No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Adolescents at Risk: A Summary of Work in the Field— Programs and Policies
... In lieu, many small-scale grassroots organizations targeting underserved youth arise from the ground up in communities branded by a low socioeconomic standing and a lack of access to services and facilities. In these communities many youth are considered at-risk in that 75 their current conditions and life circumstances give them a low probability of growing into responsible adulthood (Dryfoos, 1992) and instead grow up adopting more negative behaviors (Catalano et al., 2002). Thus, grassroots organizations can fill in an important gap toward the provision of PYD programs in underserved communities. ...
Positive youth development (PYD) is an approach to helping youth grow into
successful and responsible adulthood based off of developmental systems theory.
Despite there being a wealth of knowledge in the literature regarding what outcomes
PYD-focused programs should achieve in youth participants and practices that work
to achieve these outcomes, programs operating in this space face various challenges
that can impede their success. The dilemmas faced by PYD programs are not simply
the result of a lack of knowledge on PYD concepts but also the everyday logistical
and managerial challenges that come with running such programs. This article
examines seven categories of dilemmas found through a thorough review of the
sport and recreation literature associated with creating and implementing self-sustaining, not-for-profit, community-based PYD programs. It then concludes with
seven recommendations addressing each of these dilemmas.
... 3 Dryfoos places youth problem behaviors into fbur categories: delinquency, substance abuse, teen pregnancy, and school failure (Dryfbos, 1990). ...
Meeting the diverse needs of young people who are coping with such problems as delinquent behaviors or poor academic performance is an urgent issue today. This paper aims to demonstrate the benefits of introducing intergenerational mentoring activities into educational programs for supporting "at risk" adolescents by highlighting some innovative and effective methods. Among various types of mentoring activities, this paper will focus on ones in which older adults take on the role of mentors. The significance of mentoring activities in which older adults give emotional support to at risk adolescents has been recognized since the late 1980s in the United States. An important component of this type of "intergenerational mentoring" initiative involves establishing a sense of mutual trust between the older adult mentors and the at risk youth mentees. This paper consists of the following parts. Firstly, the author will describe the rationale and some of the societal factors that are contributing to the emergence of the mentoring activities for at risk adolescents in contemporary society. Secondly, the author will describe key characteristics of intergenerational mentoring activities designed to support at risk adolescents. The primary focus will be on lessons learned from an intergenerational mentoring program called "Across Ages" which is operated by Temple University's Center for Intergenerational Learning. In analyzing this model program, the author will focus on challenging issues related to how the mentor role is constructed and how the mentors function in the context of program goals to produce benefits for the participants. Finally, in concluding this paper, the author will point out that such intergenerational mentoring endeavors not only expand informal helping resources for at risk adolescents but also help in establishing a circulative mentoring process that has implications for the enrichment of the lives of people of all ages in the community.
... As indicated earlier, at-risk youth have a lower probability of growing into responsible adults and contributing and thriving members of society than youth considered not at-risk (Dryfoos, 1992). Many at-risk youth live in poorer socioeconomic conditions making them subject to a range of inequalities such as lower household incomes and neighbourhood segregation (Travis & Leech, 2013). ...
... As indicated earlier, at-risk youth have a lower probability of growing into responsible adults and contributing and thriving members of society than youth considered not at-risk (Dryfoos, 1992). Many at-risk youth live in poorer socioeconomic conditions making them subject to a range of inequalities such as lower household incomes and neighbourhood segregation (Travis & Leech, 2013). ...
... As indicated earlier, at-risk youth have a lower probability of growing into responsible adults and contributing and thriving members of society than youth considered not at-risk (Dryfoos, 1992). Many at-risk youth live in poorer socioeconomic conditions making them subject to a range of inequalities such as lower household incomes and neighbourhood segregation (Travis & Leech, 2013). ...
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.