Contents

Engaging Older Youth: Program and City-Level Strategies

Click here to download the full report:
 Engaging Older Youth: Program and City-Level Strategies

1. On engagement, see also McLaughlin, M. (2000). Community counts: How youth organizations matter for youth development. Washington, DC: Public Education Network; National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. J. Eccles & J. A. Gootman (Eds.). Board on Children, Youth, and Families, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; Hall, G., Israel, L., & Shortt, J. (2004). It’s about time: A look at out-of-school time for teens. Wellesley, MA: National Institute on Out-of-School Time; Raley, R., Grossman, J., & Walker, K. E. (2005). Getting it right: Strategies for after-school success. Philadelphia, PA: Public/ Private Ventures; Pearce, N. J., & Larson, K. W. (2006). How teens become engaged in youth development programs: The process of motivational change in a civic activism organization. Applied Developmental Science, 10(3), 121–131; Strobel, K., Kirshner, B., O’Donoghue, J., & McLaughlin, M. (2008). Qualities that attract urban youth to after-school settings and promote continued participation. Teachers College Record, 110(8), 1677–1705.

2. Hansen, D. M., Larson, R.W., & Dworkin, J. B. (2003). What adolescents learn in organized youth activities: A survey of self-reported developmental experiences. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 131(1), 25–55; Deschenes, S., McDonald, M., & McLaughlin, M. (2004). Youth organizations: From principles to practice. In S. F. Hamilton, & M. A. Hamilton (Eds.), The youth development handbook: Coming of age in American communities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; Arbreton, A. J., Sheldon, J., & Herrera, C. (2005). Beyond safe havens: A synthesis of 20 years of research on Boys & Girls Clubs. Philadelphia, PA, Public/Private Ventures; Durlak, J. A., & Weissberg, R. P. (2007). The impact of after-school programs that promote personal and social skills. Chicago, IL: Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning; Vandell, D. L., Reisner, E. R., & Pierce, K. M. (2007). Outcomes linked to high-quality afterschool programs: Longitudinal findings from the study of promising afterschool programs. Irvine: University of California, Madison: University of Wisconsin, Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates; Little, P., Wimer, C., & Weiss, H. (2008). Afterschool programs in the 21st century—Their potential and what it takes to achieve it. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Family Research Project.

3. See, for example, Fredericks, J. A., & Eccles, J. S. (2006a). Extracurricular involvement and adolescent adjustment: Impact of duration, number of activities, and breadth of participation. Applied Developmental Science, 10(3), 132–146; Durlak & Weissberg, 2007.

4. See, for example, Fredericks, J. A., & Eccles, J. S. (2006b). Is extracurricular participation associated with beneficial outcomes? Concurrent and longitudinal relations. Developmental Psychology, 42(4), 698–713.

5. See Roth, J. L. (2006). Next steps: Considering patterns of participation. Social Policy Report 20(4), 20.

6. Walker, J., Marczak, M., Blyth, D., & Borden, L. (2005). Designing youth development programs: Toward a theory of developmental intentionality. In J. L. Mahoney, R. Larson, & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Organized activities as contexts of development: Extracurricular activities, after-school and community programs, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; Pearce & Larson, 2006.

7. Walker, K. E., & Arbreton, A. J. A. (2004). After-school pursuits: An examination of outcomes in the San Francisco Beacon Initiative. Philadelphia, PA: Public/Private Ventures; Arbreton, A., Bradshaw, M., Sheldon, J., & Pepper, S. (2009). Making every day count: Boys & Girls Clubs’ role in promoting positive outcomes for teens. Philadelphia, PA: Public/Private Ventures.

8. Little, Wimer, & Weiss, 2008.

9. Kane, T. J. (2004). The impact of after-school programs: Interpreting the results of four recent evaluations. New York: W.T. Grant Foundation; Lauver, S., Little, P. M. D., & Weiss, H. (2004). Moving beyond the barriers: Attracting and sustaining youth participation in out-of-school time programs. Issues and opportunities in out-of-school time evaluation #6. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Family Research Project; Afterschool Alliance (2004). America after 3 PM: A household survey on afterschool in America. Working families and afterschool. A special report from America after 3 PM. Washington, DC: Author.

10. Afterschool Alliance (2009). America after 3 PM. Washington, DC: Author.

11. Lauver, Little, & Weiss, 2004.

12. Hall, Israel, & Shortt, 2004; Chaskin, R., & Baker, S. (2006). Negotiating among opportunity and constraint: The participation of young people in out-of-school time activities. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall.

13. Bouffard, S. M., Wimer, C., Caronongan, P., Little, P. M. D., Dearing, E., & Simpkins, S. D. (2006). Demographic differences in patterns of youth out-of-school time activity participation. Journal of Youth Development, 1(1).

14. Duffett, A., Johnson, J., Farkas, S., Kung, S., & Ott, A. (2004). All work and no play? Listening to what kids and parents really want from out-of-school time. New York, NY: Public Agenda; Pederson, S., & Seidman, E. (2005). Contexts and correlates of out-of-school time activity participation among low-income urban adolescents. In J. L. Mahoney, R. Larson, & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Organized activities as contexts of development: Extracurricular activities, after-school and community programs. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; Wimer, C., Bouffard, S., Caronongan, P., Dearing, E., Simpkins, S., Little, P. M. D., & Weiss, H. (2006). What are kids getting into these days?: Demographic differences in youth out-of-school time participation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Family Research Project.

15. Webster, B.H. & Bishaw, A. (2007). Income, earnings, and poverty data from the 2006 American Community Survey. U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey Reports, ACS-08. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved March 24, 2010, from: http://www.census.gov/prod/2007pubs/acs-08.pdf.

16. Coleman Advocates for Children and Youth. (2006). Families struggle to stay: Why families are leaving San Francisco and what can be done. San Francisco: Author.

17. See Walker & Arbreton, 2004; Walker, Marczak, Blyth, & Borden, 2005; Pearce & Larson, 2006; Arbreton, Bradshaw, Sheldon, & Pepper, 2009.

18. Strauss, A., and Corbin, J. (2007). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

19. Little, P. (2007). The quality of school-age child care in afterschool settings. Research-To-Policy Connections No. 7. New York: Child Care & Early Education Research Connections.

20. Welsh, M. E., Russell, C. A., Williams, I., Reisner, E. R., & White, R. N. (2002). Promoting learning and school attendance through after-school programs: Student-level changes in educational performance across TASC’s first three years. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates.

21. Herrera, C., & Arbreton, A. J. A. (2003). Increasing opportunities for older youth in after-school programs: A report on the experiences of Boys & Girls Clubs in Boston and New York City. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventures.

< < Previous | Next > >