2003); and camps in general (Henderson et
al., 2007). Likewise, parents also described qualitatively some changes they saw in campers.
All scores for self-efficacy were in the moderate to high range at post-camp. The areas of lower
self-efficacy were those that involved campers dealing with people whom were not directly part
of the camp experience or were unfamiliar to them, such as teachers and community members.
These areas were not emphasized in the camp program because the focus was on making
connections with other youth. Other researchers have noted that military youth are often more
comfortable sharing with other military youth (Knobloch et al., 2015; Mmari et al., 2009).
The findings of enhanced self-efficacy demonstrate that despite the challenges of deployment,
positive outcomes may result. Others have also identified positive changes and opportunities
from a deployment. Both youth and adults reported strengthened relationships and family
46
cohesion (Knobloch et al., 2015; Knobloch & Theiss, 2012) and increased independence and
autonomy (Castenada et al., 2008; Knobloch et al., 2015; Knobloch & Theiss, 2012; Mmari et
al., 2009) as a result of deployment. Because self-efficacy influences whether individuals
undertake and persist in challenging tasks, promoting self-efficacy can be an asset for
overcoming the challenges associated with deployment.
Limitations
With any study, it is important to note limitations. The low response rate limits the
generalizability of these findings. Rather than surveying participants at the conclusion of the
camp experience, we wanted to allow time for observing sustained effects of camp
participation. However, the three-month gap between the end of camp and the survey period
likely contributed to this lower response rate. Also, it is possible that those who did not
experience changes did not complete the survey. Those who did respond could have done so in
a socially desirable manner. Another limitation was using a new instrument. We developed a
new instrument because there was no existing instrument to study the area of interest. We
followed Bandura’s (2006) recommendations for creating self-efficacy instruments to ensure
that it was theoretically sound. Our 11-point response scale (Muris, 2001) captured more
variation than those with a smaller number of responses, which in the past has been thought to
contribute to a ceiling effect (Henderson et al., 2007). However, the number of responses was
not sufficient to allow us to conduct factor analysis or to explore demographic comparisons.
Therefore, the results of this study should be considered exploratory.
Recommendations
We recommend that future research address the following considerations.
1. Take steps to increase the number of respondents such as direct contact with
participants and offering incentives for participation.
2. Continue to be informed by multiple perspectives and use a mixed-methods approach.
3. Analyze data for potential differences based on camper demographics.
4. Follow up with participants after camp by conducting focus groups or interviews to
obtain rich descriptions of outcomes.
5. Explore the program features and aspects of the camp experience that lead to the
identified outcomes.
Authors have noted the importance of incorporating research about military families into
support programs as they are developed and implemented (Lara-Cinisomo et al., 2013). Taking
into account the results of this study and recommendations shared by Pajares (2006), we
suggest that camp directors strive to create an environment conducive to enhancing self-
efficacy development, which we have summarized in Table 7. These recommendations are also
very much in tune with what has been suggested to enhance resilience.
47
Table 7
Creating a Camp Environment Conducive to Enhancing Self-Efficacy:
Connecting Recommendations to Theory
Sources of Self
-
Efficacy
Ways of Accomplishing
Mastery Experiences
• Provide activities that are novel (activities they may not otherwise
try) and challenging.
• Start out small and build up to more challenging activities or tasks.
A task should be “hard enough that it energizes, not so hard that it
paralyzes” (Pajares, 2006, p. 344).
• Provide multiple opportunities where campers develop
independence and responsibility.
• Emphasize skill development (improving) rather than self-
enhancement (proving).
Vicarious Experiences
• Bring together youth who are experiencing similar situations who
can learn from each other.
• Capitalize on the power of role models.
o Recruit military youth as camp counselors, especially those
who have aged out of attending camp as a camper, as they
can relate to situations faced by military youth.
o Involve service members as role models who can cultivate
pride in military service.
Verbal or Social
Persuasion
• Provide encouragement from peers and adults to persist in
overcoming challenges.
• Provide counselors and staff with talking points they can use to
talk to campers during teachable moments (e.g., emphasizing
persistence and effort).
Individual’s Reactions
(Physiological &
Psychological State)
• Create a safe environment where campers are comfortable
interacting with new people.
• Create a welcoming environment that facilitates belonging and
connectedness.
• Promote an optimistic, can-do attitude.
• Leverage fun and enjoyment to foster engagement and positive
emotions (Morgan, Sibthorp, & Wells, 2014).
Conclusion
Camps are one way to provide programming that is consistent with recommendations calling for
programs to enhance the well-being of military families (Ames et al., 2011; Ferrari, 2005; The
White House, 2011). We are encouraged that participation in these camps produced positive
results. These findings offer support for continued use of camps to address the needs of
military youth. They may also be useful to those working with other special populations in the
camp setting.
Acknowledgments: Earlier versions of this paper were shared at the American Camp Association Camp
Research Forum in Orlando, FL; the 4
th
International Conference on Health, Wellness, and Society in
Vancouver, British Columbia; the National Association of Extension 4-H Agents annual conference in
Minneapolis, MN; and the National 4-H Camping and Environmental Education Institute held at Rock
Eagle 4-H Center, Georgia.
48
References
Adams, R.E., Santo, J.B., & Bukowski, W.M. (2011). The presence of a best friend buffers the
effects of negative experiences.
Developmental Psychology, 47
(6), 1786-1991
.
doi:
10.1037/a0025401
American Camp Association (ACA). (2005).
Directions: Youth development outcomes of the
camp experience.
Martinsville, IN: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.acacamps.org/sites/default/files/images/research/directions.pdf
Ames, B., Smith, S., Holtrop, K., Blow, A., Hamel, J., MacInnes, M., & Onaga, E. (2011).
Meeting the needs of National Guard and Reserve families: The vital role of Extension.
Journal
of Extension, 49
(5), Article 5FEA7. Retrieved from http://www.joe.org/joe/2011october/a7.php
Arnold, M.E., Bourdeau, V.D., & Nagele, J. (2005). Fun and friendship in the natural world: The
impact of Oregon 4-H residential camp programs on girl and boy campers.
Journal of Extension
,
43
(6), Article 6RIB1. Retrieved from http://www.joe.org/joe/2005december/rb1.php
Bailey, Q.S., Lang, S.N., Schoppe-Sullivan, S., & Ferrari, T.M. (2015).
Adolescent experiences
with Operation: Military Kids.
Poster presentation at the Denman Undergraduate Research
Forum, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
Bandura, A. (1997).
Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.
New York: W.H. Freeman and
Company.
Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. C. Urdan
(Eds.).
Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents
(pp. 307-337). Greenwich, CT: Information Age
Publishing. Retrieved from http://web.stanford.edu/dept/psychology/bandura/pajares/014-
BanduraGuide2006.pdf
Barker, L.H., & Berry, K.D. (2009). Developmental issues impacting military families with young
children during single and multiple deployments.
Military Medicine, 174
(10) 1033-1040.
Baughman, S., Garst, B.A ., & Fuhrman, N.E. (2009). Consistency of developmental outcomes
of 4-H camp experiences over time and across sites.
Journal of Youth Development, 4
(2),
Article 090402 FA002. Retrieved from http://www.journalofyouthdevelopment.org/
Bialeschki, M.D., Henderson, K.A., & James, P.A. (2007). Camp experiences and developmental
outcomes for youth.
Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America
,
16
(4), 769-788.
Bowling, U.B., & Sherman, M.D. (2008). Welcoming them home: Supporting service members
and their families in navigating the tasks of reintegration.
Professional Psychology: Research
and Practice, 39,
451–458.
Card, N.A., Bosch, L., Casper, D.M., Wiggs, C.B., Hawkins, S.A., Schlomer, G.L., & Borden, L.M.
(2011). A meta-analytic review of internalizing, externalizing, and academic adjustment among
children of deployed military service members.
Journal of Family Psychology.
doi:
10.1037/a0024395
49
Castenada, L.W., Harrell, M.C., Varda, D.M., Hall, K.C., Beckett, M.K., & Stern, S. (2008).
Deployment experiences of Guard and Reserve families: Implications for support and retention.
Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG645.html
Chandra, A., Lara-Cinisomo, S., Burns, R.M., & Griffin, B.A. (2012).
Assessing Operation Purple:
A program evaluation of a summer camp for military youth.
Santa Monica, CA: RAND
Corporation. Available from http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR1243.html
Chandra, A., Lara-Cinisomo, S., Jaycox, L.H., Tanielian, T., Han, B., Burns, R.M., & Ruder, T.
(2011).
Views from the homefront: The experiences of youth and spouses from military
families.
Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Retrieved from
http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/technical_reports/2011/RAND_TR913.pdf
Chandra, A., Martin, L.T., Hawkins, S.A., & Richardson, A. (2010). The impact of parental
deployment on child social and emotional functioning: Perspectives of school staff.
Journal of
Adolescent Health, 46,
218-223. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.10.009
Clary, C.D. (2013).
Impact of Operation: Military Kids residential camping programs on military
youth's self-efficacy toward military related resiliency skills.
Unpublished master’s thesis, Purdue
University, West Lafayette, IN.
Conrad, A.K., & Altmaier, E.M. (2009). Specialized summer camp for children with cancer: Social
support and adjustment.
Journal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing, 26
(3), 150-157.
Cozza, S.J., & Lerner, R.M. (2013). Military children and families: Introducing the issue. In
Princeton University and Brookings Institution (Ed.),
Military children and families, 23
(2), 3-11.
Retrieved from http://futureofchildren.org
Creed, J., Ruffin, J.E., & Ward, M. (2001). A weekend camp for bereaved siblings.
Cancer
Practice, 9
(4), 176-182.
Department of Defense (DoD). (2010).
Report on the impact of deployment of members of the
armed forces on their dependent children.
Retrieved from
http://www.militaryonesource.mil/12038/MOS/Reports/Report_to_Congress_on_Impact_of_Dep
loyment_on_Military_Children.pdf
Dillman, D.A. (2000).
Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method
(2nd ed.). New
York: John Wiley & Sons.
Drummet, A.R., Coleman, M., & Cable, S. (2003). Military families under stress: Implications for
family life education.
Family Relations, 52,
279-287. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2003.00279.x
Easterbrooks, M.A., Ginsburg, K., & Lerner, R.M. (2013). Resilience among military youth. In
Princeton University and Brookings Institution (Ed.),
Military children and families, 23
(2), 99-
120. Retrieved from http://futureofchildren.org
Fergus, S., & Zimmerman, M.A. (2005). Adolescent resilience: A framework for understanding
healthy development in the face of risk.
Annual Review of Public Health, 26,
399-419.
50
Ferrari, T.M. (2005). Extension’s response to an un-natural disaster: Enlisting your support for
military youth and families.
Journal of Extension, 43
(4), Article 4COM1. Retrieved from
http://www.joe.org/joe/2005august/comm1.php
Ferrari, T.M., & Leonard, D. (2007, October).
Coping with deployment: Can a camp for military
youth make a difference?
Presentation at the National Association of Extension 4-H Agents
annual conference, Atlanta, GA. Retrieved from
http://georgia4h.org/nae4ha2007/agenda/Proceedings.pdf
Flake, E.M., Davis, B.E., Johnson, P.L., & Middleton, L.S. (2009). The psychosocial effects of
deployment on military children.
Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 30
(4),
271-278. doi: 10.1097/DBP.0b013e3181aac6e4
Garst, B.A., Browne, L.P., & Bialeschki, M.D. (2011). Youth development and the camp
experience.
New Directions for Youth Development, 130,
73-87. doi: 10.1002/yd.398
Garst, B.A., & Bruce, F.A. (2003). Identifying 4-H camping outcomes using a standardized
evaluation process across multiple 4-H educational centers.
Journal of Extension
,
41
(3), Article
3RIB2. Retrieved from http://www.joe.org/joe/2003june/rb2.php
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003).
SPSS for Windows step by step. A simple guide and reference.
11.0 update
(4
th
ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Gillard, A., & Watts, C.E. (2013). Program features and developmental experiences at a camp
for youth with cancer.
Children and Youth Services Review, 35,
890-898.
Gillard, A., Witt, P.A., & Watts, C.E. (2011). Outcomes and processes at a camp for youth with
HIV/AIDS.
Qualitative Health Research, 21
(11), 1508-1526. doi: 10.1177/1049732311413907
Ginsburg, K.R., & Jablow, M.M. (2011).
Building resilience in children and teens: Giving kids
roots and wings
(2nd ed.). Elk Grove Village, IL: American Academy of Pediatrics.
Gorman, G.H., Eide, M., & Hisle-Gorman, E. (2010). Wartime military deployment and increased
pediatric mental and behavioral health complaints.
Pediatrics, 126,
1058-1066. doi:
10.1542/peds.2009-2856
Henderson, K.A., Whitaker, L.S., Bialeschki, M.D., Scanlin, M.M., & Thurber, C. (2007). Summer
camp experiences: Parental perceptions of youth development
. Journal of Family Issues, 28
(8),
987-1007. doi: 10.1177/0192513X07301428
Hill, P.A., & Francis, D.W. (2014). Responding to the needs of geographically dispersed military
youth.
Journal of Extension,
52(2), Article 2FEA4. Retrieved from
http://www.joe.org/joe/2014april/a4.php
Holbein, C.E., Murray, C.B., Psihogoios, A.M., Wasserman, R.M., Essner, B.S., O’Hara, L.K., &
Holmbeck, G.N. (2013). A camp-based psychosocial intervention to promote independence and
social function in individuals with spina bifida: Moderators of treatment effectiveness.
Journal of
Pediatric Psychology, 38
(4), 412-424.
51
Houston, J.B., Pfefferbaum, B., Sherman, M.D., Melson, A.G., Jeon-Slaughter, H., Brand, M.W.,
& Jarman, Y. (2009). Children of deployed National Guard troops: Perceptions of parental
deployment to Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Psychiatric Annals, 39,
805–811.
Huebner, A.J., & Mancini, J.A. (2005).
Adjustment among adolescents in military families when
a parent is deployed.
A final report submitted to the Military Family Research Institute and the
Department of Defense Quality of Life Office. Falls Church, VA: Virginia Tech, Department of
Human Development. Retrieved from
https://www.mfri.purdue.edu/resources/public/reports/Adjustments%20Among%20Adolescents
.pdf
Huebner, A.J., & Mancini, J.A. (2010).
Resilience and vulnerability: The deployment experiences
of youth in military families.
Final report submitted to the Army Child, Youth and School
Services, and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture. Retrieved from
https://spock.fcs.uga.edu/cfd/docs/resilience_and_vulnerability.pdf
Huebner, A.J., Mancini, J.A., Bowen, G.L., & Orthner, D.K. (2009). Shadowed by war: Building
community capacity to support military families.
Family Relations, 58
(2), 216-228. doi:
10.1111/j.1741-3729.2008.00548.x
Knobloch, L.K., Pusateri, K.B., Ebata, A.T., & McGlaughlin, P.C. (2015). Experiences of military
youth during a family member’s deployment: Changes, challenges, and opportunities.
Youth &
Society,
47
(3), 319-334. doi: 10.1177/0044118X12462040
Knobloch, L.K., & Theiss, J.A. (2012). Experiences of U.S. military couples during the post-
deployment transition: Applying the relational turbulence model.
Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships, 29
(4), 423-450. doi: 10.1177/0265407511431186
Lara-Cinisomo, S., Chandra, A., Burns, R.M., & Lau, J. (2013). Recommendations for counselors
and community service providers working with military families.
Primary Health Care, 3
(1), 139.
doi: 10.4172/2167-1079.1000139
Le, T.N., (2014). Mindfulness-based adventure camp for military youth.
Journal of Extension
,
52
(2), Article 2FEA5. Retrieved from http://www.joe.org/joe/2014april/a5.php
Lester, P., Leskin, G., Woodward, K., Saltzman, W., Nash, W., Mogil, C., Paley, B., & Beardslee,
W. (2011).Wartime deployment and military children: Applying prevention science to enhance
military family resilience. In S. MacDermid Wadsworth & D. Riggs (Eds.),
Risk and resilience in
U.S. military families
(pp. 149–173). New York, NY: Springer.
Lester, P., Peterson, K., Reeves, J., Knauss, L., Glover, D., Mogil, C., Duan, N., Saltzman, W.,
Pynoos, R., Wilt, K., & Beardslee, W. (2010). The long war and parental combat deployment:
Effects on military children and at-home spouses.
Journal of the American Academy of Child and
Adolescent Psychiatry, 49
(4), 310-320.
Lucier-Greer, M., O’Neal, C.W., Arnold, A.L., Mancini, J.A., & Wickrama, K.K.A.S. (2014).
Adolescent mental health and academic functioning: Empirical support for contrasting models of
risk and vulnerability.
Military Medicine, 179
(11), 1279-1287. doi: 10.7205/MILMED-D-14-00090
52
MacDermid Wadsworth, S.M. (2010). Family risk and resilience in the context of war and
terrorism.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 72
, 537-556. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00717.x
MacDermid, S.M., Samper, R., Schwarz, R., Nishida, J., & Nyaronga, D. (2008).
Understanding
and promoting resilience in military families.
West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University, Military
Family Research Institute.
Marek, L., Hollingsworth, G., Zhang, J., & Brock, D.J. (2011).
2011 OSD/OMK camp report:
Building resiliency in military youth.
Blacksburg, VA Virginia Tech, Family & Community
Research Laboratory.
Marek, L.I., O’Rourke, K., & Moore, L. (2013). 2
013 OSD-DOD summer camps: Building
resiliency in military youth.
Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Tech.
Marshall, J.P., Higginbotham, B.J., Harris, V.W., & Lee, T.R. (2007). Assessing program
outcomes: Rationale and benefits of posttest-than-retrospective pretest designs.
Journal of
Youth Development, 2
(1), Article 0701RS001. Retrieved from
http://www.journalofyouthdevelopment.org/
Martiniuk, A.L.C. (2003). Camping programs for children with cancer and their families.
Support
Care Cancer, 11,
749-757. doi: 10.1007/s00520-003-0540-y
Masten, A.S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development.
American
Psychologist, 56
(3), 227-238. doi: 10.1037//0003-066X.56.3.227
Masten, A.S. (2014). Invited commentary: Resilience and positive youth development
frameworks in developmental science.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43
, 1018–1024. doi:
10.1007/s10964-014-0118-7
Masten, A.S., & Obradovic, J. (2006). Competence and resilience in development.
Annals of the
New York Academy of Sciences, 1094,
13–27. doi: 10.1196/annals.1376.003
Milburn, N.G., & Lightfoot, M. (2013). Adolescents in wartime US military families: A
developmental perspective on challenges and resources.
Clinical Child and Family Psychology
Review, 16,
266–277. doi: 10.1007/s10567-013-0144-0
Mmari, K.N., Bradshaw, C.P., Sudhinaraset, M., & Blum, R. (2010). Exploring the role of social
connectedness among military youth: Perceptions from youth, parents, and school personnel.
Child Youth Care Forum, 39
(5), 351-366. doi: 10.1007/s10566-010-9109-3
Mmari, K., Roche, K.M., Sudhinaraset, M., & Blum, R. (2009). When a parent goes off to war:
Exploring issues faced by adolescents and their families.
Youth & Society, 40
(4), 455-475. doi:
10.1177/0044118X08327873
Moola, F. J., Faulkner, G.E.J., White, L., & Kirsh, J.A. (2013). The psychological and social
impact of camp for children with chronic illnesses: A systematic review update.
Child: Care,
Health and Development, 40
(5), 615-631. doi:10.1111/cch.12114
53
Morgan, C., Sibthorp, J., & Wells, M.S. (2014). Fun, activities, and social context: Leveraging
key elements of recreation programs to foster self-regulation in youth.
Journal of Park and
Recreation Administration, 32
(3), 74-91
Morris, A.S., & Age, T.R. (2009). Adjustment among youth in military families: The protective
roles of effortful control and maternal social support.
Journal of Applied Developmental
Psychology, 30,
695–707. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2009.01.002
Muris, P. (2001). A brief questionnaire for measuring self-efficacy in youths
. Journal of
Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 23
(3), 145-149
Nabors, L., Ohms, M., Buchanan, N., Kirsh, K.L., Nash, T., Passik, S.D., Johnson, J.L., Snapp, J.,
& Brown, G. (2004). A pilot study of the impact of a grief camp for children.
Palliative and
Supportive Care, 2,
403-408. doi: 10.1017/S1478951504040532
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy during childhood and adolescence: Implications for teachers
and parents. In F. Pajares & T.C. Urdan (Eds.),
Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents
(pp. 339-
369). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Park, N. (2011). Military children and families: Strengths and challenges during peace and war.
American Psychologist, 66
(1), 65-72. doi: 10.1037/a0021249
Pfefferbaum, B., Houston, J.B., Sherman, M.D., & Melson, A.G. (2011). Children of National
Guard troops deployed in the Global War on Terrorism.
Journal of Loss and Trauma, 16,
291-
305. doi: 10.1080/15325024.2010.519293
Pratt, C.C., McGuigan, W.M., & Katzev, A.R. (2000). Measuring program outcomes: Using
retrospective pretest methodology.
American Journal of Evaluation, 21,
341-349.
Richardson, G.E. (2002). The metatheory of resilience and resiliency.
Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 5
8(3), 307-321.
Richardson, A., Chandra, A., Martin. L.T., Setodji, C.M., Hallmark, B.W., Campbell, N.F.,
Hawkins, S.A., & Grady, P. (2011).
Effects of soldiers’ deployment on children’s academic
performance and behavioral health.
Santa Monica, CA: Rand. Retrieved from:
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG1095.html
Roberson, S.G. (2010).Camp processes or mechanisms that bring about reports of social
support.
Therapeutic Recreation Journal, XLIV
(4), 255-269.
Thurber, C.A., Scanlin, M.M., Scheuler, L., & Henderson, K.A. (2007). Youth development
outcomes of the camp experience: Evidence for multidimensional growth.
Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 36
(3), 241-254.
The White House. (2011).
Strengthening our military families: Meeting America’s commitment.
Retrieved from
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/strengthening_our_military_families_
meeting_americas_commitment_january_2011.pdf
54
Weigold, A., Weigold, I.K., & Russell, E.J. (2013). Examination of the equivalence of self-report
survey-based paper-and-pencil and Internet data collection methods.
Psychological Methods,
18
(1), 53-70. doi: 10.1037/a0031607
Wilson, S.R., Wilkum, K., Chernichky, S.M., MacDermid Wadsworth, S.M., & Broniarczyk, K.M.
(2011). Passport Toward Success: Description and evaluation of a program designed to help
children and families reconnect after a military deployment.
Journal of Applied Communication
Research, 39
(3), 223-249. doi: 10.1080/00909882.2011.585399
© Copyright of Journal of Youth Development ~ Bridging Research and Practice. Content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without copyright holder’s express written
permission. Contact Editor at: patricia.dawson@oregonstate.edu for details. However, users may print,
download or email articles for individual use.
ISSN 2325-4009 (Print); ISSN 2325-4017 (Online)
55
Where PYD Meets CBPR:
A Photovoice Program for Latino Immigrant Youth
Elizabeth Andrade
Milken Institute School of Public Health
The George Washington University
Washington, DC
elandrade@gwu.edu
I.C. Cubilla
The George Washington University
Washington, DC
G. Sojo-Lara
The George Washington University
Washington, DC
S.D. Cleary
The George Washington University
Washington, DC
M.C. Edberg
The George Washington University
Washington, DC
L.K. Simmons
The George Washington University
Washington, DC
56
Volume 10, Number 2, Summer 2015 Article 151002FA003
Where PYD Meets CBPR:
A Photovoice Program for Latino Immigrant Youth
Elizabeth Andrade, E.L. Andrade, I.C. Cubilla, G. Sojo-Lara, S.D. Cleary,
M.C. Edberg and L.K. Simmons
The George Washington University
Abstract: Community engagement in identifying issues of
collective concern to address health disparities is an approach that is
central to conducting community-based participatory research. It is
particularly important for youth to be engaged in dialogue around
issues that affect their lives. Participation of this nature is
understood, within a Positive Youth Development (PYD) approach,
to be an element of primary prevention vis a vis health risks.
Photovoice has been an increasingly used methodology to enable
youth to identify and address issues relevant to their daily
experiences. We implemented a six-week Photovoice project guided
by a PYD approach with Latino immigrant youth (n=12) from
Langley Park, MD. This article describes the experiences of
facilitators in implementing the program, testing a new curriculum,
and also presents results related to changes in PYD assets among
participants. We also offer recommendations for future Photovoice
programs with similar populations and aims.
Introduction
Latinos are the largest ethnic minority group in the U.S., accounting for 16.9% of the total
population (US Census Bureau, 2012), thus a key population of focus with respect to addressing
health disparities. Over the past few decades, the Washington, DC area has been a major
destination for a number of immigrant groups, particularly from Central and South American
countries. According to the U.S. Census, between 2000 and 2010, the state of Maryland
experienced a 107% increase in Latino residents. The community of Langley Park, MD is a
burgeoning immigrant community outside of Washington, DC (pop. 20,675). Langley Park is
predominantly low-income and foreign-born (67.6%), with 79.7% of residents self-reporting as
Latino (US Census Bureau, 2012). Data collected in a recent study showed the national origins
of the foreign-born Latino population in Langley Park as primarily from El Salvador (46.53%),
57
Guatemala (32.86%), and Honduras (10.41%). The same study estimates that among foreign-
born Latinos ages 12-17, 66.33% have lived in the U.S. three years or less (Cleary, 2014),
which is consistent with a recent wave of unaccompanied minor immigrants from Central
America choosing Langley Park as their final destination. Latino youth, including those living in
Langley Park, experience numerous health disparities and elevated risk behaviors, one of which
is the co-occurrence of substance use, sexual risk, and interpersonal violence (Edberg et al.,
2009; Martinez Jr., 2006; Martinez, Eddy, & DeGarmo, 2003; Vega & Gil 1998). We
implemented a six-week Photovoice project guided by a Positive Youth Development (PYD)
approach with Latino immigrant youth from Langley Park, MD. This article describes the
experiences of facilitators in implementing the program, testing a new curriculum, and also
presents results related to changes in PYD assets among youth participants.
The Avance Center for the Advancement of Immigrant/Refugee Health (Avance Center) formed
a collaborative partnership with the community of Langley Park, MD to address health
disparities experienced by Latino immigrant youth and their families. Central to the work of the
Avance Center is the
Adelante
intervention, a community-based, multi-level PYD program that
addresses the co-occurrence of substance abuse, sexual risk and interpersonal violence among
Latino youth in Langley Park. The Avance Center’s key implementation partner is the Maryland
Multicultural Youth Center (MMYC). The overarching goal of
Adelante
is to build individual,
family and community assets -- Competence, Connection, Confidence, Contribution –
representing 4 of 6 key PYD constructs, referred to as “C’s” (Lerner, 2005; Silbereisen &
Lerner, 2007), and connections between these assets, as a mechanism for preventing youth risk
behavior. Recognizing the social-ecological nature of health problems, the
Adelante
intervention
is innovative, community-driven, and addresses multiple contributing factors for these health
disparities. The Photovoice pilot program described here is part of the
Adelante
intervention,
and is also part of a larger university-community participatory research process. In this article,
we describe the development and a testing a Photovoice curriculum with immigrant, Latino
youth participants living in Langley Park, as well as the impact of the program on changes in
PYD assets among participants. We also offer recommendations for future Photovoice programs
with similar populations and aims.
Background
Community engagement in identifying and prioritizing issues of collective concern to address
health disparities is an approach that is central to conducting community-based participatory
research (CBPR) (Israel, Eng, Schulz, & Parker, 2005; Minkler, & Wallerstein, 2003). CBPR is
designed to build capacity among community members and stakeholders to engage in research
and address community issues (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2009). It is
important for marginalized and vulnerable groups to have a voice through this process, but it is
not always the case that these groups are empowered to speak out. Immigrants, in general,
and immigrant Latino youth, in particular, tend to be at increased risk for exclusion from these
community participatory processes (Roffman, Suarez-Orozco, & Rhodes, 2003). Moreover, it is
particularly important for youth to be engaged in dialogue around issues that affect their lives
and to be empowered to take action if barriers and injustices are identified. Participation of this
nature is understood, within a PYD approach, to be an element of primary prevention vis a vis
health risks. Active participation during adolescence can also contribute to more sustained
prevention effects, because it occurs during the formation of a social identity, a key adolescent
developmental process (Erikson, 1968). To support this development, adolescents should be
given the tools and opportunity to develop their communication skills, share their insights, and
become agents of change (Youniss & Yates, 1997). The Photovoice process is an excellent
58
strategy for achieving this goal, allowing young people an opportunity to explore different social
phenomena, culture, and behaviors, thus enhancing their understanding of themselves and
world they live in (Strack, Magill, & McDonagh, 2004).
In addition, photography has increasingly been used as a qualitative method for conducting
participatory action research and engaging communities in health promotion and social change
(Hergenrather, Rhodes, Cowan, Bardhoshi, & Pula, 2009). Photovoice is an innovative
methodology in which community members are asked to identify issues relevant to their daily
experiences, portray them through photographs, reflect on the meaning and themes underlying
these images, and disseminate photographic representations to policymakers with the goal of
addressing disparities or inequities (Killion & Wang, 2000; Wang & Burris, 1997; Wang, Morrel-
Samuels, Hutchison, Bell, & Pestronk, 2004). Photovoice draws from Paulo Freire’s approach to
education for critical consciousness (Freire, 1973), positing that critical reflection leads to
discovery and action to address social inequalities. The Photovoice methodology has been
successfully used with different marginalized immigrant and youth populations for the conduct
of CBPR (Garcia et al., 2013; Greene, Burke, & McKenna, 2013; Morales-Campos, Parra-Medina
& Esparza, 2015; Rhodes et al., 2009; Schwartz, Sable, Dannerbeck, & Campbell, 2007;
Stevens, 2010; Strack et al., 2004; Streng et al., 2004; Vaughn, L.M., Rojas-Guyler, & Howell,
2008).
This methodology is especially useful for engaging immigrant youth because they may be
unfamiliar with processes of meaningful community change where their voices count (Greene et
al., 2013), they may experience barriers to expressing their opinions, or they may feel
disempowered because of their immigration experiences or status (Streng et al., 2004). This is
particularly relevant for the scores of recently arrived Latino immigrant youth in the U.S., an
especially vulnerable population. Despite the use of Photovoice with U.S.-born and more
recently arrived immigrant Latino youth, none of these studies have expressly mentioned the
use of a PYD-based Photovoice curricula that has been tested with a mixed youth population
(both recently arrived and first generation immigrant) and adapted to meet the unique
circumstances of this group of youth (Hergenrather et al., 2009; Morales-Campos et al., 2015;
Streng et al., 2004; S. Vaughn, 2012). The reality is that many immigrant enclave communities
are increasingly composed of youth with varying lengths of time living in the U.S. and varying
degrees of engagement in community issues. Having a curriculum that is tailored to meet the
needs of this diverse population is a useful tool to facilitate more effective engagement of
Latino immigrant youth in participatory action research.
Methods
As part of the overall CBPR and prevention strategies, the Adelante project implemented a
Photovoice pilot program with Latino immigrant youth living in Langley Park, MD. This program
was a collaboration between youth participants and university researchers, (Wang & Burris,
1997) and served as both a participatory needs assessment to inform investigators, as well as
an empowering, skill-building activity for youth. The Photovoice program contributed to the
goals of the overall
Adelante
intervention, and introduced the Latino youth viewpoint into a
broader dialogue around community needs, where this voice was previously unheard. The
specific aims of the Photovoice program were to: update the research team about evolving
community needs/strengths from a youth perspective in order to inform the ongoing Adelante
intervention; develop youth skills in photography, community activism, and leadership; build
PYD assets among participants regarding the constructs of Confidence, Connection, and
59
Competence; engage youth in a dialogue around community issues; and empower youth to
advocate for change to local officials to address identified disparities.
Overview of Photovoice Program
With respect to PYD aims, the Photovoice program was designed to develop youths’ Confidence
through learning new skills like photography and public speaking, while also building a deeper
Connection to their community, their peers and their cultural heritage. The Photovoice program
was also intended to enhance participants’ Competence to take action related to community
issues that were important to them. From a social-ecological perspective, this program sought
to not only build youths’ individual assets, but to connect them to their broader community
context in a dynamic process of change.
The program consisted of six weekly sessions that were conducted after school, followed by
three photo exhibitions and an online exhibition. Youth were provided digital cameras and
week-long photo assignments to answer the following questions:
1) What is it like being a youth living in your community?
2) What do you like/dislike about your community?
3) What are things that help you/prevent you from being healthy?
Participants were also encouraged to take photos that captured their thoughts, feelings, or
artistic perspective. The overarching purpose of the photo assignments was to capture
community needs and strengths from a youth perspective. Each photovoice session generally
followed a process: review/discussion of photos from that week’s photo assignment, a
presentation/discussion about community issues or photography-specific topics, and
introduction of the new photo assignments and brainstorming on the types of issues that might
be portrayed through photos for that assignment. Sessions lasted two hours, and were longer
for field trips.
The SHOWeD method (Wang et al., 2004) was used for the review and analysis of photos taken
by youth, with additional probing questions used when necessary. This method included five
questions:
1) What do you see here?
2) What is really happening here?
3) How does this relate to your lives?
4) Why does this situation, concern, or strength exist?
5) What can we do about it?
Photos were displayed using a projector, and we viewed all photos taken as a group. Youth
selected five photos each to discuss in depth. We documented exhibition candidates based on
photo quality, composition and content. Details of findings related to the community issues
identified are discussed in a forthcoming article.
Curriculum Development and Testing
The research team developed a six-session curriculum to test with immigrant Latino youth
having different characteristics in terms of time living in the US, age, primary language, level of
engagement in community issues, and prior
Adelante
participation. We were interested to see
how youth with different characteristics responded to and benefitted from the curriculum.
Based on our experiences, we added one additional session and three optional modules:
1) Team-building and Self-Empowerment,
2) Community Activism and
3) Transitioning to the U.S, which are discussed further below.
60
As noted, the curriculum was also developed to build PYD assets that had been operationalized
for immigrant Latino youth as part of the larger
Adelante
intervention. Photovoice sessions were
created for in-school youth who lived within a defined community boundary. We designed
sessions to stimulate discussion and critical thinking about community, family, cultural, and
immigration-related factors, as well as how their lives were influenced by these factors. Youth
were encouraged to consider ways of documenting these issues through photography,
expressing their opinions, and making recommendations on how to address issues that were
important to them.
Setting and Participants
Participants were all Latino youth ages 12-16 living in the community of Langley Park, MD.
There were 12 participants, with eight females and four males. Six youth were U.S.-born and
six were born in El Salvador or Guatemala. For foreign-born youth, three had arrived in the U.S.
less than three years prior, and three had lived in the U.S. for more than three years. More
recently arrived youth were predominantly Spanish-speaking, and others were bilingual in
Spanish and English. All participants were enrolled in public middle or high school, and were
recruited through verbal invitation at
Adelante
youth program activities, at the high school, and
through referrals. We intentionally recruited youth participants who varied in terms of length of
time living in the U.S., previous
Adelante
program involvement, age and predominant language
in order to test the curriculum and program with youth having different characteristics.
Photo Exhibits
Three in-person and one online photo exhibits were held to display the youth’s artistic point of
view, raise awareness about community issues, and advocate for solutions. The first exhibit
took place at the
Adelante
program’s leadership program graduation, reaching a broader
audience of parents, family members, youth leaders, and community stakeholders. The second
exhibit was at a monthly county-supported, community stakeholder group meeting, called the
Transforming Neighborhoods Initiative (TNI), where youth presented three issues that they
proposed to address in collaboration with stakeholders. The third exhibit was at a Latino health
disparities conference attended by academicians, researchers, and community service providers.
We are displaying the online exhibit through the
Adelante
program’s website,
http://www.adelantelp.org/.
Facilitators
Facilitators were all from The George Washington University, and included: one Assistant
Research Professor, one Doctoral student, one undergraduate student and one research staff.
Two facilitators were Latinas and two were non-Latinas. All facilitators were fully bilingual and
had extensive experience working with Latino immigrant youth. Facilitators were familiar with
some of the Photovoice youth, which created an enhanced sense of trust. Two of the facilitators
had photography training.
Data Collection and Measures
Qualitative data collection included the collection of photos taken by youth, discussions of these
photos, and notes taken by facilitators. Although we briefly mention the results of the
Photovoice study here, detailed results are presented elsewhere. This article focuses on the
experiences of facilitators in implementing the program and changes in PYD assets among
youth participants. Pre-post tests were given to all participants and measured the following PYD
constructs, as operationalized by the larger
Adelante
intervention study (See Table 1):
61
Confidence, Connection to Community, Connection to Peers, Connection to Culture/Identity,
and Competence for Civic Action.
Table 1
Adelante
Intervention PYD Construct Definitions
PYD Construct
Definition
Confidence
Components that increase positive self
-
image, such as a cultural
activity celebrating Latinos in the U.S.; or 2) components that
increase confidence in taking a specific action – role-play
exercises that increase youths’ self-esteem or confidence that
they can communicate effectively to a potential employer,
negotiate condom use with a partner or express their opinion on
a topic.
Connection to
Community
1) Components that promote a positive feeling about or bonding
to the community, increase the perceived value of community
engagement; or 2) activities that create actual relationships to the
community, such as mentoring, connecting with community
businesses, community journalism/blogging.
Connection to Peers
Components that promote the value of supportive peers/friends,
of involvement with peers/friends who are heading in a positive
direction; or 2) components that actually provide activities or
opportunities to promote peer relationships, e.g., through group
activities, outings.
Connection to
Culture/Identity
Components that promote a positive connection to cultural and
social heritage, such as museum trips, films about immigration,
talks by successful Latinos, participation in Hispanic Heritage
month events, etc.
Competence for Civic
Action
Components that increase knowledge or skills about how to
engage in civic action, including advocacy skills, how to organize
a petition, or public communication skills.
Pre-post tests included five subscales, one for each PYD construct evaluated, each with 5 or six
items rated on a 5-point Likert scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Since this was a
pilot program, sample size was reduced, and basic analysis was done only for curriculum
evaluation purposes. Participants were classified into groups for the analysis, based on key
features of our study population: place of birth (U.S. vs. foreign-born), and previous
Adelante
program participation (previous
Adelante
participation vs. none). Pre- and post-test results for
participants were evaluated to verify increases, decreases or no variation in PYD assets.
Results
Overall, the Photovoice program showed a great deal of promise as a mechanism for youth
expression, as well as awareness-raising and advocacy on important community issues. The
curriculum and SHOWeD method were useful in working with this group of youth, with a few
exceptions, described below. Similar to the participatory planning process used by Morales-
Campos (2015), the Photovoice project also provided an important mechanism for youth to be
involved in the future direction and planning of the
Adelante
intervention by identifying
community issues to be addressed by the program. For intervention purposes, as a strategy,
Photovoice also produced gains in PYD assets (see Figures 1-3). Our experiences implementing
the curriculum indicate that the Photovoice program also has potential to build skills in the
areas of leadership, advocacy, communication and public speaking, artistic expression, and
photography, although these were not direc
Photographs were useful tools for youth to express their opinions, ideas and concerns.
Community issues identified by youth participants through photography focused on community
needs (trash removal, affordable adolescent recreation/physical activity oppor
community safety) and community assets (culture and traditions, religion, strong family ties,
availability of green spaces). Identified issues also highlighted major health threats, including
high levels of substance and alcohol abuse in
outlets, and the high cost of fresh produce. Finally, youth expressed some troubling sentiments,
including feelings of isolation, sadness and challenges that arose from their experiences as
immigrants. Details on
themes that emerged from the Photovoice program are presented
elsewhere.
Changes in PYD Constructs
As part of the larger
Adelante
PYD intervention, this curriculum helped to enhance assets of
youth in the areas of Confidence, Connection to Peer