Being Y-AP Savvy: A primer on creating & sustaining youth-adult partnerships

This manual is designed to help all those committed to youth-adult partnerships (Y-AP) acquire core knowledge, establish and communicate a point of view about Y-AP, and build consensus on key issues regarding Y-AP

Program Assessment and Improvement Through Youth-Adult Partnership: The YALPE Resource Kit

Youth and Adult Leaders for Program Excellence (YALPE) is a resource kit for youth programs seeking to engage youth in generating assessment data for action planning, communicating to stakeholders, and training volunteers and community partners. The research-based, user-friendly resource kit outlines a structured process of planning, assessment, and improvement to be carried out by a team of youth and adults. The kit includes a guide to the assessment process; four assessment tools to choose from; templates for data entry, analysis, and reporting; and four research briefs that detail the empirical basis for the YALPE tools and the processes

Toward an understanding of youth in community governance: Policy priorities and research directions

For more than a decade, many researchers and practitioners have endorsed a “positive youth development” approach, which views adolescents as active contributors to their own development and as assets to their communities. As part of this shift, youth are increasingly being invited to engage in community governance. In youth organizations, schools, community organizations, and public policy arenas, youth are making strong contributions to advisory boards and planning councils, and are integrally involved in key day-to-day functions such as program design, budgeting, outreach, public relations, training, and evaluation. State and local policy-makers are also beginning to endorse the engagement of youth in community governance. This policy endorsement, however, has largely occurred independent of scholarship on adolescent development. In this Social Policy Report, our aim is to help bridge this gap. We discuss the cultural context for youth engagement, theoretical rationales and innovative models, empirical evidence, and priorities for policy and research. Why involve youth in community governance? Three main theoretical rationales have been established: Ensuring social justice and youth representation, building civil society, and promoting youth development. Moreover, across the country, innovative models demonstrate that the theory can be effectively translated into policy. Finally, a strong research base supports the practice. When youth are engaged in meaningful decision-making – in families, schools, and youth organizations – research finds clear and consistent developmental benefits for the young people. An emerging body of research shows that organizations and communities also derive benefits when youth are engaged in governance. Several directions need to be pursued for youth engagement to exert a maximum positive impact on young people and their communities. We recommend three areas for policy development. First, public awareness of the practice needs to be better established. Societal expectations for youth remain low and negative stereotypes remain entrenched in the mass media. Second, more stable funding is needed for youth engagement. It will be especially critical to support community-based youth organizations because these places are likely to remain the primary catalysts for youth engagement in the civic life of communities. Third, it is necessary to build local capacity by supporting outreach and training through cross-sector community coalitions and independent, nonprofit intermediary organizations. These entities are best positioned to convince stakeholder groups to chart, implement, and sustain youth engagement. It is equally important to broaden the scientific context for youth engagement in community governance. Priorities for scholars are to focus research on understanding: the organizational and community outcomes that emanate from engaging youth in governance; the competencies that youth bring to governance; and how the practice of youth engagement can be sustained by communities

Pathways to youth empowerment and community connectedness: a study of youth-adult partnership in Malaysian after-school, co-curricular programs

After-school programs are prevalent across the world, but there is a paucity of research that examines quality within the “black box” of programs at the point of service. Grounded in current theory, this research examined hypothesized pathways between the experience of youth-adult partnership (youth voice in decision-making; supportive adult relationships), the mediators of program safety and engagement, and the developmental outcomes of youth empowerment (leadership competence, policy control) and community connectedness (community connections, school attachment). Surveys were administered to 207 ethnically diverse (47.3 % female; 63.3 % Malay) youth, age 15–16, attending after-school co-curricular programs in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Results showed that youth voice in program decision-making predicted both indicators of youth empowerment. Neither youth voice nor supportive adult relationships was directly associated with community connectedness, however. Program engagement mediated the associations between youth-adult partnership and empowerment. In contrast, program safety mediated the associations between youth-adult partnership and community connectedness. The findings indicate that the two core components of youth-adult partnership—youth voice and supportive adult relationships—may operate through different, yet complementary, pathways of program quality to predict developmental outcomes. Implications for future research are highlighted. For reasons of youth development and youth rights, the immediate challenge is to create opportunities for youth to speak on issues of program concern and to elevate those adults who are able and willing to help youth exercise their voice

Toward an understanding of youth in community governance: Policy priorities and research directions

ABSTRACT: For more than a decade, many researchers and practitioners have endorsed a “positive youth development” approach, which views adolescents as active contributors to their own development and as assets to their communities. As part of this shift, youth are increasingly being invited to engage in community governance. In youth organizations, schools, community organizations, and public policy arenas, youth are making strong contributions to advisory boards and planning councils, and are integrally involved in key day-to-day functions such as program design, budgeting, outreach, public relations, training, and evaluation. State and local policy-makers are also beginning to endorse the engagement of youth in community governance. This policy endorsement, however, has largely occurred independent of scholarship on adolescent development. In this Social Policy Report, our aim is to help bridge this gap. We discuss the cultural context for youth engagement, theoretical rationales and innovative models, empirical evidence, and priorities for policy and research. Why involve youth in community governance? Three main theoretical rationales have been established: Ensuring social justice and youth representation, building civil society, and promoting youth development. Moreover, across the country, innovative models demonstrate that the theory can be effectively translated into policy. Finally, a strong research base supports the practice. When youth are engaged in meaningful decision-making – in families, schools, and youth organizations – research finds clear and consistent developmental benefits for the young people. An emerging body of research shows that organizations and communities also derive benefits when youth are engaged in governance. Several directions need to be pursued for youth engagement to exert a maximum positive impact on young people and their communities. We recommend three 91 areas for policy development. First, public awareness of the practice needs to be better established. Societal expectations for youth remain low and negative stereotypes remain entrenched in the mass media. Second, more stable funding is needed for youth engagement. It will be especially critical to support community-based youth organizations because these places are likely to remain the primary catalysts for youth engagement in the civic life of communities. Third, it is necessary to build local capacity by supporting outreach and training through cross-sector community coalitions and independent, nonprofit intermediary organizations. These entities are best positioned to convince stakeholder groups to chart, implement, and sustain youth engagement. It is equally important to broaden the scientific context for youth engagement in community governance. Priorities for scholars are to focus research on understanding: the organizational and community outcomes that emanate from engaging youth in governance; the competencies that youth bring to governance; and how the practice of youth engagement can be sustained by communitiesRESUMO: Há mais de 10 anos que vários investigadores e interventores têm vindo a defender os resultados positivos de abordagens que promovem o envolvimento dos jovens, esta perspectiva vê os adolescentes como facilitadores activos do seu próprio desenvolvimento e como recursos importantes para as suas comunidades. Como parte destas mudanças os jovens têm vindo a ser cada vez mais envolvidos na governança das suas comunidades. Os jovens têm vindo a dar contributos importantes nas organizações juvenis, nas escolas, nas organizações comunitárias e na definição de políticas públicas, através da sua participação em conselhos consultivos e equipas de planeamento de intervenção e estão plenamente envolvidos nas funções/actividades inerentes ao desenvolvimento destas acções, como o desenvolvimento de designs de intervenção, orçamentos, relações públicas, formação e avaliação. Os decisores políticos de nível local e estatal começam agora a valorizar o envolvimento dos jovens na governança das comunidades. Esta política de envolvimento dos jovens, contudo, tem ocorrido de forma independente do investimento no desenvolvimento dos adolescentes. Neste Social Policy Report, o objectivo é preencher a lacuna entre estas duas áreas. Discutimos o contexto cultural do envolvimento dos jovens, teorias e modelos inovadores, evidências empíricas e prioridades para a intervenção e pesquisa. Porque envolver os jovens na governança das comunidades? Têm sido identificadas três fundamentações teóricas de base: Assegurara a justiça social e a representação dos jovens; construir uma sociedade civil e promover o desenvolvimento dos jovens. Contudo, de uma forma geral, modelos inovadores têm vindo a demonstrar que a teoria pode ser eficazmente transformada em política. Por outro lado, uma forte pesquisa de base serve de suporte à prática. Quando os jovens estão envolvidos em processos de tomadas de decisão importantes – nas famílias, nas escolas, e nas organizações juvenis – a pesquisa identifica evidências claras e consistentes dos benefícios para o desenvolvimento desses jovens. Um conjunto de pesquisas recentes mostram-nos, também, que organizações e comunidades retiram benefícios da participação dos jovens na sua governança. Várias acções devem ser desenvolvidas para que se retire o máximo proveito do envolvimento dos jovens para os próprios e para as comunidades. Recomendamos três áreas para o desenvolvimento dessas políticas. Primeiro, o reconhecimento público do sucesso destas práticas necessita de ser melhor divulgado. As expectativas sociais sobre os jovens continuam baixas e os estereótipos negativos continuam a ser veiculados pelos média. Segundo, são necessários apoios económicos mais estáveis para o envolvimento dos jovens. Especialmente no caso das associações juvenis que nascem nas comunidades, pois estas continuam a ser o principal catalizador para a participação dos jovens na vida cívica das comunidades. Terceiro, é necessário promover o desenvolvimento de competências locais dando suporte ao nível da formação, nos vários sectores das organizações comunitárias, coligações e associações sem fins lucraticos. Estas entidades estão melhor posicionadas para convencerem os grupos com poder de decisão no sentido de planearem, implementarem e manterem o envolvimento dos jovens. É igualmente importante expandir o contexto científico para o envolvimento dos jovens na governança comunitária. As prioridades dos académicos deverão ser a focalização da pesquisa na compreensão: dos resultados do envolvimento dos jovens na governança, quer ao nível organizacional, quer ao nível comunitário; as competências que os jovens transportam para a governança; e como é que a prática do envolvimento dos jovens pode ser sustentada/mantida pelas comunidades.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Conceptualizing and measuring youth–adult partnership in community programs: a cross national study

Youth participation in program and community decision making is framed by scholars as an issue of social justice, a platform for positive youth development and effective citizenry, and a strategy for nation building. Recent literature reviews have consistently identified youth–adult partnership (Y–AP) as an effective type of youth participation across highly diverse contexts. These same reviews, however, note that indicators of Y–AP have not been conceptualized and validated for measurement purposes. The present study addresses this limitation by developing a brief measure of Y–AP that is explicitly grounded in current theory, research, and community practice. The measure was administered to youth in the United States, Malaysia, and Portugal (N = 610). Validation was assessed through factor analysis and tests of factorial, discriminant, and concurrent validity. Results confirmed the two predicted dimensions of the Y–AP measure: youth voice in decision making and supportive adult relationships. These two dimensions were also found to be distinct from other measures of program quality: safety and engagement. As predicted, they also significantly correlated with measures of agency and empowerment. It is concluded that the measure has the potential to support community efforts to maximize the quality of youth programs

Community predictors of school engagement: the role of families and youth-adult partnership in Malaysia

School engagement is central to students' academic achievement and their successful transition into post-secondary programs. Existing research on contributors to school engagement has been mostly limited to individual and school-based predictors in Western countries. Additionally, few studies have investigated the ‘cross-over’ relationship between student experiences within community settings and school engagement. This study addresses these limitations. It explores youth-adult partnership (youth voice, supportive adult relationships) in two types of out-of-school time youth programs and family processes (parental monitoring, family cohesion) as predictors of cognitive and emotional school engagement in Malaysia. Surveys were administered to 507 diverse students (56% male, 64% Malay) age 15 to 17, attending after-school co-curricular and community-based youth programs. The findings indicate that experiences in community and family settings may have a positive influence on student experiences in school. Specifically, OLS hierarchical regression analysis showed that youth voice in decision-making within both types of programs as well as parental monitoring contributed to both types of school engagement. Supportive relationships with adult staff were significantly associated with students' emotional engagement. Implications for practice in out-of-school time programs and schools, as well as future research, are discussed

Malaysian validation of a sociopolitical control scale for youth

Empowerment is a process by which people and groups gain control over their lives and environments. The emotional component of psychological empowerment has been assessed using a measure of sociopolitical control. Prior research has measured sociopolitical control as a construct with two dimensions: (a) leadership competence and (b) policy control. This study tested the factor structure of the Sociopolitical Control Scale for Youth (SPCS‐Y) in a sample of Malaysian secondary school students (n = 364; mean age = 16) involved in 3 afterschool programs. Analyses found support for the bidimensional factor structure by using factor loadings and modification indices to reduce the scale from 17 to 8 items. Participants with higher scores on both dimensions of the SPCS‐Y were found to have higher levels of psychological sense of community, school connectedness, and perceived agency. These findings provide support for a measure of youth empowerment in Malaysia and build on recent findings from other nations

Youth–adult partnership and youth civic development: cross-national analyses for scholars and field professionals

Across the world, community-based youth organizations are engaging youth as partners with adults to promote youth civic development. A sample of 528 youth from the United States, Portugal, and Malaysia were surveyed to explore associations between youth–adult partnership (youth voice in decision making; supportive adult relationships) and two key aspects of civic development (youth empowerment; community connections). Multi-level modeling, regression, and profile analysis were used to compare patterns of association across the three national samples. Results indicate that youth are most likely to achieve positive outcomes when they experience the freedom to make decisions, while experiencing trust and power sharing from adults. The results were consistent across the three national samples, suggesting that the influence of partnership may transcend cultures and contexts. Future scholarship should aim to support field professionals in building organizational structures and opportunities that encourage shared dialogue, program planning, and purposeful action among youth and adults