The Experts below are selected from a list of 149898 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Richard M Lerner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Frontiers in Theory-Predicated Research in Youth Development: A Commentary
    Journal of Youth Development, 2019
    Co-Authors: Richard M Lerner
    Abstract:

    The field of Youth Development sits at the frontier of new opportunities for research and practice. These opportunities are enabled by innovations in theory and in theory-inspired research methods. Framed by relational Developmental systems metatheory, dynamic systems models of Youth Development emphasize that every young person has the potential to change positively by aligning specific individual strengths and contextual resources that, together, can optimize the life paths of a young person. The methods linked to these theoretical models combine to help identify the specific links between an individual and his or her context that may maximize thriving across the adolescent decade. The evidence derived from theory-predicated use of these methods may be used to create innovations in Youth Development programs and policies that promote lives of personal thriving and social contribution among the diverse young people of our world.

  • The Five Cs Model of Positive Youth Development
    Advancing Responsible Adolescent Development, 2015
    Co-Authors: G. John Geldhof, Edmond P. Bowers, Jacqueline V Lerner, Megan K. Mueller, Christopher M. Napolitano, Kristina Schmid Callina, Katie J. Walsh, Richard M Lerner
    Abstract:

    The growing consensus among Developmental scientists argues that optimizing young people’s Development requires much more than simply ensuring that they avoid negative outcomes (e.g., drug use, delinquency). We must also foster strengths that help Youth thrive in their diverse ecologies. In this chapter we draw on data and research from the 4-H Study of Positive Youth Development to discuss the benefits of promoting such strength-based perspectives in Youth Development programs. Our discussion focuses primarily on the Five Cs of positive Youth Development and on how our understanding of this model can inform social policies and enhance the experience of both practitioners and the Youth they serve.

  • Positive Youth Development: Processes, Programs, and Problematics
    Journal of Youth Development, 2011
    Co-Authors: Richard M Lerner, Edmond P. Bowers, Jacqueline V Lerner, Selva Lewin-bizan, Michelle J. Boyd, Megan K. Mueller, Kristina L. Schmid, Christopher M. Napolitano
    Abstract:

    Using the tripartite conception of positive Youth Development (PYD) suggested by Hamilton (1999) – as a Developmental process, a philosophy or approach to Youth programming, and as instances of Youth programs and organizations focused on fostering the healthy or positive Development of Youth – we review different theoretical models of the Developmental process involved in PYD. In addition, we review the ideas for and the features of Youth Development programs aimed at promoting PYD. We discuss the need for research interrelating different, theoretically-predicated measures of PYD and, as well, the importance of clear links between models of the PYD Developmental process and of the Youth Development programs seeking to enhance PYD among diverse Youth. We discuss several conceptual and practical problematics that must be addressed in order to integrate the three facets of PYD scholarship.

  • Youth Development Program Participation and Intentional Self-Regulation Skills: Contextual and Individual Bases of Pathways to Positive Youth Development.
    Journal of adolescence, 2011
    Co-Authors: Megan K. Mueller, Edmond P. Bowers, Erin Phelps, Jennifer Brown Urban, Jennifer P. Agans, Richard M Lerner
    Abstract:

    Abstract The present research used data from Grades 8, 9, and 10 of the 4-H Study of Positive Youth Development, a longitudinal study involving U.S. adolescents, in order to better elucidate the process through which the strengths of Youth and the ecological resources promoting healthy Development (such as out-of-school-time programs) may contribute to thriving. We examined the relationship between adolescents’ self-regulation skills (selection, optimization, and compensation) and their participation in Youth Development (YD) programs across Grades 8 and 9 in predicting Grade 10 PYD and Contribution. Results indicated that while self-regulation skills alone predicted PYD, self regulation and YD program participation both predicted Contribution. In addition, Grade 8 YD participation positively predicted Grade 9 self regulation, which, in turn, predicted Grade 10 PYD and Contribution. We discuss how the alignment of Youth strengths and resources within the environment may promote positive Youth Development.

  • Patterns of Early Adolescents' Participation in Youth Development Programs Having Positive Youth Development Goals
    Journal of Research on Adolescence, 2009
    Co-Authors: Aida Bilalbegovic Balsano, Jacqueline V Lerner, Erin Phelps, Christina Theokas, Richard M Lerner
    Abstract:

    Theory and research suggest that structured, out-of-school-time activities, and in particular Youth Development programs aimed at promoting positive Youth Development (PYD), are key Developmental assets for such Development. Using longitudinal data from 945 fifth and sixth graders participating in the 4-H Study of PYD, initial descriptive information is presented about early adolescent participation in Youth programs having or not having PYD goals. Within each grade, early adolescents participated in multiple programs (overall mean for Grades 5 and 6 are 3.8 and 2.9, respectively). In Grades 5 and 6, 44.1% and 35.8% of Youth, respectively, participated in PYD-related programs, but typically in combination with other program types. Researchers and practitioners should consider implications for healthy early adolescent Development of participation in multiple programs, only some of which seek to promote PYD.

Michael W Arthur - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Prevention science and positive Youth Development: competitive or cooperative frameworks?
    The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine, 2002
    Co-Authors: Richard F. Catalano, M. Lisa Berglund, J. David Hawkins, John A Pollard, Michael W Arthur
    Abstract:

    To examine the convergence in the critiques and recommendations for the future of programs to promote healthy Development and prevent problem behaviors among children and adolescents. A review of literature captures two streams of thought, those promoting positive Youth Development approaches to Youth programming and those promoting prevention science approaches to Youth programming. Results suggest that advocates of positive Youth Development and prevention science have similar critiques of single-problem-focused prevention programs in the 1980s and early 1990s, and have similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, review of data on Youth Development suggests that it is important to focus on risk and protection in preventing adolescent problems as well as in promoting positive Youth Development. These results suggest that both Youth Development and prevention science approaches have grown from similar roots and make similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, data on precursors suggest that focusing on promoting protection and reducing risk is likely to prevent problems and promote positive Youth Development. Yet advocates of these approaches often are at odds, suggesting that the approaches provide different paradigmatic approaches to Youth programming. We conclude that cooperation between these two approaches would further progress in the field of Youth programming.

  • Prevention science and positive Youth Development: competitive or cooperative frameworks?
    Journal of Adolescent Health, 2002
    Co-Authors: Richard F. Catalano, M. Lisa Berglund, J. David Hawkins, John A Pollard, Michael W Arthur
    Abstract:

    Abstract Purpose To examine the convergence in the critiques and recommendations for the future of programs to promote healthy Development and prevent problem behaviors among children and adolescents Methods A review of literature captures two streams of thought, those promoting positive Youth Development approaches to Youth programming and those promoting prevention science approaches to Youth programming. Results Results suggest that advocates of positive Youth Development and prevention science have similar critiques of single-problem-focused prevention programs in the 1980s and early 1990s, and have similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, review of data on Youth Development suggests that it is important to focus on risk and protection in preventing adolescent problems as well as in promoting positive Youth Development. Conclusions These results suggest that both Youth Development and prevention science approaches have grown from similar roots and make similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, data on precursors suggest that focusing on promoting protection and reducing risk is likely to prevent problems and promote positive Youth Development. Yet advocates of these approaches often are at odds, suggesting that the approaches provide different paradigmatic approaches to Youth programming. We conclude that cooperation between these two approaches would further progress in the field of Youth programming.

Richard F. Catalano - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Positive Youth Development in the United States: Research Findings on Evaluations of Positive Youth Development Programs
    The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2004
    Co-Authors: Richard F. Catalano, M. Lisa Berglund, Jean A. M. Ryan, Heather S. Lonczak, J. David Hawkins
    Abstract:

    This article summarizes a much lengthier one that appeared in Prevention and Treatment. The earlier article grew out of a project initiated by the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. The Positive Youth Development Evaluation project described why policy makers, practitioners, and prevention scientists advocated a shift in approach for how Youth issues are addressed in this country. The Positive Youth Development Evaluation project sought to define how Youth Development programs have been defined in the literature and then to locate, through a structured search, strong evaluations of these programs and summarize the outcomes of these evaluations. In the current article, we explain why prevention has shifted from a single problem focus to a focus on factors that affect both positive and problem Youth Development, describe what is meant by positive Youth Development, and summarize what we know about the effectiveness of positive Youth develop...

  • Prevention science and positive Youth Development: competitive or cooperative frameworks?
    The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine, 2002
    Co-Authors: Richard F. Catalano, M. Lisa Berglund, J. David Hawkins, John A Pollard, Michael W Arthur
    Abstract:

    To examine the convergence in the critiques and recommendations for the future of programs to promote healthy Development and prevent problem behaviors among children and adolescents. A review of literature captures two streams of thought, those promoting positive Youth Development approaches to Youth programming and those promoting prevention science approaches to Youth programming. Results suggest that advocates of positive Youth Development and prevention science have similar critiques of single-problem-focused prevention programs in the 1980s and early 1990s, and have similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, review of data on Youth Development suggests that it is important to focus on risk and protection in preventing adolescent problems as well as in promoting positive Youth Development. These results suggest that both Youth Development and prevention science approaches have grown from similar roots and make similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, data on precursors suggest that focusing on promoting protection and reducing risk is likely to prevent problems and promote positive Youth Development. Yet advocates of these approaches often are at odds, suggesting that the approaches provide different paradigmatic approaches to Youth programming. We conclude that cooperation between these two approaches would further progress in the field of Youth programming.

  • Prevention science and positive Youth Development: competitive or cooperative frameworks?
    Journal of Adolescent Health, 2002
    Co-Authors: Richard F. Catalano, M. Lisa Berglund, J. David Hawkins, John A Pollard, Michael W Arthur
    Abstract:

    Abstract Purpose To examine the convergence in the critiques and recommendations for the future of programs to promote healthy Development and prevent problem behaviors among children and adolescents Methods A review of literature captures two streams of thought, those promoting positive Youth Development approaches to Youth programming and those promoting prevention science approaches to Youth programming. Results Results suggest that advocates of positive Youth Development and prevention science have similar critiques of single-problem-focused prevention programs in the 1980s and early 1990s, and have similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, review of data on Youth Development suggests that it is important to focus on risk and protection in preventing adolescent problems as well as in promoting positive Youth Development. Conclusions These results suggest that both Youth Development and prevention science approaches have grown from similar roots and make similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, data on precursors suggest that focusing on promoting protection and reducing risk is likely to prevent problems and promote positive Youth Development. Yet advocates of these approaches often are at odds, suggesting that the approaches provide different paradigmatic approaches to Youth programming. We conclude that cooperation between these two approaches would further progress in the field of Youth programming.

J. David Hawkins - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Positive Youth Development in the United States: Research Findings on Evaluations of Positive Youth Development Programs
    The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2004
    Co-Authors: Richard F. Catalano, M. Lisa Berglund, Jean A. M. Ryan, Heather S. Lonczak, J. David Hawkins
    Abstract:

    This article summarizes a much lengthier one that appeared in Prevention and Treatment. The earlier article grew out of a project initiated by the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. The Positive Youth Development Evaluation project described why policy makers, practitioners, and prevention scientists advocated a shift in approach for how Youth issues are addressed in this country. The Positive Youth Development Evaluation project sought to define how Youth Development programs have been defined in the literature and then to locate, through a structured search, strong evaluations of these programs and summarize the outcomes of these evaluations. In the current article, we explain why prevention has shifted from a single problem focus to a focus on factors that affect both positive and problem Youth Development, describe what is meant by positive Youth Development, and summarize what we know about the effectiveness of positive Youth develop...

  • Prevention science and positive Youth Development: competitive or cooperative frameworks?
    The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine, 2002
    Co-Authors: Richard F. Catalano, M. Lisa Berglund, J. David Hawkins, John A Pollard, Michael W Arthur
    Abstract:

    To examine the convergence in the critiques and recommendations for the future of programs to promote healthy Development and prevent problem behaviors among children and adolescents. A review of literature captures two streams of thought, those promoting positive Youth Development approaches to Youth programming and those promoting prevention science approaches to Youth programming. Results suggest that advocates of positive Youth Development and prevention science have similar critiques of single-problem-focused prevention programs in the 1980s and early 1990s, and have similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, review of data on Youth Development suggests that it is important to focus on risk and protection in preventing adolescent problems as well as in promoting positive Youth Development. These results suggest that both Youth Development and prevention science approaches have grown from similar roots and make similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, data on precursors suggest that focusing on promoting protection and reducing risk is likely to prevent problems and promote positive Youth Development. Yet advocates of these approaches often are at odds, suggesting that the approaches provide different paradigmatic approaches to Youth programming. We conclude that cooperation between these two approaches would further progress in the field of Youth programming.

  • Prevention science and positive Youth Development: competitive or cooperative frameworks?
    Journal of Adolescent Health, 2002
    Co-Authors: Richard F. Catalano, M. Lisa Berglund, J. David Hawkins, John A Pollard, Michael W Arthur
    Abstract:

    Abstract Purpose To examine the convergence in the critiques and recommendations for the future of programs to promote healthy Development and prevent problem behaviors among children and adolescents Methods A review of literature captures two streams of thought, those promoting positive Youth Development approaches to Youth programming and those promoting prevention science approaches to Youth programming. Results Results suggest that advocates of positive Youth Development and prevention science have similar critiques of single-problem-focused prevention programs in the 1980s and early 1990s, and have similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, review of data on Youth Development suggests that it is important to focus on risk and protection in preventing adolescent problems as well as in promoting positive Youth Development. Conclusions These results suggest that both Youth Development and prevention science approaches have grown from similar roots and make similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, data on precursors suggest that focusing on promoting protection and reducing risk is likely to prevent problems and promote positive Youth Development. Yet advocates of these approaches often are at odds, suggesting that the approaches provide different paradigmatic approaches to Youth programming. We conclude that cooperation between these two approaches would further progress in the field of Youth programming.

M. Lisa Berglund - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Positive Youth Development in the United States: Research Findings on Evaluations of Positive Youth Development Programs
    The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2004
    Co-Authors: Richard F. Catalano, M. Lisa Berglund, Jean A. M. Ryan, Heather S. Lonczak, J. David Hawkins
    Abstract:

    This article summarizes a much lengthier one that appeared in Prevention and Treatment. The earlier article grew out of a project initiated by the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. The Positive Youth Development Evaluation project described why policy makers, practitioners, and prevention scientists advocated a shift in approach for how Youth issues are addressed in this country. The Positive Youth Development Evaluation project sought to define how Youth Development programs have been defined in the literature and then to locate, through a structured search, strong evaluations of these programs and summarize the outcomes of these evaluations. In the current article, we explain why prevention has shifted from a single problem focus to a focus on factors that affect both positive and problem Youth Development, describe what is meant by positive Youth Development, and summarize what we know about the effectiveness of positive Youth develop...

  • Prevention science and positive Youth Development: competitive or cooperative frameworks?
    The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine, 2002
    Co-Authors: Richard F. Catalano, M. Lisa Berglund, J. David Hawkins, John A Pollard, Michael W Arthur
    Abstract:

    To examine the convergence in the critiques and recommendations for the future of programs to promote healthy Development and prevent problem behaviors among children and adolescents. A review of literature captures two streams of thought, those promoting positive Youth Development approaches to Youth programming and those promoting prevention science approaches to Youth programming. Results suggest that advocates of positive Youth Development and prevention science have similar critiques of single-problem-focused prevention programs in the 1980s and early 1990s, and have similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, review of data on Youth Development suggests that it is important to focus on risk and protection in preventing adolescent problems as well as in promoting positive Youth Development. These results suggest that both Youth Development and prevention science approaches have grown from similar roots and make similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, data on precursors suggest that focusing on promoting protection and reducing risk is likely to prevent problems and promote positive Youth Development. Yet advocates of these approaches often are at odds, suggesting that the approaches provide different paradigmatic approaches to Youth programming. We conclude that cooperation between these two approaches would further progress in the field of Youth programming.

  • Prevention science and positive Youth Development: competitive or cooperative frameworks?
    Journal of Adolescent Health, 2002
    Co-Authors: Richard F. Catalano, M. Lisa Berglund, J. David Hawkins, John A Pollard, Michael W Arthur
    Abstract:

    Abstract Purpose To examine the convergence in the critiques and recommendations for the future of programs to promote healthy Development and prevent problem behaviors among children and adolescents Methods A review of literature captures two streams of thought, those promoting positive Youth Development approaches to Youth programming and those promoting prevention science approaches to Youth programming. Results Results suggest that advocates of positive Youth Development and prevention science have similar critiques of single-problem-focused prevention programs in the 1980s and early 1990s, and have similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, review of data on Youth Development suggests that it is important to focus on risk and protection in preventing adolescent problems as well as in promoting positive Youth Development. Conclusions These results suggest that both Youth Development and prevention science approaches have grown from similar roots and make similar recommendations for the future of Youth programming. Further, data on precursors suggest that focusing on promoting protection and reducing risk is likely to prevent problems and promote positive Youth Development. Yet advocates of these approaches often are at odds, suggesting that the approaches provide different paradigmatic approaches to Youth programming. We conclude that cooperation between these two approaches would further progress in the field of Youth programming.