outcomes, not only adds tremendous meaning to our efforts, but also adds credibility and value to our field. If we begin thinking of ourselves as positive youth development educators, in addition to content specialists, our program outcomes expand, leading to greater organizational growth. Positive Youth Development, or PYD, emphasizes building on youth’s strengths, rather than on the prevention of problems. Meaning, programs seek not only to prevent adolescents from engaging in health-compromising behaviors, but also to build their abilities and competencies (Roth & Brooks-Gunn, 2003). This approach suggests empowering youth in their own development through relationships with peers, mentors, family, school, and community. The research supports the importance and power of a holistic approach to youth development, comprehensively infusing youth programs with core PYD elements. These include opportunities for belonging, opportunities to make a difference, supportive relationships, positive social norms, opportunities for skill building, and integration with family, school, and community efforts (Sibthrop, 2010).
Case Study: Designing and Evaluating “4-H Junior Master Naturalist”
4-H is the nation’s largest youth
organization with a long history of positive outcomes. One of the many characteristics that makes 4-H unique and adds to its strong reputation is that its programs are deeply rooted in positive youth development (PYD) theory. One of 4-H’s mission mandates is science and there are countless environmental education programs that fall under that umbrella. One such program is Oregon’s Junior Master Naturalist. As with other 4-H programs, Junior Master Naturalist was intentionally designed within a positive youth development framework: the Oregon 4-H Program Model. To measure the success of this design, participants completed evaluations for both environmental literacy outcomes and PYD outcomes. Junior Master Naturalist serves as a worthy example of situating environmental education programming within a PYD context.
Junior Master Naturalist is an experiential, place-based,
science program. It targets underserved youth through after- school and weekend sessions as well as a four-day residential camp experience. Participants engage in six units of study: ecoregions, geology and soils, watersheds and water resources, forests and plant communities, wildlife, and marine science. Approximately 75% of experiences are field based, while 25% are hands-on classroom activities. All sessions are family-friendly and content is often youth-driven.
The goals of Junior Master Naturalist are to connect youth with their local landscape, develop a sense of stewardship, introduce participants to natural science careers, and improve environmental literacy. Additionally, following the Oregon 4-H Program Model, developmental outcomes sought are academic
CLEARING Fall 2017
motivation and success, reduction in risk behaviors, healthful choices, social competence, personal standards, and connection and contribution to others.
Content goals for Junior master Naturalist are achieved
through curriculum design and field experiences. However, developmental outcomes required consideration of several programmatic factors. These include 1) high program quality, 2) appropriate intensity and duration, and 3) healthy developmental relationships. It was important to program staff to ensure that not only would the curriculum and activities be of high quality, but the opportunity for youth to connect with one another and have positive adult role models were present as well. Furthermore, participants have the opportunity to pursue deeper study of topics they most connect with and are offered a wide range of field experiences, including camping, citizen science, service learning, and outdoor recreation. There is a continual focus on health and well-being, independent exploration, and making connections to their local communities. In 2017, participants from three Junior Master Naturalist cohorts completed evaluations measuring several desired outcomes. The evaluation tool first asked participants to rate their feelings about their interest in science, their perceived competency in science, their interest in a science career field, and their desire to learn more about science. As anticipated, results demonstrated growth in all areas. Next, the evaluation measured positive youth development outcomes based on the framework used in program design. Indicators of program quality included participants’ sense of belonging in the program. 94.9% reported feeling welcome 96.1% said they felt safe 90.9% said they felt like they
mattered
A participant soaks in a quiet moment along the Willamette River. Photo by Emily McDonald-Williams
Measuring the presence of developmental relationships included adults in the program expressing care, challenging growth, and sharing power.
98.6% felt respected by adults in the program 94.9% said adults paid attention to them
92.9% believe adults expected them to do something positive While this is only a snapshot of PYD evaluation results from the Junior Master Naturalist program, it illustrates the tremendous potential of measuring and sharing the developmental outcomes achieved in environmental education programs.
Integrating Positive Youth Development in Your Program One of the fortuitous qualities about environmental education
programs is that short- and long-term developmental outcomes inherently occur whether we are intentional about positive youth development, or not. However, if you want to get more out of your program, challenge yourself to incorporate PYD principles during the planning phase of your program. Alternatively, for
www.clearingmagazine.org
(continued on next page) Page 45
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56
