HANDBOOK OF ADOLESCENT PSYCHOLOGY - PART 10 docx

Hamilton 1999 characterizes positive youth development as three interconnected ideas: a youth have an inherent capacity to grow toward optimal development if given appropriate opportunit

macrosystem studied by developmentalists, along with families and schools as social institutions that have an important influence on socialization and development From this perspective, policy work is not substantially different from clinical atten- tion; it is just focused at a macrolevel rather than trying to solve individual problems It might be viewed as a developmental extension of community psychology Hence, it is logical and perfectly consistent with its field goals that psychology include policy mak- ing in the areas to which it attends Psychology programs such as the applied develop- mental program at Fordham University includes such curricula as part of their mission, but the importance is too great to be limited to a few select programs Policy making should be as core to the field as are research methods and statistics If policy makers are

to develop effective policies and programs, it is essential that psychologists be involved, and policies and programs provide important areas for psychological research.

To some extent, it is easier to involve psychology in the policy making process than

it is to include research Although psychology is a science, it also has a practitioner element, which increases its relevance to policy Clinical psychology, forensics, and industrial-organizational psychology are applied branches of psychology, although they tend to function at an individual rather than a systems level However, theoreti- cally, there is no substantive reason that policy making should not be added to this ar- ray (Sherrod, 1997).

Although it should be obvious that information from research should be useful to policy making, that usefulness is in fact too frequently not recognized First, other fac- tors such as ideology or cost outweigh information Second, it is frequently difficult for research to provide the clear, direct singular-answer type of guidance that is needed for policy making Third, we have noted that social problems change faster than our abil- ity to generate information to address them (Prewitt, 1995) Hence, pressure is rela- tively constant against using research to guide policy; thus, the need to base policy making in research must be always on the agenda of the applied researcher (Zigler & Hall, 2000; Zigler, Kagan, & Hall, 1996).

Perhaps at no point in the history of the United States has it been more important

to direct effective policy solutions to such problems There are a variety of serious cial problems confronting children, youth, and families today that require our imme- diate and concerted efforts Too often, however, policies and programs are based on ide- ology, misguided efforts, or solutions designed with too little information Therefore, the importance of building and maintaining substantial connections between research and policy has never been more important.

so-Elsewhere, Sherrod (2002) outlined and elaborated seven points about developing and maintaining a close interaction between research and policy These points included the following:

1 It is necessary to use both demographic information summarizing the problem and research study findings that address the underlying causes and consequences

of the problem Both basic and applied research are needed.

2 Developmental appropriateness and developmental continuity are crucial siderations; that is, interventions must be designed to target the developmental needs of the age period for which they are focused, and it is also important to at-

con-Vision and Values 769

tend to the developmental mechanisms by which interventions my generate fects that would be expected to last long beyond the end of the program Fur- thermore, it would be interesting to ask about the cumulative impact across the life span of interventions experienced at different ages.

ef-3 There are no magic bullets; that is, there are no interventions that are going to solve all the problems faced by disadvantaged children and youth Short-lived in- terventions can be expected to help, not to fix lives Sustained social commitment

is required to help those children and families with needs.

4 It is essential that we adopt a diverse approach to the design of policies and to their assessment and evaluation We have to be creative about solutions to social problems and open to different forms of evaluative research so that the method suits the question.

5 Dissemination is also a key ingredient of the research-policy interaction, but the target of dissemination must be clear and varies by both the problem being ad- dressed and the policy being proposed.

6 Cost-benefit analyses and recommended means of achieving costs have to be part

of the efforts to help children and families; otherwise, failure is assured.

7 Regardless of how well one pursues the goal of using research to guide policy mation, even while attending to all the points made herein, research will be only one of many factors driving policy The research practitioner has to recognize this fact, do the best he or she can, and not despair.

for-Most researchers today who are interested in policy found their interest through some indirect route because psychology programs do not currently devote much attention to policy The younger generation of researchers is, however, very interested in research- policy connections; there is, for example, an SRCD social policy network for students (Susman-Stillman and Brown, 1997) We must exploit this interest by developing insti- tutional mechanisms for young scholars to follow a career path that allows them to use research to guide policy One such route is fellowships such as the Congressional Sci- ence Fellowships of SRCD ADS and training programs such as the one at Fordham University offer another such mechanism Attention to the prevention of problems and the promotion of development (covered in the next section) offers one avenue for elic- iting the interest of developmental scientists seeking an applied orientation.

Prevention and Promotion

In recent years, a new approach has arisen in the youth development field This proach moves beyond treatment and even beyond prevention to the promotion of de- velopment This focus on the positive development of youth moves beyond fixing prob- lems or eliminating defects For several decades, research and policy have been devoted

ap-to identifying and correcting problems of youth: high-risk sexual behavior, teenage pregnancy, school failure and dropout, substance use and abuse, violence, and crime.

It was from this focus that the emphasis on risk factors became prominent Because not all youth succumb equally to risks, the concept of resiliency emerged, and prevention

efforts were developed Although these efforts have enjoyed some success in reducing risks and health-compromising behaviors, their achievement is constrained by limited funding and by the limited evidence of sustained behavior change after the program has ended (Benson, Scales, Leffert, & Roehlkkepartain, 1999; Scales et al., 2000).

A focus on promoting the positive development of youth rather than on fixing lems leads to the development-promoting qualities of families and communities and to policies that make up for the shortfalls of the environments If we provide the supports that youth need, all have the potential to beat the odds (Larsen, 2000).

prob-This approach is based on the contributions of several groups such as the Search Institute, the International Youth Foundation, and the Youth Policy Forum (Benson, Leffert, Scales, & Blyth, 1998) Both external and internal assets of youth have been identified and correlated with environmental and individual resiliency factors Internal factors include commitment to learning, positive values, social competencies, and pos- itive identity Broad categories of external factors include family and community sup- ports, empowerment, boundaries and expectations, and constructive use of time The presence of risk behaviors is inversely correlated with assets These assets, of course, in- teract in complex ways and vary substantially by community (Benson et al., 1998; Scales et al., 2000) However, this approach demonstrates how providing the means to meet youth’s multiple developmental needs by ensuring protection, support, and op- portunities across these important contexts is a preferred focus for intervention The interest in positive youth development has focused primarily on adolescents The National Research Council of the Institute of Medicine (2000) recently outlined a set of the key ingredients in strengths-based programs that promote effective develop- ment and support family coping (Tolan, Sherrod, Gorman-Smith, & Henry, 2003):

1 Programs must have clear goals and intended outcomes.

2 The content or focus is age appropriate but challenging.

3 The involvement is based on active learning processes.

4 The program provides a positive and safe environment.

5 There are adequate materials and facilities to conduct the program.

6 The staff is well prepared, supported, and stable.

7 The staff is culturally competent and conducts outreach to diverse groups.

8 The program or approach should be related to and work with parents and isting community groups and organizations.

ex-9 The program elicits, supports, and promotes parental involvement and does not separate youth needs from family or parental needs but rather integrates them.

10 The program or approach is conducted within a learning organization; the ganization is willing to adapt, improve, and develop as the setting, youth needs, and opportunities shift.

or-This focus on the promotion of positive development is, however, relevant to all riods of the life span ADS applies it equally from conception to the end of life (e.g., see Baltes et al., 1998).

pe-Another critical aspect of the ADS vision is university-community partnerships,

Vision and Values 771

which have arisen in recent years to promote a new kind of relationship between searchers, their study participants, and the communities that may benefit from research.

re-University-Community Partnerships

In recent years, resulting in part from perspectives and principles inherent in ADS, a new approach to research has arisen In this approach, researchers do not set them- selves up as experts to study subjects in the form of community residents, schoolchild- ren, or participants in youth programs Instead, the research project is established as a partnership between the researcher and the participants in his or her study In fact, cer- tain universities, especially the land-grant ones, have established partnerships with the communities in which they reside (Kellogg Commission, 1999) Individual research projects then exist in the context of these partnerships Universities share their expert- ise and other resources, and community institutions and residents share their perspec- tives, their local wisdom, and their willingness to cooperate with research (Fisher, 2002; Lerner & Fisher, 1994; Lerner & Simon, 1998a, b; Sherrod, 1998a) These partnerships between typical academic institutions and community organizations and community residents carry many implications for research and for the functioning of the university Universities adopting this stance to their communities have been described as outreach universities (Lerner & Simon, 1998a).

These outreach universities carry the full array of characteristics of ADS They blur the distinction between basic and applied research They bring a new perspective on evaluation research, one that uses programs and policies to generate new information about children and youth They contribute to the dissemination of science, thereby in- creasing its usefulness to policy and programs Finally—and perhaps most important— these university-community collaborations contribute to the reciprocity of communica- tion between academics and others; too often academics have assumed a unidirectional flow of information from them to others A bidirectional flow increases the chances that anyone will listen to academics and increases the usefulness of the communication to them It becomes a learning endeavor for all involved parties (Sherrod, 1998b) The outreach university orientation carries an equal number of implications for the nature of institutions of higher learning First, by reaching out to precollegiate schools

in their communities, universities can contribute to the reform of precollegiate tion Mentorship and internship programs are one vehicle, for example Second, it can contribute to the reform of higher education Although most of our attention to educa- tional reform has been at the precollegiate level, collegiate education is also in need of review and revision For example, compared to the widespread concern for high school dropout, almost no attention has been paid to dropout from college Yet dropping out

educa-of college can have equally serious consequences for the dropout, and minorities are at particularly high risk for dropout Third, in this historical moment of rapid and exten- sive social change in technology, medicine, and most other domains, lifelong learning becomes essential Certainly, universities are the vehicle to lifelong learning, beginning with their approach to collegiate education Finally, universities can extend their reach

to serve community residents such as individuals now required to move off welfare, as well as the more typical young adult college student population (Sherrod, 1998a).

We have also previously argued that the outreach university provides a means of

re-connecting philanthropy and science (Sherrod, 1998a) When philanthropy originated early in this century, science was seen as a means of identifying the core causes of so- cial problems so that appropriate strategies could be devised to effectively address such problems As philanthropy has increasingly turned its attention to systematic social re- form during the latter half of the century (Wisely, 1998), science has been viewed to be less relevant, and a broad chiasm has developed between philanthropy and research The outreach university has the potential to readdress this relationship and reforge connections that could prove useful to both constituencies (Sherrod, 1998a).

Thus, the potential contributions and impacts of the university partnerships are many and varied The number of such efforts has increased substantially in recent years; they are a core ingredient of ADS.

CONCLUSIONS

In this chapter we have used descriptions of the methods, values, and vision of ADS to illustrate its unique contributions to developmental science Although all developmen- tal science need not be applied, we believe that ADS has a very important and original contribution to make; that is why we have devoted our program at Fordham University

to it and why we have devoted our research careers to its furtherance.

The methods of ADS—assessment and early intervention, evaluation research, multiculturalism, and dissemination—provide tools as important and as generally use- ful as research methods and statistics in the broader field of psychology These methods lead to concerns for ethics in research, to the design of social policies, to prevention and promotion, and to university-community partnerships, which when taken together de- fine values and create a vision that define a truly unique new approach to developmen- tal science The implications for training are of course profound, but the existence of an applied developmental training program at Fordham University for now more than 10 years demonstrate that it is doable.

Furthermore, developmental science has a place for many approaches; basic research

is needed as well as policy-relevant research and policy analysis But it is fully possible that programs could devote a track to ADS without reorienting their whole program, and we believe the younger generation of researchers are ripe for this approach We are committed to the field and believe that the future of developmental research will be sig- nificantly enhanced by the relatively new approach represented in ADS.

REFERENCES

Abramovitch, R., Freedman, J L., Thoden, K., & Nikolich, C (1991) Children’s capacity to

consent to participation in psychological research: Empirical findings Child Development,

62, 1100–1109.

American Psychological Association (2002) Ethical principles of psychologists and code of

conduct American Psychologist.

American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Associate, & National

Council on Measurement in Education (1974) Standards for educational and psychological tests Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

References 773

Anastasi, A (1988) Psychological testing New York: Macmillan.

Appelbaum, P S., & Rosenbaum, A (1989) Tarasoff and the researcher: Does the duty to

pro-tect apply in the research setting? American Psychologist, 44, 885–894.

Baltes, P., Lindenberger, U., & Staudinger, U M (1998) Life-span theory in developmental

psy-chology In W Damon (Series Ed.) & R M Lerner (Vol Ed.), Handbook of child ogy: Vol 1 Theoretical models of human development (5th ed., pp 1029–1144) New York:

psychol-Wiley.

Baltes, P., & Reese, H (1984) The life-span perspective in developmental psychology In M.

Bornstein & M Lamb (Eds.), Developmental psychology: An advanced textbook Hillsdale,

NJ: Erlbaum.

Bandura, A (1992) A social cognitive approach to the exercise of control over AIDS infection.

In R J DiClemente (Ed.), Adolescents and AIDS: A generation in jeopardy Newbury Park,

CA: Sage.

Benson, P., Scales, P., Leffert, N., & Roehlkkepartain, E (1999) A fragile foundation: The state of developmental assets among American youth Minneapolis, MN: Search Institute.

Benson, P., Leffert, N., Scales, P., & Blyth, D (1998) Beyond the village rhetoric: Creating healthy

communities for children and adolescents Applied Developmental Science, 2, 138–159.

Biafora, F A., Jr., Warheit, G J., Zimmerman, R S., Gil, A G., Apospori, E., & Taylor, D (1993) Racial mistrust and deviant behaviors among ethnically diverse African American

adolescent boys Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 891–910.

Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P A (1998) The ecology of developmental processes In W

Da-mon (Series Ed.) & R M Lerner (Vol Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol 1 ical models of human development (pp 993–1028) New York: Wiley.

Theoret-Brooks-Gunn, J., & Rotheram-Borus, M J (1994) Rights to privacy in research: Adolescents

versus parents Ethics & Behavior, 4, 109–121.

Bruzzese, J M., & Fisher, C B (2003) Assessing and enhancing the research consent capacity

of children and youth Applied Developmental Science, 7, 13–26.

Busch-Rossnagel, N A (1992) Commonalities between test validity and external validity in

ba-sic research on Hispanics In K F Geisinger (Ed.), Psychological testing of Hispanics

(pp 195–214) Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Busch-Rossnagel, N A (1998) Development in Puerto Rican and Dominican toddlers (Final

Pro-gress Report, Grant HD30590, National Institute of Child Health and Development) Busch-Rossnagel, N A (2002) Creating culturally and community-sensitive measures of devel-

opment In A Higgins (Ed.), Influential lives: New directions for child and adolescent opment San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

devel-Busch-Rossnagel, N A., Vargas, M., Knauf, D E., & Planos, R (1993) Mastery motivation in

ethnic minority groups: The sample case of Hispanics In D Messer (Ed.), Mastery tion in early childhood: Development, measurement and social processes (pp 132–148) Lon-

motiva-don: Routledge.

Chan, K S., & Hune, S (1995) Racialization and panethnicity: From Asians in America to

Asian Americans In W D Hawley & A W Jackson (Eds.), Toward a common destiny: proving race and ethnic relations in America (pp 205–236) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Im-Chun, K (1995) The myth of Asian American success and its educational ramifications In D.

Nakanishi & T Nishida (Eds.), The Asian American educational experience (pp 95–112).

New York: Routledge.

Clarke-Stewart, A K., & Allhusen, V (2002) Nonparental caregiving In M Bornstein (Ed.),

Handbook of parenting (2nd ed.) Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Connell, J., Aber, J L., & Walker, G (1995) How do urban communities affect youth: Using cial science research to inform the design and evaluation of comprehensive community ini-

so-tiatives In J Connell, A Kubisch, L Schorr, & C Weiss (Eds.), New approaches to ing community initiatives New York: The Aspen Institute.

evaluat-Connell, J P., Spencer, M B., & Aber, J L (1994) Educational risk and resilience in African

American youth: Context, self, action, and outcomes in school Child Development, 65,

493–506.

Council of National Psychological Associations for the Advancement of Ethnic Minority

Inter-ests (2000) Guidelines for research in ethnic minority communities Washington, DC:

Amer-ican Psychological Association.

Cross, W E (1991) Shades of black: Diversity in African-American identity Philadelphia: Temple

University Press.

Dennis, R M (1993) Studying across difference: Race, class and gender in qualitative research.

In J H Stanfield III & R M Dennis (Eds), Race and ethnicity in research methods (pp 53–

74) Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Department of Health and Human Services (1991, August) Title 45 Public Welfare, Part 46,

Code of Federal Regulations, Protection of Human Subjects.

Diaz Soto, L (1989) Relationship between home environment and intrinsic and extrinsic

orien-tation of high achieving and low achieving Puerto Rican children Education Research terly, 13, 22–36.

Quar-Fisher, C B (1993) Integrating science and ethics in research with high-risk children & youth.

Society for Research in Child Development Public Policy Report, 7, 1–26.

Fisher, C B (2000) Relational ethics in psychological research: One feminist’s journey In M.

Brabeck (Ed.), Practicing feminist ethics in psychology (pp 125–142) Washington, DC:

American Psychological Association.

Fisher, C B (2002) Participant consultation: Ethical insights into parental permission and fidentiality procedures for policy relevant research with youth In R M Lerner, F Jacobs,

con-& D Wertlieb (Eds.), Handbook of applied developmental science (Vol 4, pp 371–396).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fisher, C B., Hatashita-Wong, M., & Isman, L (1999) Ethical and legal issues in clinical child

psychology In W K Silverman & T H Ollendick (Eds.), Developmental issues in the cal treatment of children and adolescents (pp 470–486) Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

clini-Fisher, C B., Higgins-D’Allesandro, A., Rau, J M B., Kuther, T., & Belanger, S (1996)

Re-porting and referring research participants: The view from urban adolescents Child opment, 67, 2086–2099.

Devel-Fisher, C B., Hoagwood, K., Duster, T., Grisso, T., Frank, D A, Macklin, R., et al (2002)

Re-search ethics for mental health science involving ethnic minority children and youth ican Psychologist, 57, 1024–1040.

Amer-Fisher, C B., Hoagwood, K., & Jensen, P (1996) Casebook on ethical issues in research with children and adolescents with mental disorders In K Hoagwood, P Jensen, & C B Fisher

(Eds.), Ethical issues in research with children and adolescents with mental disorders (pp 135–

238) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Fisher, C, B., Jackson, J., & Villarruel, F (1997) The study of African American and Latin

Amer-ican children and youth In W Damon (Series Ed.) & R M Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (5th ed., pp 1145–1207) New York:

Wiley.

Fisher, C B., & Lerner, R (1994) Applied developmental psychology New York: McGraw-Hill.

Fisher, C B., & Murray, J P (1996) Applied developmental science comes of age In C B Fisher,

J P Murray, & W E Sigel (Eds.), Graduate training in applied developmental science for verse disciplines and educational settings (pp 1–22) Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

di-Fisher, C B., Murray, J P., & Sigel, I E (Eds.) (1996) Graduate training in applied tal science for diverse disciplines and educational settings Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

developmen-Fisher, C B., & Osofsky, J (1997) Training the applied developmental scientist for prevention

and practice: Two current examples In Social policy report Chicago: Society for Research

in Child Development.

Fisher, C B., Murray, J P., Dill, J R., Hagen, J W., Hogan, M J., Lerner, R M., et al (1993) The national conference on graduate education in the applications of developmental science

across the life span Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 14, 1–10.

Fisher, C B., & Tryon, W W (1990) Emerging ethical issues in an emerging field In C B Fisher

& W W Tryon (Eds.), Ethics in applied developmental psychology: Emerging issues in an emerging field (pp 1–14) Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

References 775

Fisher, C B., & Wallace, S A (2000) Through the community looking glass: Re-evaluating the

ethical and policy implications of research on adolescent risk and psychopathology Ethics

& Behavior, 10, 99–118.

Fisher, C B., Wallace, S A., & Fenton, R E (2000) Discrimination distress during adolescence.

Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29, 679–695.

Freud, S (1964) An outline of psychoanalysis: Vol 23 The standard edition of the complete chological works of Sigmund Freud (James Strachey, Ed & Trans.) London: Hogarth Press.

psy-(Original work published 1940)

Gimenéz, M E (1992) U.S ethnic politics: Implications for Latin Americans Latin American Perspectives, 19, 7–17.

Graham, S (1992) “Most of the subjects were white and middle class”: Trends in published

re-search on African Americans in selected APA journals, 1970–1989 American Psychologist,

47, 629–639.

Hamburg, B A (1993) President’s report: New futures for the “forgotten half.” Realizing unused potential for learning and productivity: Annual report of the William T Grant Foundation.

New York: William T Grant Foundation.

Hamburg, D (1992) Today’s children: Creating a future for a generation in crisis New York: Time Heath, S B (1997) Culture: Contested realm in research on children and youth Applied Devel- opmental Science, 1, 113–123.

Helms, J E (1996) Toward a methodology for measuring and assessing racial as distinguished

from ethnic identity In G R Sodowsky & J C Impara (Eds.), Multicultural assessment in counseling and clinical psychology (pp 143–192) Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental

Measurement.

Hernandez, D (1993) America’s children: Resources from family, government, and the economy.

New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Higgins-D’Allesandro, A., Hamilton, M., & Fisher, C B (1998) Educating the applied opmental psychologist for community partnerships: The Fordham model In R M Lerner

devel-& L A K Simon (Eds), Outreach universities for America’s youth and families: Building community collaborations for the 21st century Garland.

Hoagwood, K (1994) The Certificate of confidentiality at NIMH: Applications and

implica-tions for service research with children Ethics & Behavior, 4, 123–121.

Hollister, R., & Hill, J (1995) Problems in the evaluation of community-wide initiatives In J.

Connell, A Kubisch, L Schor, & C Weiss (Eds.), New approaches to evaluating community initiatives: Concepts, methods, contexts Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute.

Huston, A (2002) From research to policy: Choosing questions and interpreting the answers In

A Higgins-D’Alessandro and K Jankowski (Eds.), Science and society: New directions of child development San Francisco, CA: Jossey–Bass.

Jensen, P S., & Hoagwood, K (1997) Developmental psychopathology and the notion of ture: Introduction to the special issue on the fusion of cultural horizons Cultural influences

cul-on the assessment of psychopathology in children and adolescents Applied Developmental Science, 1, 108–112.

Kellogg Commission (1999) Returning to our roots: The engaged institution Washington, DC:

National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges.

Kliegl, R., Smith, J., & Baltes, P B (1989) Testing-the-limits and the study of adult age

differ-ences in cognitive plasticity of a mnemonic skill Developmental Psychology, 25, 247–256.

Klonoff, E A., Landrine, H., & Ullman, J B (1999) Racial discrimination and psychiatric

symptoms among blacks Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 5, 329–339.

Knight, G P., & Hill, N E (1998) Measurement equivalence in research involving minority

adolescents In V C McLoyd & L Steinberg (Eds.), Studying minority adolescents: ceptual, methodological, and theoretical issues (pp 183–211) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Kotulak, R (1996) Inside the brain: Revolutionary discoveries of how the mind works Kansas City,

Con-MO: Andres and McNeel.

LaFromboise, T., Hardin, L., Coleman, K., & Gerton, J (1993) Psychological impact of

bicul-turalism: Evidence and theory Psychological Bulletin, 114, 395–412.

Lancaster, J (1986) Human adolescence and reproduction: An evolutionary perspective In J.

Lancaster & B Hamburg (Eds.), School-age pregnancy and parenthood: Biosocial dimensions

(pp 17–38) New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

Lancaster, J., Altmann, J., Rossi, A., & Sherrod, L (1987) Introduction In J Lancaster, J

Alt-mann, A Rossi, & L Sherrod (Eds.), Parenting across the life span: Biosocial dimensions

(pp 1–12) New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

Laosa, L M (1990) Population generalizability, cultural sensitivity, and ethical dilemmas In

C B Fisher & W W Tyron (Eds), Ethics in applied developmental psychology: Emerging sues in an emerging field (pp 227–252) Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

is-Larsen, R (2000) Toward a psychology of positive youth development American Psychologist,

55, 170–183.

Lerner, R M (1995) America’s youth in crisis: Challenges and options for programs and policies.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lerner, R M., & Fisher, C B (1994) From applied developmental psychology to applied opmental science: Community coalitions and collaborative careers In C B Fisher & R M.

devel-Lerner (Eds.), Applied developmental psychology (pp 503–522) New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lerner, R M., Fisher, C B., & Weinberg, R A (2000a) Applying developmental science in the

twenty-first century: International scholarship for our times International Journal of havioral Development, 24, 24–29.

Be-Lerner, R M., Fisher, C B., & Weinberg, R A (2000b) Towards a science for and of the people:

Promoting civil society through the application of developmental science Child ment, 71, 11–20.

Develop-Lerner, R M., & Galambos, N (1998) Adolescent development: Challenges and opportunities

for research, programs, and policies In J T Spence (Ed.), Annual review of psychology (Vol.

49, pp 413–446) Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews

Lerner, R M., & Simon, L A K (1998a) The new American outreach university: Challenges

and options In R M Lerner & L A K Simon (Eds.), University-community collaborations for the twenty-first century: Outreach scholarship for youth and families (pp 3–23) New

York: Garland.

Lerner, R M., & Simon, L A K (Eds.) (1998b) University-community collaborations for the twenty-first century: Outreach scholarship for youth and families New York: Garland.

Lerner, R M., Sparks, E S., & McCubbin, L (2000) Family diversity and family policy In D.

Demo, K Allen, & M Fine (Eds.), Handbook of family diversity (pp 380–401) New York:

Oxford University Press.

Lerner, R M., & Tubman, J G (1990) Plasticity in development: Ethical implications for

de-velopmental interventions In C B Fisher & W W Tryon (Eds.), Ethics in applied mental psychology: Emerging issuer in an emerging field (pp 113–132) Norwood, NJ: Ablex Liss, M (1994) State and federal laws governing reporting for researchers Ethics & Bheavior, 4,

develop-133–146.

Marín, G., & Marín, B V (1991) Research with Hispanic populations Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

McAdoo, H P (1990) The ethics of research and intervention with ethnic minority parents and

their children In C B Fisher & W W Tyron (Eds), Ethics in applied developmental ogy: Emerging issues in an emerging field (pp 273–284) Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

psychol-McCall, R B (1990) Promoting interdisciplinary and faculty-service-provider relations ican Psychologist, 45, 1319–1324.

Amer-McCall, R B (1992) A guide to communicating through the media In K McCartney & D.

Phillips (Eds.), An insider’s guide to providing expert testimony before Congress Ann Arbor,

MI: Society for Research in Child Development

Melton, G H (1990) Certificates of confidentiality under the public health service act: Strong

protection but not enough Violence & Victims, 5, 67–71.

Miller, J., & Rodwell, M K (1997) Disclosure of student status in agencies: Do we still have a

secret? Families in Society, 78, 72–83.

Mio, J., Trimble, J., Arredondo, P., Cheatham, H., & Sue, D (Eds) (1999) Keywords in tural interventions: A dictionary Westport, CT: Greenwood.

multicul-References 777

National Research Council of the Institute of Medicine (2000) After school programs to promote child and adolescent development: Summary of a workshop Washington, DC: National

Academy Press.

Oboler, S (1995) Ethnic labels, Latino lives: Identity and the politics of (re)presentation in the United States Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

O’Connor, A (1995) Evaluating comprehensive community initiatives: A view from history In

J Connell, A Kubisch, L Schorr, & C Weiss (Eds.), New approaches to evaluating nity initiatives Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute.

commu-Ogbu, J U (1994) From cultural differences to differences in cultural frame of reference In

P M Greenfield & R R Cocking (Eds.), Cross-cultural roots of minority child development

(pp 365–392) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Omi, M., & Winant, H (1986) Racial formation in the United States New York: Routledge &

Kegan Paul.

O’Sullivan, C., & Fisher, C B (1997) The effect of confidentiality and reporting procedures on

parent-child agreement to participate in adolescent risk research Applied Developmental Science, 1(4), 185–197.

Padilla, A M (1995) Hispanic psychology: Critical issues in theory and research Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.

Parron, D L (1997) The fusion of cultural horizons: Cultural influences on the assessment of

psychopathology on children Applied Developmental Science, 1, 156–159.

Pearson, J L., Stanley, B., King, C., & Fisher, C B (2001) Intervention research for persons at

high risk for suicidality: Safety and ethical considerations Journal of Clinical Psychiatry Supplement, 62, 17–26.

Piaget, J (1960) The child’s conception of the world London: Routledge.

Phinney, J S (1996) When we talk about American ethnic groups, what do we mean? American Psychologist, 51, 918–927.

Prewitt, K (1980) The council and the usefulness of the social sciences Annual Report of the President, 1979–1980 New York: Social Science Research Council.

Prewitt, K (1995) Social sciences and private philanthropy: The quest for social (Essays on

Phil-anthropy, No 15, Series on Foundations and their role in American life) Indiana sity Center on Philanthropy.

Univer-Ragin, C C., & Hein, J (1993) The comparative study of ethnicity: Methodological and

con-ceptual issues In J H Stanfield III & R M Dennis (Eds), Race and ethnicity in research methods (pp 254–272) Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Root, M (1992) Racially mixed people in American Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Rosenberg, S., & Sherrod, L R (1994) Directory of organizations concerned with public mation of relevance to children New York: William T Grant Foundation.

infor-Rossi, P H., Freeman, H E., and Lispsey, M W (1999) Evolution: A Systematic Approach.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ruck, M D., Abramovitch, R., & Keating, D P (1998) Children’s and adolescents’

under-standing of rights: Balancing nurturance and self-determination Child Development, 64,

404–417.

Rumbaut, R (1991) The agony of exile: A study of migration and adaptation of Indochinese

refugee adults and children In F L Ahean Jr & J L Athey (Eds), Refugee children: ory, research, and services Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

The-Scales, P C., Benson, P L., Leffert, N., & Blyth, D A (2000) Contribution of developmental

assets to the prediction of thriving among adolescents Applied Developmental Science, 4,

27–46.

Seráfica, F C (1997) Psychopathology and resilience in Asian American children and

adoles-cents Applied Developmental Science, 1, 145–155.

Sherrod, L (1997) Promoting youth development through research-based policies Applied velopmental Science, 1, 17–27.

De-Sherrod, L R (1998a) The common pursuits of modern philanthropy and the proposed

out-reach university: Enhancing research and education In R M Lerner & L A Simon (Eds.),

University-community collaborations for the twenty-first century New York: Garland.

Sherrod, L R (1998b) Funding opportunities for applied developmental science In P A

Ral-ston, R Lerner, A Mullis, C Simerly, & J Murray (Eds.), Social change, public policy, and community collaboration: Training human development professionals for the twenty-first cen- tury MA: Kluwer

Sherrod, L R (1999) Giving child development knowledge away: Using university-community

partnerships to disseminate research on children, youth and families Applied tal Science, 3, 228–234.

Developmen-Sherrod, L R (2002) The role of psychology in setting a policy agenda for children and

fami-lies In A Higgins-D’Alessandro & K Jankowski (Eds.), Science and Policy: New directions for child development San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Sorensen, A., Weinert, F., & Sherrod, L (Eds.) (1986) Human development and the life course.

Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Slonim-Nevo, V (1992) First premarital intercourse among Mexican American and Anglo

American adolescent women: Interpreting ethnic differences Journal of Adolescent search, 7(3), 332–351.

Re-Spencer, M B (1995) Old issues and new theorizing about African-American youth: A

phe-nomenological variant of ecological systems theory In R L Taylor (Ed.), Black youth: spectives on their status in the United States (pp 37–70) Westport, CT: Praeger.

Per-Spencer, M B., Swanson, D P., & Cunningham, M (1991) Ethnicity, ethnic identity, and

com-petence formation: Adolescent transition and cultural transformation Journal of Negro ucation, 60, 366–387.

Ed-Stanfield, J H (1993) Epistemological considerations In J H Stanfield & R M Dennis (Eds.),

Race and ethnicity in research methods (pp 16–36) Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Steele, C M (1997) A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and

perfor-mance American Psychologist, 52, 613–629.

Susman-Stillman, A., & Brown, J (1997) Building research and policy connections: Training

and career options for developmental scientists In Social Policy Reports Chicago: Society

for Research in Child Development.

Takanishi, R (1994) Continuities and discontinuities in the cognitive socialization of originated children: The case of Japanese Americans In P M Greenfield & R R Cocking

Asian-(Eds.), Cross-cultural roots of minority child development (pp 351–362) Mahwah, NJ:

Erlbaum.

Terrell, F., Terrell, S L., & Miller, F (1993) Level of cultural mistrust as a function of

educa-tional and occupaeduca-tional expectations among African American students Adolescence, 28(11), 573–578.

Tolan, P., Sherrod, L., Gorman-Smith, D., & Henry, D (2002) Building protection and tunity for inner city children and youth and their families In K Maton, C Schellenbach, &

oppor-B Leadbeater (Eds.), Fostering resilient children, youth, families and communities: Strength based research and policy Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Trimble, J E (1990) Ethnic specification, validation prospects and future of drug abuse

re-search International Journal of the Addictions, 25, 149–169.

Vargas, M., & Busch-Rossnagel, N A (2000) Authority plus affection: Latino parenting during adolescence In M M Montero-Sieburth & F A Villarruel (Eds.), Making invisible Latino adolescents visible: A critical approach to Latino diversity (pp 265–287) New York: Garland.

Weithorn, L A (1983) Children’s capacities to decide about participation in research IRB: A Review of Human Subjects Research, 5, 1–5.

Werner, O., & Campbell, D T (1970) Translating, working through interpreters and the

prob-lem of decentering In R Cohen (Ed.), A handbooks of methods in cultural anthropology.

New York: American Museum of Natural History.

Wisely, D S (1997–1998) The pursuit of a virtuous people Advancing Philanthropy (Winter),

14–20.

References 779

Yee, A H., Fairchild, H H., Weizmann, F., & Wyatt, G E (1993) Addressing psychology’s

problem with race American Psychologist, 49, 748–754.

Zayas, L H., & Solari, F (1994) Early childhood socialization in Hispanic families: Context,

culture, and practice implications Professional Psychoogy, 25, 200–206.

Zigler, E., & Hall, N (2000) Child development and social policy New York: McGraw-Hill Zigler, E., Kagan, S., & Hall, N (1996) Children, families, and government: Preparing for the 21st century Cambridge, England: University of Cambridge Press.

Zuckerman, M (1990) Some dubious premises in research and theory on racial differences:

Sci-entific, social, and ethical issues American Psychologist, 45(12), 1297–1303.

Chapter 25

YOUTH DEVELOPMENT,

DEVELOPMENTAL ASSETS,

AND PUBLIC POLICY

Peter L Benson, Marc Mannes, Karen Pittman, and Thaddeus Ferber

This chapter examines the interrelationships among the evolving field of youth ment, Search Institute’s developmental asset framework, and public policy for youth The chapter describes the strength-based youth development approach in large part by comparing it to and contrasting it with the deficit-based orientation to successful de- velopment It also discusses the theoretical and empirical basis of the developmental asset framework as a prime exemplar of positive youth development, a comprehensive conceptualization of developmental well-being, and a generator of knowledge regard- ing the developmental pathways of young people We identify relevant social and cul- tural dynamics affecting youth, consider their implication for youth development pol- icy, and highlight a number of public policies from around the country that reflect the tenets and unfolding wisdom of healthy youth development The chapter concludes by assessing the sociopolitical prospects for developmental principles and knowledge to actually inform and shape public policy for young people.

develop-According to Burt, Zweig, and Roman (2002), public policy is regularly blind to adolescents, except on occasions when their actions make adults uneasy Consequently, when the issue of adolescent health has surfaced on the national policy agenda over the last four decades, it has typically been in response to problem behaviors and expressions

of psychopathology Takanishi (1993) argues that since the 1960s, national youth icy has been driven by a developmental deficit orientation, due in part to the high visi- bility of escalating rates of developmental threats and health-compromising behavior,

pol-as documented in numerous national studies in the closing decades of the 20th century These prevailing circumstances need to be juxtaposed with a more recent resurgence in adolescent development research in the 1980s and 1990s that—when combined with studies of the daily experience of adolescents—raised two additional issues for policy makers to consider First, many of the supports and opportunities youth need to effec- tively navigate through the second decade of life were becoming less accessible (Brown, Larson, & Saraswathi, 2002) Second, the massive technological, economic, and social changes that had transpired since 1960 required a reassessment of the kinds of supports and opportunities youth need to transition successfully from adolescence to adulthood (Benson, 2003; Pittman, Irby, & Ferber, 2001; Zaslow & Takanishi, 1993) A growing body of research on the limited success of programs targeted at reducing or preventing

781

risk behaviors (Dougherty, 1993; Gambone, 1993) and several highly influential reports

on the developmental needs of middle school and high school youth (Carnegie tion of New York, 1992, 1995), combined to fuel new interest in more strength-based de- velopmental approaches to promoting youth well-being Accordingly, a more common refrain in many policy discussions is that public investment for adolescence should in- creasingly be guided by a youth development perspective (Hahn, 2002; Sherrod, 1997).

Corpora-COMPARING APPROACHES TO DEVELOPMENTAL SUCCESS

Some have claimed that the science and application of promoting developmental strengths in young people represents a significant paradigm shift (Roth & Brooks- Gunn, 2000) This newer orientation is more fully understood by contrasting it with an alternative framework that has a much longer history and a more dominant influence

on youth studies, policies, and services The traditional deficit orientation has been largely organized around the identification, reduction, and prevention of factors that are understood as undermining healthy development (e.g., physical and sexual abuse, racism and related forms of exclusion, violence in families and neighborhoods, access

to alcohol and other substances, media violence), as well as the reduction and tion of unhealthy behavior (e.g., alcohol use, tobacco use, substance use, adolescent pregnancy, violence, school dropout, and antisocial behavior) A focus on the concept

preven-of risk lies at the heart preven-of the traditional deficit paradigm addressing youth Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi (2000) make the case that the field of psychology has been sin- gularly focused on the investigation, treatment, prevention, and reduction of pathology and its symptoms Fisher and Wallace’s (2000) research identifies the enormous chal- lenges to conducting socially and ethically responsible research on adolescent risk and psychopathology in the absence of a true investigative partnership actively involving community members They call for community consultations between researchers and community participants to employ culturally sensitive lenses and gauge the risks and benefits of particular studies.

Philosophical, scientific, social, and political critiques of the deficit approach and its emphasis on risks have been made Beck (1992) conducted a social analysis of the per- meation of risk throughout all aspects of advanced modern Western society and judged

it to be a natural and regrettable consequence of technical-scientific hegemony with risome global implications According to Beck, the social production of both wealth and risk are inextricably linked in postmodern civilization by virtue of ecological de- valuations, economic insecurities, political uncertainties, health hazards, and social heteronomy resulting from scientific discoveries and technological innovation Valen- cia (1997) identifies the racial and class biases at the core of the evolution and applica- tion of the deficit approach in education Swadener and Lubeck (1995) posit that the pervasiveness of the children-and-families-at-risk construct in America has decidedly political overtones in the way it is used to sidestep the inequitable distribution of social and economic resources and avoid critical analysis of the power of privilege.

wor-This historically dominant deficit orientation, akin to the medical model in cine, has been strongly imprinted on social policy and virtually reified in related fields

medi-of practice It should come then as no surprise that a number medi-of national youth policy

initiatives during the last 30 years have borne the label war—on teen pregnancy, drugs,

and violence, to name a few (Goleman, 1995) It is also not surprising, once again sistent with the medical model, that health in general (and adolescent health in partic- ular) continue to routinely be defined as the absence of symptom, maladjustment, or health-compromising behaviors (Miringhoff & Miringhoff, 1999) The field of preven- tion—with its implied interest in eliminating the onset of problems or minimizing their adverse consequences—has consistently grown and become institutionalized in terms

con-of policy formulation and programmatic funding With nearly all federal research funding across the social and life sciences emphasizing disease and pathology, young scholars with the intellectual curiosity to investigate health and well-being are likely to

be dissuaded by insufficient revenue from building a respectable and sustainable search career A recent notable departure is the effort by the W.T Grant Foundation to concentrate its grant making on understanding the contexts that can foster positive de- velopment (Hein, 2002) Many of the national barometers used to monitor and report trends in child and adolescent health that inform policy makers and practitioners focus

re-on risks and problem behavior, with success interpreted as the lack of their tion (Benson, 1997; Pittman & Irby, 1998).

manifesta-By way of comparison, the field of youth development adopts more of a wellness perspective, places particular emphasis on the existence of healthy conditions, and ex- pands the concept of health to include the skills, prosocial behaviors, and competen- cies needed to succeed in employment, education, and civic life It moves beyond the eradication of risk and deliberately argues for the promotion of well-being Accord- ingly, a common refrain in youth development circles is “problem-free is not fully pre- pared” (Pittman et al., 2001) This perspective builds on an expanding trend in the study of adolescence and youth work to employ a strength-based orientation, focus on understanding, and foster the developmental experiences and resources that enhance educational, social, and health outcomes.

Hamilton (1999) characterizes positive youth development as three interconnected ideas: (a) youth have an inherent capacity to grow toward optimal development if given appropriate opportunity and supportive developmental ecologies; (b) youth programs orchestrate at the community level a range of developmentally appropriate supports and opportunities that build on and enhance the strengths of youth; and (c) youth programs are designed to emphasize competency, skill building, youth participation, and inclusion.

The building blocks of successful development have variously been called supports and opportunities, developmental assets, and developmental nutrients (Benson, Scales,

& Mannes, 2003) Closely aligned with this growing line of inquiry is the study of silience and its identification of the processes and sources of successful adaptation in the face of high exposure to developmental threats (Garmezy, 1985; Masten & Curtis, 2000) This interest in successful development and the pathways that promote it are gradually exerting a degree of influence on research and practice in many fields (e.g., psychology, evaluation, social work, public health), and are becoming recurrent dis- cussion themes in youth policy forums.

re-In actuality, the history of youth policy defies easy characterization Some evidence suggests that although the prevention, treatment, and reduction of youth problem be- havior characterize the primary worldviews and mindsets driving policy makers, re-

Comparing Approaches to Developmental Success 783

searchers, and practitioners, a comparatively smaller but continuous, parallel stream of activity can be characterized as the youth development approach A government report released in 1996 claims that “focusing on young people’s strengths rather than their fail- ings is the underlying principle of the youth development construct and has been the driving force behind the U.S Department of Health and Human Services’ youth- related programs for over two decades” (U.S Department of Health and Human Ser- vices [DHHS], 1996, p 3) The report argues that the Youth Development and Delin- quency Prevention Administration’s investment, dating back to 1970, encouraged a delinquency prevention strategy based on promoting “a sense of competence, a sense

of usefulness, a sense of helping, a sense of power” (DHHS, 1996, p 4) Another more recent policy initiative aligned with youth development principles is service learning and community service, buoyed in part by the 1990 National and Community Service Act (Stukas, Clary, & Snyder, 1999) The developmental strengths approach experi- enced even greater legitimacy by the release of a major National Research Council re-

port called Community Programs to Promote Youth Development (National Research

Council & Institute of Medicine, 2002) and the new focus of the W.T Grant tion on youth as resources (Hein, 2002).

Founda-A more reasonable conclusion to draw at this point in time is that reducing and venting developmental deficits and promoting developmental strengths are parallel,

pre-unique, and complementary tracks They both have informed youth policy during the last 40 years, with the former clearly ascendant and the latter gaining momentum and a heightened measure of recognition Figure 25.1 illustrates the relationship between the deficit- and strength-based policy orientations in terms of how each paradigm defines healthy developmental ends and specifies means to secure those ends The figure illu- minates the ways in which there are conceptual and operational arenas of distinctive- ness and overlap between the two orientations and depicts their increasing interplay First, Figure 25.1 contrasts two general ways of thinking about the outcomes asso- ciated with successful development The first emphasizes preventing or reducing health-compromising behavior (Cell C) such as alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drug use; adolescent pregnancy; violence; antisocial behavior; depression; and suicide The sec- ond attends to promoting behaviors demonstrating caring, competence, and thriving (Cell D) that are beneficial to self and society Given that the first of these two outcome domains has driven the vast majority of policy initiatives and related program evalua- tions as well as scientific studies having to do with adolescent development (Benson, 1997), the conceptualization and measurement of Cell D lags behind that of Cell C Still, several attempts to render definition to the thriving and well-being space in the past decade are worth highlighting Pittman and Irby (1996) proposed a four-part tax- onomy for capturing the major tasks of successful adolescent development: developing

competence, confidence, character, and connections Lerner (2002) added a fifth c:

car-ing (or compassion) Connell and his colleagues suggested a framework involvcar-ing the concepts of learning to be productive, learning to connect, and learning to navigate (Connell, Gambone, & Smith, 2002) Several scholars have begun to delineate and measure the concept of thriving, which includes multiple behaviors postulated to pro- mote both the individual and social good (Lerner, 2002; Scales, Benson, Leffert, & Blyth, 2000) Among these activities are academic success, the affirmation of diversity, leadership skill, and civic engagement.

The dominant deficit paradigm—variously labeled the risk reduction, the problem behavior, or prevention approach—tends to pay more of its attention to the outcomes essentially represented in Cell C, even though it also has to consider the means in Cell

A by which those outcomes can be accomplished Arrow 1 represents this traditional emphasis of the deficit-based paradigm In contrast, the youth development perspec- tive has tended to concentrate more on the pathways of promoting developmental nu- trients (Cell B) and only secondarily on the positive outcomes themselves (Cell D) As one recent definition put it, “youth development mobilizes programs, organizations, systems, and communities to build developmental strengths in order to promote health and well-being” (Benson & Saito, 2001, p 144) Arrow 2 represents the usual emphasis

of the strength-based paradigm.

Each paradigm has a particular emphasis and reflects a theoretically distinct way for improving the lives of young people Yet, over time, the two approaches have become increasingly conceptually interwoven by model developers and practitioners who see them as inherently complementary in real-world applications (Benson, 1997; Hawkins & Catalano, 1992) For example, the field called prevention science parts company with the traditional deficit-based paradigm In prevention science, the driv- ing organizing principle of producing the reduction-prevention of negative outcomes

path-by reducing-preventing threats to development has been broadened to also attend to developmental nutrients that are labeled as protective factors and are also seen as im- portant to minimizing or curtailing negative outcomes So, for example, an initiative to

Comparing Approaches to Developmental Success 785

Figure 25.1 Approaches to Successful Development

Reduce/Prevent

Health–Compromising Behavior

Approaches to Successful Development

reduce adolescent alcohol use might combine efforts to reduce the supply of alcohol available to youth within a community and promote more equitable access to quality after-school programs Each of the two strategies is seen as having alcohol prevention utility, and they are both linked to outcome Cell C Therefore, in seeking solutions to risk-taking behavior, the central theories and models in the prevention science ap- proach (e.g., see Hawkins & Catalano, 1992; Jessor, 1991) argue for the utility of both risk reduction and the promotion of developmental nutrients as core strategies (Arrows

1 and 3 in Figure 25.1).

Interconnections are also spawned by the sustained dominance of the deficit tation and related funding pressures and accountability expectations Youth develop- ment programs, policies, and practices are clearly the focus of Arrow 2 However, the sustained pervasiveness of a deficit paradigm, the fact that most federal and foundation fund providers remain locked into that prevailing approach, and the lack of viable met- rics for healthy development means that youth development also becomes inextricably tied to reducing problem behavior (Arrow 3) Consequently, both policy orientations share an interest in Arrow 3.

orien-The unique and complimentary features of the two paradigms are crucial for policy makers to consider as they establish intent and forge strategy for securing adolescent health Public, private, and philanthropic investments need to recognize the genuine contributions of the complimentary pathways to youth health and well-being and en- courage the incorporation of both outcome perspectives into policy initiatives and pro- grammatic interventions.

THE SCIENCE AND APPLICATION OF THE DEVELOPMENTAL

ASSET FRAMEWORK

The foundations of the developmental asset framework advanced by Search Institute are rooted in an integration of multiple lines of inquiry designed to identify the building blocks of healthy development (Benson, Leffert, Scales, & Blyth, 1998; Scales & Lef- fert, 1999).The framework is grounded in major developmental strength concepts such

as resiliency and competence (Garmezy, 1985; Masten et al., 1995), protective factors (Hawkins, Catalano, & Miller, 1992; Jessor , Turbin, & Costa,1998), and connectedness (Scales & Gibbons, 1996; Resnick et al., 1997) In addition to drawing upon theory and research in these core developmental strengths, the framework has incorporated the findings of many studies within child and adolescent developmental psychology The framework emphasizes primary socialization contexts and processes for youth across the middle and high school years The breadth of the framework’s purview al- lows it to override the warning of Connell et al (2002) that too often practice arenas for the youth development perspective are confined to after-school programs or add-on programs within school settings and “excludes key settings in which youth develop” (p 292) They charge the youth development field to conceptualize with greater clarity the multiple community settings in which supports and opportunities can emerge The framework places a premium on the universe of ecologies (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) that have a particular and collective social responsibility in fostering positive development The socializing systems of family (Simpson, 2001), school (Starkman,

Scales, & Roberts, 1999), neighborhood (Sampson, Morenoff, & Earls, 1999; Sampson, Raudenbush, & Earls, 1997), youth-serving organizations (Larson, 2000; Wynn, 1997), and religion (Paragment & Park, 1995; Resnick et al., 1997; Werner & Smith, 1992; Youniss, McLellan, & Yates, 1999) are among the prime settings and sources con- tributing to youth development The ability of these developmental contexts to facili- tate connection, regulation, and autonomy has been identified by a number of re- searchers as fundamental to healthy adolescent functioning (Barber & Olsen, 1997; Eccles, Early, Frasier, Belansky, & McCarthy, 1997) The framework’s interest in and re- spect for the developmental dynamics that transpire among these ecologies is especially noteworthy, given the uncommonness of approaches that consider reciprocal and transactional encounters across social settings and sources as vital to healthy develop- ment (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Scales & Leffert, 1999) By virtue of its concern for inter- active and redundant developmental processes, the developmental asset framework articulates the kinds of relationships, social experiences, social environments, and pat- terns of interaction, norms, and competencies over which a community of people— through its socializing systems—has considerable control.

The relativity of developmental strength concepts and the expression of mental dynamics must be kept in mind Brown et al (2002) posit that middle-class youth in India, Southeast Asia, and Europe have much more in common with each other than with their economically poorer counterparts in their own nations Masten and Curtis (2000) remind us that what is viewed as resilient, competent, protective, or even connected is also culturally and historically bound In America, autonomy for youth meant something very different 100 years ago and will likely have a different con- notation in the 22nd century Whereas stricter parenting seems to be related to better outcomes among African American children living in more urban or high-risk neigh- borhoods (Furstenburg, 1993), it is related to poorer outcomes among White children

develop-in less stressed and high-risk environments (Stedevelop-inberg, Mounts, Lamborn, & busch, 1991).

Dorn-Even though these developmental concepts and dynamics may manifest themselves

in diverse ways across transnational social classes and time periods as well as within a particular country’s racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic subcultures, they are best appre- ciated as the kinds of foundational developmental task accomplishments that secure the health and well-being of youth and ultimately make optimal development possible (Benson, 2003) The developmental asset framework is also stimulating pioneering at- tempts by scholars and practitioners to move beyond normal development and con- sider optimal development along with the contributions various socialization settings make to maximizing development (Lerner, Brentano, Dowling, & Anderson, 2002) Scales and Leffert’s (1999) research synthesis undergirding the framework focused

on integrating developmental experiences that have been shown to contribute to (a) the prevention of high-risk behaviors, (b) the enhancement of thriving outcomes, and (c) the capacity to function adequately in the face of adversity The other intent of the syn- thesis was to identify developmental factors that appear to be particularly robust in predicting health outcomes across sex, race-ethnicity, and family income.

Forty developmental assets have been specified and then subdivided into two groups:

20 external assets (i.e., health-promoting features of the environment) and 20 internal assets (e.g., commitments, values, and competencies) The external assets are grouped

The Science and Application of the Developmental Asset Framework 787

into four categories: (a) support, (b) empowerment, (c) boundaries and expectations, and (d) constructive use of time The internal assets are grouped into the four categories

of (a) commitment to learning, (b) positive values, (c) social competencies, and (d) itive identity.

pos-In 1989 Search pos-Institute began conducting studies of 6th–12th grade students in public and private schools throughout the nation Then in 1996 the Institute developed

a 156-item survey instrument, Search Institute Profiles of Student Life: Attitudes and Behaviors From 1989 through 2001, more than 2,500 communities and more than

1,800,000 adolescents have completed the instrument The instrument measures each

of the 40 developmental assets, along with other constructs that include developmental deficits, high-risk behaviors consonant with federally funded research studies, and thriving indicators The specific assets comprising the developmental asset framework and the set of developmental deficits, high-risk behaviors, and thriving indicators are presented in Table 25.1.

The survey is administered anonymously in a classroom setting with standardized structions Routinely, these school district oriented studies serve as a complete census

in-of all 6th- to 12th-grade students attending school on the day the survey is administered and renders a developmental profile of youth Conducting the survey is typically part of

a community strategy to mobilize around the developmental asset framework The port developed for and delivered to a city or town often becomes a widely shared public document catalyzing a community-wide call to action on behalf of youth development Aggregate reports on the national sample completing the survey during particular years have been published periodically (Benson, 1990; Benson, Scales, Leffert, & Roehl- kepartain, 1999) The latest data set is composed of slightly more than 217,000 youth who completed the survey during the 1999–2000 school year These reports, along with the most recent data set, have served as the basis for a line of inquiry that has analyzed the promotional and protective value of the developmental assets and examined their cumulative benefits and predictive power.

re-Evidence exists to make a case that the number of developmental assets in young people’s lives (a measure of the developmental richness of a young person’s total ecol- ogy) and clusters of assets (often operating in specific contexts for specific outcomes of interest for particular young people) promote healthy behavior (Scales, Benson, Lef- fert, & Blyth, 2000), prevent unhealthy behavior (Leffert et al., 1998; Taylor et al., 2002), and help us better understand patterns of risk and thriving among adolescents (Benson et al., 1999).

The developmental assets appear to provide what can be thought of as beneficial tical and horizontal pile-up effects Vertical pile-up effects can manifest and be mea- sured in several different ways The total number of assets young people experience at any one time, the clustering or co-occurrence of risks and assets, and the accumulation over time of the effects of a young person’s developmental history are all examples What we call horizontal pile-up effects are represented and measured as the interac- tions among the developmental assets as a result of experiencing complimentary de- velopmental strengths across contexts and social networks within one’s total ecology and experiencing clusters of assets that are particularly related to specific developmen- tal outcomes.

ver-Benson (1990) reported on an early Search Institute study of more than 47,000 6th–

The Science and Application of the Developmental Asset Framework 789

Table 25.1 The Developmental Asset Framework

3 Other adult relationships—Young person receives support from three or more nonparent adults

4 Caring neighborhood—Young person experiences caring neighbors.

5 Caring school climate—School provides a caring, encouraging environment.

6 Parent involvement in schooling—Parent(s) are actively involved

in helping young person succeed in school.

Empowerment 7 Community values youth—Young person perceives that

commu-nity adults value youth.

8 Youth as resources—Young people are given useful roles in the community.

9 Service to others—Young person serves in the community one hour or more per week.

10 Safety—Young person feels safe at home, at school, and in the neighborhood.

Boundaries and 11 Family boundaries—Family has clear rules and consequences, Expectations and monitors the young person’s whereabouts.

12 School boundaries—School provides clear rules and quences.

conse-13 Neighborhood boundaries—Neighbors take responsibility for monitoring young people’s behavior

14 Adult role models—Parent(s) and other adults model positive, responsible behavior.

15 Positive peer influence—Young person’s best friends model tive, responsible behavior.

posi-16 High expectations—Both parents and teachers encourage the young person to do well.

Constructive Use 17 Creative activities—Young person spends three or more hours

of Time per week in lessons or practice in music, theater, or other arts.

18 Youth programs—Young person spends three hours or more per week in sports, clubs, or organizations at school, and/or in the community.

19 Religious community—Young person spends one or more hours per week in activities in a religious institution.

20 Time at home—Young person is out with friends “with nothing special to do” two or fewer nights per week.

(continued)

24 Bonding to school—Young person cares about her or his school.

25 Reading for pleasure—Young person reads for pleasure 3 or more hours per week.

Positive Values 26 Caring—Young person places high value on helping other

29 Honesty—Young person “tells the truth even when it is not easy.”

30 Responsibility—Young person accepts and takes personal sponsibility.

re-31 Restraint—Young person believes it is important not to be ally active or to use alcohol or other drugs.

sexu-Social Competencies 32 Planning and decision making—Young person knows how to

plan ahead and make choices.

33 Interpersonal competence—Young person has empathy, ity, and friendship skills.

sensitiv-34 Cultural competence—Young person has knowledge of and comfort with people of different cultural/racial/ethnic back- grounds.

35 Resistance skills—Young person can resist negative peer pressure and dangerous situations.

36 Peaceful conflict resolution—Young person seeks to resolve flict nonviolently.

con-Positive Identity 37 Personal power—Young person feels he or she has control over

“things that happen to me.”

38 Self-esteem—Young person reports having high self-esteem.

39 Sense of purpose—Young person reports “my life has a purpose.”

40 Positive view of personal future—Young person is optimistic about her or his personal future.

Table 25.1 (Continued)

Developmental Deficits

Alone at home Spends two hours or more per school day alone at home.

TV overexposure Watches television or videos three or more hours per school day Physical abuse Reports one or more incidents of physical abuse in lifetime.

Victim of violence Reports being a victim of violence one or more times in the past two

years.

Drinking parties Reports attending one or more parties in the last year “where other

kids your age were drinking.”

High-Risk Behavior

Problem alcohol use Has used alcohol three or more times in the past month or got drunk

one or more times in the past two weeks.

Tobacco use Smokes one or more cigarettes every day or frequently uses chewing

tobacco.

Illicit drug use Has used illicit drugs three or more times in the past 12 months Sexual intercourse Has had sexual intercourse three or more times in lifetime.

Depression and suicide Is frequently depressed and/or has attempted suicide.

Violence Has engaged in three or more acts of fighting, hitting, injuring a

per-son, carrying or using a weapon, or threatening physical harm in the past 12 months.

Antisocial behavior Has been involved in three or more incidents of shoplifting, trouble

with police, or vandalism in the past year.

School problems Has skipped school two or more days in the past four weeks and/or

has below a C average.

Gambling Has gambled three or more times in the past 12 months.

Thriving Indicators

Succeeds in school Gets mostly A’s on report card.

Helps others Helps friends or neighbors one or more hours each week

Values diversity Places high importance on getting to know people of other

racial/eth-nic groups Maintains good health Pays attention to healthy nutrition and exercise.

Exhibits leadership Has been a leader of a group or organization in the past 12 months Resists danger Avoids doing things that are dangerous.

Delays gratification Saves money for something special rather than spending it all right

away.

Overcomes adversity Does not give up when things get difficult.

Note Reprinted with permission from Search Institute (Minneapolis, MN: Search Institute) ©1997.

www.search-institute.org

The Science and Application of the Developmental Asset Framework 791

12th graders that showed that youth who experience a horizontal pile-up of assets via engagement in four developmentally rich settings (family, school, structured youth ac- tivity, and faith community) report six times fewer risk behaviors than do other adoles- cents This finding is reinforced through Sanders’ (1998) study of more than 800 urban African American students in the 8th grade, which lends additional support for the hy- pothesis that strengths piling up across ecological domains magnify the protective and thriving effects of positive experiences in single contexts Sanders suggested that “when students receive support from the family, church, and school simultaneously, the effects

on their attitudes about self and the importance of schooling are magnified” (p 402) The protective and promotional significance of the developmental assets is best il-

lustrated by studies showing how risk and thriving patterns co-occur as a function of

varying categories of asset levels On the protective side, the average number of 10 risk behavior patterns reported by young people drops sharply—by half or more— with each successive shift to a higher quartile of reported assets (Benson et al., 1999) Consistent with the findings of other researchers (e.g., Jessor & Jessor, 1977; Ketterli- nus, Lamb, Nitz, & Elster, 1992), Benson et al (1999) also reported that risk behaviors tend to co-occur Analysis based on the data set of approximately 100,000 youth who completed the survey during the 1996–1997 school year suggested that students who engage in any of those risk patterns are more than four times as likely as are other stu- dents to engage in at least three additional risk behavior patterns.

high-Moreover, Benson et al (1999) identified a consistent pattern of assets helping to plain the prevention of typical high-risk behaviors In a different analysis of the same sample, Leffert et al., (1998) found that certain clusters of developmental assets ex- plained a considerable proportion of the variance associated with those high-risk be- havior patterns Although slightly different clusters of assets were meaningful in ex- plaining different outcomes, the total models (with demographic variables) accounted for 21–41% of the variance, and the assets contributed 16–35%.

ex-Benson et al (1999) demonstrated that relationship between developmental assets and thriving indicators is the same as with high-risk behavior patterns From a promo- tional perspective the data reveals that asset-rich youth are six times more likely to ex- perience indicators of thriving.

In terms of academic achievement, research reviewed in Scales and Leffert (1999) and Starkman et al (1999) consistently shows that the assets are related to and may well help contribute to students’ academic success Benson et al (1999) found that asset-rich students are 2.5 times more likely to report getting mostly As in school than are stu- dents who have only an average level of the assets Leffert, Scales, Vraa, Libbey, and Benson (forthcoming) find that students experiencing higher levels of developmental assets generally had higher actual grades in English, science, social studies, and math- ematics; higher cumulative GPAs; and higher class ranks In addition, high levels of as- sets seemed to be related to the narrowing of traditional gender equity gaps as reflected

by GPAs and math grades.

More extensive descriptions of the framework’s development, the measurement of sets, and the predictive power of the framework can be found in a series of publications (Benson, 1997; Benson, 2003; Benson et al.,1998; Leffert et al., 1998; Scales et al., 2000) The developmental asset framework attributes salient roles and responsibilities to multiple socialization settings for fostering positive youth development Therefore, it is

as-imperative that significant social and economic forces affecting these developmental contexts are identified and better understood in order to establish a more informed ba- sis for generating public policies.

YOUTH DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC POLICY:

THE CULTURAL CONTEXT

Dramatic changes in family composition, family mobility, media exposure, the nature and demands of work, the rapid migration of women into the outside-of-home work- force, and the isolation of families from community supports have complicated and even altered pathways to developmental success for youth (Fukuyama, 1999; Hernan- dez, 1994; National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, 2000, 2002) Accord- ing to social historians such as Fukuyama (1999), during such times of rapid social change, societies tend to experience an upswing in problem behaviors such as substance use and violence Fukuyama associates this consequence in America with two co- occurring processes: the lessening of social restraints and the expansion of individual- ism as the referent point for identity Yankelovich (1998) reinforces this cultural assess- ment by noting several significant value shifts in American society over the last several decades He argues that the concept of duty has been transformed, with less value be- ing placed on what one owes to others as a matter of moral obligation Respectability has also undergone a change in the sense that less value is placed on symbols of correct behavior for a person of a particular social class Social morality has experienced a de- cline, with less value being attributed to observing society’s rules Finally, Yankelovich suggests that the importance and emphasis of sacrifice have been recalibrated and re- oriented Less value is placed on sacrifice as a moral good, and the very idea of sacri- fice has been tied to more pragmatic economic criteria.

The cumulative weight of social change dynamics, problem behavior issues, and value shifts needs to be considered against the backdrop of one of the more discussed phenomena influencing contemporary cultural life—“the disappearance of social cap- ital and civic engagement in America” (Putnam, 1996, p 34) Healthy society—at least

in Western terms—requires the mobilization of social networks and social norms to support the pursuit of shared goals (social capital) and the meaningful participation of citizens in building and being community (civic engagement) McKnight (1995) rails against the evolution of the American human service industry and its unintended con- sequence of suppressing community social capital and engagement The implication is that an overemphasis on professionalized services unintentionally fuels—or is a corre- late of—downward trends in forms of community participation particularly crucial for child and adolescent socialization (Benson et al., 1998).

Both the intrinsic benevolence of social capital and the downward trends in social relations and civic participation are open to skepticism American writers as far back

as Sinclair Lewis have generally mocked and penned disdain for the cautiousness, formity, and regimentation associated with at least the small-town version of civic and associational life Moreover, other data exist to draw a less gloomy picture than the one sketched by Putnam (Keeter, Zukin, Andolina, & Jenkins, 2002; Ladd, 1996) Nonethe- less, in political science and public affairs the suppression of social capital and civic en-

con-Youth Development and Public Policy: The Cultural Context 793

gagement continue to be widely discussed as possible explanations for historical turns in voting behavior and seen as stemming from rising levels of social mistrust, so- cial isolation, and the cultural cache surrounding the ethos of individualism (Benson, 1997).

down-Accepting the assumption that rapid change does indeed produce problematic youth behaviors, as those problem behaviors are subjected to persistent media attention (Gilliam & Bales, 2001; Scales, 2001), they are likely to create an environment in which action is demanded or expected of elected officials Gilliam and Bales (2001) demon- strate how the media consistently frames youth in a negative light and portrays them as dangerous and self-absorbed The prevalence of this frame may feed a tendency by pol- icy makers to legislate programs and initiatives designed to reduce harm.

The form and substance of policy options and responses is also invariably tied to highly subjective assessments and interpretation of the causes and nature of the prob- lems themselves (Garbarino, 1993) Garbarino makes clear that adolescent behavioral problems can be seen as “ice cubes,” which suggests that they are tied to individual de- velopment and emanate from individual and family flaws, or “icebergs,” in which the roots of problems lie beyond and below the individual in broad social and cultural forces More than likely because of the strong societal bias towards individualism, the tendency in American policy making is to make policy choices and produce programs that view the adolescent behavioral situation as one of ice cubes, absent the broader recognition that individual-level changes quite often depend on modifications in the larger social ecology (Goodman, Wandersman, Chinman, Imm, & Morrissey, 1996) Consequently, incentives are in place for the government to inexorably build social in- dicators and monitoring systems to track problem behaviors Subsequent research and practice are steered to naming, counting, and reducing the incidence of environmental developmental risks (e.g., family violence, poverty, family disintegration) and health- compromising behaviors (e.g., substance use, adolescent pregnancy, interpersonal vio- lence, school dropout).

Widespread faith in and respect for science, with its philosophical grounding in ical positivism and its emphasis on detached inquiry, along with the splits between ba- sic research and application and the splits between expert and practitioner, may also make a contribution to policy rooted in resolving and reconciling deficiencies Accord- ing to Giddens (1991), the inherent reflexivity of science interjects doubt into the world and makes a major contribution to the anxieties and insecurities of the postmodern world For Boyte (2000), positivism structures patterns of theory evaluation, assess- ment, and outcome measures around fixing social problems Benson (2003) argues that

log-an overrelilog-ance on this orglog-anizing frame supports the creation of elaborate log-and sive service and program delivery infrastructures, creates a dependence on professional experts, and encourages an ethos of fear It derogates, ignores, and interferes with the natural and inherent capacity of communities to be community.

expen-Whereas the aforementioned philosophical and intellectual currents fuel ments in deficit-reducing approaches, a new line of inquiry is beginning to focus atten- tion on the widespread societal depletion of developmental supports and opportuni- ties In an important overview of development in the United States, Bronfenbrenner and Morris (1998) identify a growing chaos in traditional socializing systems The so- cial and cultural forces discussed in this section have dramatically altered youth access

invest-to sources of support, empowerment, connection, modeling, and value transmission over the last 40 years (Benson et al., 1998) Pervasive age segregation contributes to the deep disconnect adolescents have from long-term, sustained relationships with multi- ple adults (Benson, 1997) The issue of socialization inconsistency that now typifies the journey of human development in most communities results in many youths experi- encing a dissonance in core messages they receive about boundaries, expectations, and values (Damon, 1995) In examining the contemporary American social landscape, we discover that fundamental developmental support mechanisms are relatively uncom- mon (Benson et al., 1999) Nagging and ample data support the conclusion that the hu- man development infrastructure—if not outright chaotic—is particularly fragile and perhaps even ruptured in far too many American communities (e.g., Benson, 1997; Benson et al., 1998) Quantitative support for this conclusion emerges from aggregated community-level studies utilizing Search Institute’s developmental asset framework mentioned earlier In survey-based profiles of hundreds and hundreds of suburban, ru- ral, and urban communities, we discover that these developmental assets are relatively uncommon (Benson et al., 1999) Only a minority of American 6th- to 12th-grade youth report access to such critical developmental resources as caring neighborhood, intergenerational relationships, adult role models, a caring school climate, and creative (art, music, drama) activities (e.g., see Benson et al., 1999) To be more precise, a 1997 aggregated sample of 99,000 middle school and high school students in 213 communi- ties across the country yielded these percentages of youth who possess the following de- velopmental assets: nonrelated adult relationships, 41%; caring neighborhood, 40%; a caring school climate, 25% Furthermore, subgroup analyses of student reports reveal that this nonnormatic access to these kinds of developmental resources hold across gender, grade, parental education, and race-ethnicity (Benson et al., 1999) A year-2000 aggregated sample of 217,000 youth from 318 communities in 33 states, although it was able to show slight percentage improvement, still demonstrated similar results This information is especially disturbing in light of the data showing that opportu- nities for youth to have sustained relationships with nonrelated adults, their ability to live in places where adults know and interact with them, and their experience of schools

as places of care, support, and intellectual stimulation are understood to be predictive

of significant adolescent health outcomes (Scales & Leffert, 1999) Although some young people are indeed faring better than others in terms of social environments con- ducive to and supportive of healthy development, most young people report that they

do not experience these connections and supports A low level of access to tal developmental resources is normative for youth across gender, grade level, parental education, and race-ethnicity.

fundamen-Results from two Gallup Polls conducted in 2000 with a representative sample of American adults and in 2002 with adults and youth offer some insights regarding the social norms for adult engagement with adolescents (Scales et al., 2001) Both adult samples reveal that even though a strong majority of adults consider it very important

to communicate and enforce a common set of beliefs and behavioral expectations to youth, they routinely tend not to take personal action and view other adults as even less likely to act A lack of social expectations, pressure, permission, and support may ac- count for a wide gap between consensus on the importance of engagement and actually engaging in activity to bring it about (Scales, Benson, & Mannes, 2003).

Youth Development and Public Policy: The Cultural Context 795

A major question that emerges from this cultural assessment is, what effects and implications do all of these events and circumstances have on policy responses to youth development? One effect is youth development advocates’ motivation to increasingly

propose youth engagement and youth participation as key strategies in preparing youth for adulthood.

A second major effect is a deeper appreciation for and understanding of the ways in which the environments of the many life settings that touch the lives of youth can nur- ture developmental nutrients (Benson, Scales, & Mannes, 2003; Pittman et al., 2001); this includes delineating the key features that all settings must exhibit to secure devel- opmental objectives The recent National Research Council (2002) report entitled

Community Programs to Promote Youth Development identified these developmentally

attentive features as follows: physical and psychological safety; appropriate structure; supportive relationships; opportunities to belong; positive social norms; support for ef- ficacy and mattering; opportunities for skill building; and coordination among family, school, and community efforts.

A third major effect is the more prominent embrace of community as a locus of action for mobilizing multiple actors Community is increasingly understood as an important means for integrating the contexts that shape positive adolescent development as well

as an arena for comprehensive, citywide initiatives promoting child and adolescent being (Benson, 1997; Blyth & Leffert, 1995; Damon, 1997; National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, 2000, 2002) The idea of developmentally attentive commu- nity flows naturally out of this recognition and provides a potentially useful conceptual framework for exploring and positing optimal configurations of resources, opportuni- ties, experiences, and relationships across many institutional and sector ecologies At its core, developmentally attentive community reenergizes community sources of devel- opmental strengths for youth in the following five ways: (a) mobilizing adults, (b) en- gaging youth, (c) transforming sectors, (d) strengthening programs, and (e) unleashing supports for change (Benson & Libbey, 2001; Benson, Scales, & Mannes, 2003) Moreover, the idea of developmentally attentive community links to several relevant intellectual currents It is a concrete way to operationalize Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) pi- oneering ecological model of human development by articulating both the independent and synergistic roles community residents and sectors play in constructing an optimal environment for positive child and youth development A developmentally attentive community activates the strength-building capacity of its residents (both adults and youth) and promotes collective action for purposes of transforming developmental set- tings and sources that constitute the community infrastructure (Mannes, Benson, Kretzmann, & Norris, 2003) From the field of community organizing, it serves as the basis for Tilly’s (1973) notion of collective action—that is, that a community’s pooled resources need to be applied by a critical mass of community members to advance the common good; this entails resurrecting the role of nonprofessional citizens as poten- tial generators of developmental nutrients and necessitates rejuvenating civic engage- ment (Benson, 1997) A developmentally attentive community orchestrates the flow of positive developmental energy emanating from an organized and active citizenry so that youth acquire as many developmental assets as possible It ensures that youth ex- perience multiple developmentally rich ecologies and that all youth—not just those deemed to be at risk and served by standard prevention or risk-reduction programs—

well-are the intended beneficiaries In general, developmentally attentive communities well-are also characterized by more indirect influences that support and sustain these more di- rect resident and sector influences through social norms that promote adult engage- ment with the young and financial resources to bring developmental well-being to fruition This idea is consistent with Damon’s (1995) understanding of the develop- mental necessity of communities mobilizing around a unified consensus of core values that begins to concretize the definition of the common good.

Based upon this all-too-brief cultural review that has sought to surface germane cial and political circumstances within which the youth development paradigm has emerged, an overriding challenge is to determine how policy can be used to strengthen social capacity and build sensible and appropriate pathways to developmental success for youth.

so-DEVELOPMENTALLY ATTENTIVE YOUTH PUBLIC POLICY

Progress in securing developmentally attentive community is in part tied to ing developmentally attentive public policies for youth Developmentally attentive youth public policy would meet two primary conditions First, such policy would be congruent with the organizing frame of youth development and help codify the tenets

promulgat-of the field There would be movement beyond negative outcomes and academic cess to encompass both positive and nonacademic outcomes (Pittman, Diversi, & Fer- ber, 2002) A broad range of services, supports, and opportunities would be made avail- able to young people and would prominently feature their voices and actions as agents

suc-of positive change (Pittman, Yohalem, & Irby, 2003) Second, applied youth ment knowledge would be woven into youth policy In other words, policies would be grounded in what is empirically known and understood about healthy development Roth & Brooks-Gunn (2000) provide policy makers with a brief and user-friendly cat- aloguing of the existing knowledge base Unfortunately, neither of these two primary conditions are routinely met at the federal level (Hahn, 2002), and the same can be said for other governmental units responsible for generating youth policy.

develop-Securing developmentally attentive youth policy must also contend with the issue of whether the United States has a singular youth policy or possesses an assemblage of policies that for convenience can be clustered under a wide youth policy umbrella Pittman et al.(2003) argue that America has a plethora of policies affecting youth, in- cluding the more obvious ones that are developed in the education, juvenile justice, child welfare, and social service spheres There are also a trove of policies that may seem less obvious but have just as direct an impact on youth, such as health insurance cov- erage, tax credits, tax cuts, and school vouchers (Zigler, Kagan, & Hall, 1996) Pittman

et al (2003) determine that the United States lacks a unified and coherent policy agenda for youth that is cognizant of the dynamics of youth development, incorporates devel- opmental insights, and is decidedly strength based in its approach At the federal level, neither policies nor policy mechanisms currently exist that are capable of shepherding young people through the complicated and challenging developmental transitions from childhood through adolescence and on into adulthood.

Hahn (2002) takes a much more circumscribed perspective on what actually

consti-Developmentally Attentive Youth Public Policy 797

tutes American youth policy and suggests it has primarily focused on school reform, out-of-school youth, and programming during nonschool hours He also acknowl- edges the relatively modest reach of those existing forms of youth programs to only ap- proximately 12% of eligible youth At the state government level, Hahn suggests youth policy can be characterized as “young, underdeveloped, and inconsistent,” even though there are a growing number of positive examples in specific states, many of which are presented later in this section The viewpoint that interprets school reform, out-of- school youth, and programming during nonschool hours as viable and significant youth policy makes the case for the relevance to youth of what can be thought of as “micro public policies,” which are typically created by school boards, community-based or- ganizations, and foundations.

Developmentally attentive youth policy would help engender the formation of social capital by primarily building upon Macedo’s (2002) distinction between the relative merits of its bridging and bonding forms He asserts that the bridging aspect of social capital is far more important than the bonding version because the former builds ties within a pluralistic society, whereas the latter maintains sharp social and economic dis- tinctions between insiders and outsiders A developmentally attentive public policy for youth would affirm that associations and interrelationships across diverse social con- texts can actually make meaningful contributions to positive development and would recognize the family, neighborhood, school, youth organization, places of work, and congregations as policy intervention points Transforming schools into more develop- mentally rich settings, building linkages across multiple socializing institutions, mobi- lizing citizens, launching community-wide initiatives organized around a shared vision

of strength building, and expanding funding for quality of out-of-school programs can all be seen as features of youth development policy initiatives Moreover, enlightened youth public policy would actually create incentives for the formation of bridging so- cial capital in order to promote human and operational relationships across diverse de- velopmental settings Clearly, public policy framed with a youth development orienta- tion, based on developmental knowledge, and emphasizing bridging social capital introduces the need for many interlocking strategies cultivating youth access to and uti- lization of developmental opportunities and supports Although it is unreasonable to expect any more than a modicum of coherence resulting from diverse policy expres- sions channeled through multiple outlets, a dispersive strategy can still help create a more hospitable zeitgeist for developmentally attentive public policy.

The advancement of developmentally attentive public policy is also dependent upon the degree of success in dealing with several classic dimensions of the policy-making process The first dimension deals with the multiple factors associated with policy agenda setting (Kingdon, 1984) Building an asset-oriented youth public policy agenda

is predicated upon articulating issues that need to be on the agenda and formulating policy options that seem reasonable and capable of resolving those issues Pittman et al.’s (2001) enunciation of youth development concerns are instructive for crafting a youth policy agenda Items such as moving beyond prevention, quick fixes, and basic services can certainly serve to guide agenda-setting thinking, and Pittman et al (2001) have gone on to suggest ways in which those concerns can be translated into con- structing a policy agenda A large part of agenda setting entails consciousness raising,

education, and advocacy to foster a more enlightened and motivated developmentally attentive policy climate among the general public and elected officials.

The second dimension of policy making addresses policy enactment and entails verse strategies and tactics (Bardach, 1972; Dear & Patti, 1981) that in this instance would be associated with moving a piece of developmentally attuned legislation from inception to executive signing Major activities involve seeking sponsorship for legisla- tion, contributing ideas to and writing the actual content of statutes, forging coalitions

di-to lobby and ensure passage, and all the while monidi-toring and maintaining vigilance as potential policies grind their way through the legislative process The third dimension focuses on the actual implementation of policy by taking into account a host of human and organizational factors integral to the various contexts in which developmentally at- tentive policies are carried out (Pressman & Wildavsky, 1974) Here, particular atten- tion is paid to elements that give policies their distinctive implementation tone, char- acter, and influence as they play out in the real world These elements, which are essential to policy-based interventions and programs, include the status of interorgani- zational and intergovernmental relations, the political tenor of organizational net- works, the infrastructure of delivery systems, and agencies at the point of service deliv- ery and individuals involved in providing the service (Mannes et al., 2003).

Next, we consider the role of these three core dimensions of policy making in taining developmentally attentive public policies for youth at different governmental levels, as well as in the micropolicy category A number of examples are included for il- lustrative purposes.

at-Setting the Policy Agenda

During the 1960s, developmental knowledge was key to conceptualizing Head Start and other early childhood policy initiatives (Zigler & Anderson, 1979) Yet, similar cir- cumstances have never arisen with regard to adolescent policy, perhaps because of the prevailing supremacy of the risk reduction policy approach Policy makers’ thin un- derstanding of strength-based child and youth development also compromises the in- clusion of developmental content (Rickel & Becker, 1997) A study by Zero to Three (2000) showed that the general public also has a very limited and often incorrect knowl- edge of early child development, and it is likely they would fare the same if they were assessed on their understanding of adolescent development The lack of adequate grounding in the basics of development undercuts efforts to have the public demand and rally in support of a policy agenda that is based on what is actually known about applied development research and practice.

A lack of coherence around actual agenda content is also seen as a liability This coherence stems largely from various advocates’ inability to reach common ground around goals, objectives, and methods As the State Legislative Leaders Foundation (1995) reports, “Building a coherent message on children’s policy is challenging, how- ever, because there is no clearly discernable legislative agenda for children and families; rather, a multitude of individuals and organizations with different agendas are sending mixed messages about what is best for children” (p 42).

in-Constituencies with the most expertise on the subject of development are likely to be

Developmentally Attentive Youth Public Policy 799

government employees with either expertise in or passion for youth development and housed in agencies at various units of government, professionals in organizations serv- ing youth, and advocates from child and youth policy organizations Although each of these groups’ policy power has limits, they can still play crucial roles and perform es- sential activities, and they should be seen as valuable allies in moving progressive youth policy forward.

Ferber, Pittman, and Marshall (2002) focus on the state level and identify several of the most important tasks associated with agenda setting: (a) vision and issue framing; (b) marketing, messages, and communication; and (c) making the case to funders Re- garding the first task, the Louisiana Youth Policy Network has created a vision and guiding set of principles targeting local investment for youth education and employ- ment The initiative will be evaluated using a set of core indicators around the themes

of ensuring that children and families get a healthy start, helping children and youth succeed in school, improving the life chances of youth and young adults, and strength- ening the positive development of youth.

Agenda setting for marketing, messages, and communication must confront the general public’s largely held negative views of young people (Scales, 2001) Gilliam and Bales (2001) attribute the viewpoint to the cumulative impact of mainstream media news and entertainment that produces a public narrative of youth as self-absorbed, amoral, violent, and experimenters with risky behaviors Certain states such as Oregon, through its campaign entitled Get Real: Connect With Youth, are engaged in the sec- ond critical task of seeking to change public consciousness by developing clear mes- sages and communications to promote a more accurate, positive view of young people

as a basis for launching positive development public policies (Ferber et al., 2002) For several years a citywide asset-building initiative in Portland entitled Take the Time conducted a similar scope of work (Mannes, Lewis, Hintz, Foster, & Nakkula., 2002) According to Ferber et al (2002), the policy agenda-setting task of justifying invest- ments on behalf of youth demands policy makers’ active involvement in informing and influencing key decision points in legislative budget cycles and leveraging foundation and corporate revenue in support of young people The Connecticut Office for Com- munity Youth Development’s Funders Connection, convened by the state Office of Pol- icy and Management, is but one example of collaboration among 11 state agencies, family and community foundations, corporate giving offices, and United Ways in the state The project encourages representatives from multiple organizations underwriting initiatives to find common ground on key elements of a policy agenda that will trans- late into cost efficiencies, greater impact, and better outcomes for youth.

Membership associations for office holders such as the National League of Cities through its Institute for Youth, Education, and Families helps mayors and city council members determine how they create a policy climate in which strength-based solutions are conceived and feasible policy options to secure those solutions attain legitimacy In

a similar vein, the National Governors Association has established a Youth Policy work to help shape agenda setting.

Net-The developmental asset framework has become a resource for policy agenda ting Elected officials from around the country, including mayors in Cary, North Car- olina and Boise, Idaho have helped coalesce an asset-oriented policy agenda by estab- lishing a vision, crafting policy messages, designing policy communication strategies,

set-and establishing youth appointments on commissions set-and boards with voting rights (Melby, 2001) School boards and superintendents use developmental assets as a cor- nerstone for school reform policy In Portage County, Ohio the framework is employed

to guide the work of the continuous improvement committee’s emphasis on tional and educational services In the Traverse Bay area of northwest Michigan, GiveEm40 24.7, an asset-building community initiative, the top administrators of the five-county school system utilize the framework as an agenda setter for improving school climate and enhancing teacher and student performance.

instruc-Enacting Strength-Based Policy

Takanishi (1996) specifies three axioms essential to youth policy enactment: (a) lish universal requirements for healthy adolescent development; (b) focus on life tran- sitions as critical opportunities for interventions, and (c) target many pivotal institu- tions (the sources and settings of developmental strengths and asset building cited earlier) that cumulatively can alter the pathway toward healthy development.

estab-As discussed earlier, attempts to enact a cohesive youth policy have remained bornly beyond reach Hahn (2002) reminds us that a Young Americans Act was passed

stub-by Congress in 1988–1989 but in the absence of an appropriation did not materialize and that a Youth Development Block Grant, attempted in the 1994–1995 legislative session, also failed to become law In the early years of the 21st century Congress has before it two complementary policy proposals intimating that the heretofore elusive na- tional youth policy is possible The first, the Younger Americans Act (YAA) is viewed

by many professionals and advocates as the legislative umbrella that can put youth velopment on the map by spelling out clear principles, establishing a national coordi- nating body and local youth councils, and creating a flexible block grant state funding stream for community-based youth services The legislative intent is to assure that youth have access to programs and services providing them with the competencies and character they need to fully meet their future responsibilities as adults and citizens The campaign is bolstered by a large grassroots advocacy campaign, a centerpiece of which

de-is endorsements from more than 250 national and local youth-serving organizations A version was introduced in both legislative chambers in 2001 with solid bipartisan sup- port, and revised versions are likely to be introduced in future sessions.

The other policy blueprint is the Children’s Defense Fund’s (CDF’s) creation of an omnibus bill that packages a multitude of separate pieces of child and youth legislation that have been introduced or are up for reauthorization The omnibus bill spans the full range of policy issues—health, child development, child care, education, income sup- port, nutrition, housing, family stability, juvenile justice, gun safety, and youth devel- opment (defined as after-school programs—i.e., 21st Century Community Learning Centers), funding for community-based programs through the YAA and programs for older youth, including YouthBuild, Job Corps, and the Workforce Investment Act Differences in the scope of the two bills underscore several fault lines in the attempt

to enact youth policy Whereas the YAA is more circumscribed, tightly linked to youth development, and preferred by certain professional groups and lobbyists, the broader CDF proposed legislation is consistent with a view held by a number of national or- ganizations and funding entities that youth development policies and programs should

Developmentally Attentive Youth Public Policy 801

not be separated from child development, family support, and community ment Reconciling the dilemmas associated with a more unilateral youth development policy approach versus one wherein youth development is nested within child, family, and community interests has significant implications for the form and substance of pol- icy prescriptions.

develop-The lack of an American national youth policy is striking in comparison with many other nations’ ability to formulate a unified and coherent youth policy agenda, produce expressions of collective policy, and determine the mechanics of implementation Ac- cording to Ferber et al (2002), in 1995 the Commonwealth Youth Ministers reached agreement that all of their member countries should formulate specific national youth policies and develop national action plans Australia, Namibia, Zambia, the Republic

of Seychelles, and New Zealand (among others) have all forged youth policy mission statements to guide policy design and operation.

Youth policy enactment at the state level may lack a long and well-established tory, but more has been achieved there than at the federal level Ferber et al (2002) show how state policy makers have been laying the groundwork for broad-based enactment

his-by developing cross-cutting initiatives and model policies States are developing quests for proposals (RFPs) and memorandums of understanding (MOUs) that create the justification and protocols for how various departments and agencies—both inside and outside of government and across service delivery systems—can work together col- laboratively In Massachusetts, policy has been enacted that grants tuition waivers at any one of Massachusetts’ 29 state and community colleges and universities for youth aging out of the foster care system.

re-Ferber et al (2002) also specify the critical enactment task of making sure there is genuine and meaningful youth and community involvement Foster youth played an active role in developing the proposal, lobbying key decision makers, testifying before the Board of Higher Education, and implementing a media campaign in support of the Massachusetts foster care youth policy initiative The Iowa Collaboration for Youth De- velopment’s (ICYD’s) primary objective is to increase youth involvement in state and local level planning, policy discussions, and decision making The developmental asset framework also fosters youth engagement in policy enactment At the municipal level,

in Alexandria, Virginia, the Youth Policy Commission created a committee to conduct background research and then plan a community-wide asset-building initiative Still, without adequate legislative appropriations, enacting developmentally atten- tive policy at the macro- or microlevel is a hollow victory Newman, Smith, and Mur- phy (2001) have calculated that it would cost approximately $144 billion dollars to pro- vide youth development supports and opportunities to all school-age children and youth in America Although the mathematical exercise has merit, tabulating the mag- nitude of the investment is not likely to create a more hospitable policy environment or win political converts.

At a more pragmatic and practical level, governmental appropriation sources need

to remember that in addition to playing a role in policy agenda setting, they also can make sure policy enactment has some teeth by providing revenue to ensure a basis for policy action Fortunately, there are examples of micro-public-level policies that are changing the opportunities and resources available to youth in local settings A num- ber of local United Ways are employing developmental asset criteria as the basis for

making appropriations to community-based agencies to ensure that they will work with youth in strength-based ways.

Implementing Youth Development Policy

With the gradual emergence of more youth-development-friendly policy at the state level, more attention is being paid to implementation issues State policy makers are taking into account organizations, alliances, and networks operating in neighbor- hoods, in communities, and throughout their entire areas of jurisdiction to see that strength-based policies take root and produce beneficial consequences State attention

is devoted to the orchestration and oversight of programs representing the application

of enacted policies.

Ferber et al (2002) identify several significant tasks state-level policy makers are gaged in to buttress implementation The first deals with creating inter- and intracoor- dinating bodies to link youth development activities across state and community sys- tems These coordinating entities tend to function as design and administrative support structures for planning, collaboration, and funding They vary in terms of their charge, where they are housed within state government, how they are staffed, how they came into being, and how permanent they are, along with the amount of resources, respon- sibility, and power they have been granted Despite structural and operational distinc- tions, these bodies have the potential to fill a critical void in choreographing state pol- icy efforts for youth.

en-In Massachusetts the Executive Office of Health and Human Services created an fice of Youth Development with an Advisory Council in 1999 to forge statewide youth policy and establish and support effective youth development programs at the state and local levels The Kentucky Youth Development Partnership has brought together a group of 18 national, state, and local youth-serving organizations to foster collabora- tion of youth services at the state and local levels and to promote positive youth devel- opment Similar efforts are being conducted at the county and municipal levels with the developmental asset framework instrumental to progress In Butler County, Ohio, a comprehensive strategy that embraces the asset approach is bringing agencies together for purposes of strengthening youth The Denver Comprehensive Plan 2000 was estab- lished to foster a citywide response to the needs of its children and youth, and its design was informed by the developmental assets.

Of-A second critical state policy task relates to the intersection of implementation and accountability A number of states are working to specify outcomes and indicators and then to go on to collect, analyze, and disseminate data in ways that promote a shared sense of accountability for youth policies and programs Given the dominance of the deficit-oriented policy paradigm, states are confronted with an uphill struggle to incor- porate promotional indicators that measure and track positive attitudes and behaviors Vermont, however, has succeeded in including youth assets data in its annual outcome and indicators publication, the Agency of Human Services’ Community Profiles, by adding in 2001 developmental asset oriented questions to its state Youth Risk Behav- ior Survey This is administered biannually to most students in Grades 8–12, and tap- ping strength-based data from the Search Institute survey, Profiles of Student Life: At- titudes & Behaviors, that has been completed by more than 15,000 of the state’s youth.

Developmentally Attentive Youth Public Policy 803

Ferber et al (2002) also conveys how states are enhancing implementation related pacity for asset-oriented initiatives and interventions by creating demonstration proj- ects, fortifying the capabilities of professionals and volunteers, and revamping multiple facets of the service delivery infrastructure Curricula are being developed, training ses- sions conducted, resources disseminated through workshops and conferences, and part- nerships between state agencies and regions and communities encouraged and honored Several specific asset-building policy implementation efforts are worth mentioning Alaska-ICE is a 6-year statewide youth development initiative emphasizing the shared responsibility for preparing Alaska’s children and youth for the future (including their academic success, civil behavior, racial tolerance, and reduction of risk behaviors) It is based on the vision set forth by the Association of Alaska School Board’s 1991 long-

ca-range plan and the book Helping Kids Succeed—Alaskan Style, created in partnership

with Alaska Department of Health and Social Services in 1998 This book, which vides tools and suggestions for building assets among Alaskan youth, is based on the Search Institute’s developmental asset framework and ideas for action provided by thousands of citizens Alaska-ICE provides local, regional, and statewide training; technical assistance; demonstration projects; and coaching and resources to schools, community organizations, parent groups, and faith communities The Association of Alaska School Boards was able to obtain a direct congressional appropriation to sup- port their long-term objective of raising healthy children and youth The Commission

pro-on Youth in the Commpro-onwealth of Virginia funded pilot asset-building community projects in three sites The New York State Office of Child and Family Services through its Integrated County Planning Initiative is building a blueprint with its field force to blend the developmental asset framework with other youth models in order to advance youth development on a cross-system basis.

The compilation of evidence in this section implies that American society is in a formative stage of agenda setting, enactment, and implementation efforts with regard

to developmentally attentive youth policies Even with comparatively less progress on the federal front, the expanding breadth of activity at the state and microlevel offers ini- tial instruction on how such public policies for youth can become more easily formu- lated and put into practice.

YOUTH DEVELOPMENT POLICY AS A MORAL IMPERATIVE AND PUBLIC IDEA

Several strategies can assist public officials in their role as policy makers, public vants in their role as policy shapers and enforcers, and the general public in their role

ser-as the ultimate policy arbiters to become more fully engaged in developmentally tive public policies for youth All three groups need to expand and hone their repertoire

atten-of policy agenda setting, enacting, and implementing skills to make change There is no doubt that greater adeptness and agility with developmental domains, desired out- comes, key inputs, service delivery, and management strategies is essential to helping them deal with the mechanics of youth development policy Accountability metrics comprised of national indicators of health and developmental well-being to augment the existing edifice of deficit-driven measurement systems will be of great use in bring-

ing balance into national reporting system and set the stage for multipronged youth policy responses Quality longitudinal research looking at interrelationships among in- terventions designed to reduce threats to development, promote developmental nutri- ents, reduce health-compromising behaviors, and promote well-being will interject wis- dom into the creation of viable youth development policy options Practical tools will

be invaluable in helping government, the academy, the nonprofit sector, and main street chart a positive path for American youth.

Still, at the end of the legislative session, board meeting, or community gathering, success is as much—if not more—about capturing the hearts and minds of Americans

as it is about more efficiently and effectively completing a set of technical policy-related activities How might this be accomplished? For one thing, public officials, public ser- vants, and the general public can choose to increasingly vocalize the importance of de- vising policies that can transform the social settings that touch the lives of youth into developmentally rich ecologies because they believe in the innate value of development Additionally, they can become more articulate in specifying policies that can weave those rich ecologies woven into a developmentally attentive social fabric because they understand the resultant societal benefits These insights lead Benson and Pittman (2001) to surface the moral concerns at the core of youth development and asset- oriented policies, programs, and practices for youth and lead Pittman et al (2001) to discuss how youth policy can be transformed into an idea that has palpable cultural currency Real progress is substantially tied to public officials, public servants, and the general public embracing the moral imperative of developmentally healthy youth and committing to the good life for youth as a public idea that resonates in civic life It would also require recognizing young people as what economists refer to as a public good, which thereby helps justify public support for their optimal development (En- gland & Folbre, 2002) The path will not be an easy one.

Skocpol and Dickert (2001) describe how advocacy for children and families in civic America has changed over the last 50 years from locally rooted membership federations

at the center of American public life to professionally run and nationally focused vocacy groups They point to the lack of substantive bridges linking local groups and nationally organized professional groups and caution that the lack of linkages stymies effective policy agenda setting and subsequent action These factors likely further ex- acerbate state legislative leaders’ perception of an incoherent children’s policy agenda Imig (2001) paints a bleak picture of our society’s ability to persuade parents and com- munities to mobilize around child and youth policy issues.

ad-Mentoring and after-school initiatives stand out in contrast to this general situation But, even with the general public and public policy supportive of mentoring and after- school programming, Walker (2001) concedes that the emphasis remains on preventing

or reducing negative behavior that retards or impairs youths’ reaching their potential, and there is very little acknowledgement of the need to actually foster healthy develop- ment The stark dimensions of the social dilemma helping Americans recognize the im- portant distinction between a deficit and a positive orientation is readily apparent in the results of a Gallup Poll released in March 2001 that indicated that a majority of Americans concentrate on their weaknesses and try to fix them as opposed to building

on their strengths (Buckingham, 2001) Similar results were obtained in a number of countries around the world, which indicates the global reach of human allegiance to re-

Youth Development Policy as a Moral Imperative and Public Idea 805

mediation as a way of being According to Buckingham, Ben Franklin described wasted strengths as “sundials in the shade,” and the Gallup research indicates that many indi- viduals, families, and organizations in America keep their sundials in the shade.

As a result of informal conversations with about two dozen Americans, Walker (2001) came to the conclusion that few had much confidence that public policy could make any difference in the lives of youth Because according to Walker the policy cli- mate is “rooted largely in the opinions and common sense of ordinary citizens” (p.78), the suspicions and doubts that surfaced complicate the possibility of progress on the developmental front for youth His experiences only serve to reinforce a prevailing so- cial perspective that policy-based solutions have limited merit.

Despite the challenges, youth development policy remains worth seeking because the good life for youth and the revitalization and refurbishment of civil society are in- creasingly seen as vitally interconnected, and emphasizing their interrelationship only serves to elevate their public presence Lerner, Fisher, and Weinberg (2000) affirm that civil society will grow and prosper as public policies provide youth with the opportuni- ties for caring-compassion, competence, character, connection, and confidence In the broadest sense, civil society represents the social contract among the people occupying

a political jurisdiction For Walzer (1998), civil society “names the space of uncoerced human association and also the set of relational networks—formed for the sake of fam- ily, faith, interest, and ideology—that fill this space” (pp 291–292) Walzer’s definition

of civil society is consonant with Putnam’s (1993) assertion of social capital as essential

to the vitality of democratic society and with major points made by models and work in youth development, including the developmental asset framework Energizing the voluntary associational nature of the various settings and source of development,

frame-as well frame-as firming connections among them, is essential to realizing developmentally rich ecologies and is harmonious with how developmentally attentive community can

be attained (Lerner & Benson, 2003).

In Walzer’s (1998) review of 19th- and 20th-century social thought on strengthening civil society in order to ensure that citizens—young and old—can attain the good life, two lines of thinking are particularly germane to the current state of youth and their de- velopment One approach affirms that the good life is secured through the marketplace and attained primarily through personal choice Freedom itself is predicated upon one’s ability to choose among product and service options Living well primarily entails focusing on consumer choices and only secondarily deals with public affairs and pol- icy Youth reach their full human potential as competitive and private creatures en- gaged in rational economic choice Walzer, however, raises concerns that the celebra- tion of autonomy inherent in the marketplace actually undermines the basis for social solidarity Moreover, he asserts that the market works strenuously to avoid entangle- ment with government policy because of its penchant for a minimalist state.

A second perspective defines the good life as engaged citizens of a public community fully participating in political affairs and policy matters This affirmation of civic re- publicanism hails political activity, collective involvement with fellow citizens, and the mutual fabrication of policy Youth reach their full human potential as public figures— active and engaged citizens caught up in proposing, debating, and deciding In this sec- ond category, contemporary America is often found wanting Fisher and Karger (1997) note the evolution of a more private contemporary world, the hallmarks of which are

an emphasis on the private rights of individuals, the expansion of private spaces, and the expanded power of private institutions They raise concerns about the impact of these trends on social life and the public good These kinds of shortcomings likely stim- ulate the impulses behind initiatives such as youth activism, service-learning, and com- munity service that are designed to get youth more meaningfully involved with and contributing to civic culture (Zeldin, 2000).

Zimmerman (1992) investigated the relationship among state political culture, the level of public investments for well-being, and negatively framed indicators of well- being such as divorce, suicide, poverty, and teen pregnancy She was able to show that states adhering to a more individualistic political culture—meaning that they empha- sized private concerns over public ones and high value was placed on keeping public in- terventions minimal—did less to mediate connections among people and had poorer results on those individual and family well-being indicators; this was contrasted with states that were less individualistic, did more to mediate connections, and had better re- sults for the individual and family indicators of well-being.

In terms of moral imperatives, Etzioni (2001) questions whether a more robust civil society and the good life for all people—including youth—can be attained without specifying the moral characteristics of the good society He chooses to draw distinc- tions between the civil and the good society and by tapping rich legacies of social phi- losophy and political theory charts differing pathways to reaching the good Etzioni posits that the liberal theory’s approach to a strong civil society is predisposed to reject social formulations of the good by either the state or society based upon adherence to

a position of moral pluralism He goes on to suggest that in marked contrast to the luctance of liberal political theory, both communitarian and conservative theorists are eager to specify what is good Conservative thought is committed to specifying the good and very comfortable with state enforcement of sanctioned moral behavior The impetus for contemporary conservative thought and action come from the belief that moral relativism ignited by the 1960s and moral irresponsibility stoked by the welfare state have engendered a loss of social virtue and foisted moral anarchy on the culture Similar to conservatives, communitarians take exception with the value neutrality of liberal thought Even though communitarian theorists share conservative interest in delineating the good, they differ from conservative theorists by remaining resistant to

re-an articulation of morality by the state Instead, communitarire-ans believe that the public itself needs to negotiate and promote a shared understanding of appropriate morality Although a discussion of social philosophy and political theory may seem highly ir- relevant to youth policy, Lakoff (1996) argues that policy positions reflect moral world- views More to the point is that these divergent orientations to articulating the good are routinely the contentious grist of social bickering and policy squabbles An especially acrimonious argumentative tone in political and policy circles over distinct moral worldviews in more recent time has led to widespread public alienation and estrange- ment from many policy matters (Elshtain, 1996).

For those who are at ease with expressions of the good, Zeldin (2000) enunciates the moral indicators of optimal community for the full development of youth: an equitable infrastructure, communitas (spirit, good feelings, and creativity), emotional attach- ment, and caritas (adult attitudinal and behavioral demonstration of caring and confi- dence in youth).

Youth Development Policy as a Moral Imperative and Public Idea 807

The concept of social citizenship offers citizens a way to go about establishing that optimal community for youth Marshall (1964) identified social citizenship as a next stage of citizenship to emerge in the 20th century after first civil and then political cit- izenship had been secured in the two previous 100-year periods Social citizenship calls for full access to a society’s social heritage and the right to live a life according to pre- vailing social standards It affirms the social rights citizens possess, and the responsi- bilities they have to the well-being of their fellow citizens.

Fraser and Gordon (1998) examine the political economy in America and take the position that an emphasis on civil society and civil rights that is property centered and contract based actually serves as an impediment to the expression of social citizenship Even in accepting the significant obstacles America’s “cultural mythology of civil citi- zenship” (Fraser & Gordon, 1998, p.125) places in the way of a robust social citizen- ship, the idea remains meaningful for developmentally attentive youth policy Notwith- standing Imig’s (2001) overall sense of disappointment in the lack of stalwart advocacy for the well-being of young people, he is still able to recognize the Academy for Educa- tional Development, the Asset-Based Community Development Institute, and Search Institute for their community organizing work around strength-based development Although the work of these organizations advances the cause of social citizenship, one

is left to ask what else can be done to advance community members’ acceptance of, sponsibility for, and willingness to take action to promulgate progressive youth public policy Mannes (2002) proposes that as a start, human development be understood and accepted as a basic social right.

re-One has the sense that developmentally attentive youth policy is more easily realized

in a culture and an epoch in which social citizenship is valued and vibrant An activated sense of social citizenship in the United States would help affirm the moral legitimacy

of developmentally healthy young people and marshal public will behind producing velopmental strengths for all youth It would offer professional, political, and lay au- diences a sense of purpose, hope, and optimism that development can be the touch- stone of public policy for youth Then America could honestly be heralded as the land

de-of developmental opportunity.

REFERENCES

Barber, B K., & Olsen, J A (1997) Socialization in context: Connection, regulation, and

au-tonomy in the family, school, neighborhood, and with peers Journal of Adolescent Research,

respon-Benson, P L (2003) Developmental assets and asset-building community: Conceptual and

em-pirical foundations In R M Lerner & P L Benson (Eds.), Developmental assets and building communities: Implications for research, policy and practice (pp.19–64) Boston:

asset-Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

Benson, P L., Leffert, N., Scales, P C., & Blyth, D A (1998) Beyond the “village” rhetoric: