The teachers, counselors, and psychologists who are committed to positive youth development recognize the good in our youth and focus on each child’s strengths and potential (Damon, 2004). Building on Pittman and Fleming’s definition (1991), Lopez and McKnight (2002) articulate how components of development interact over time to yield healthy adults:
[Positive youth development] should be seen as an ongoing process in which all youth are engaged and invested. Youth interact with their environment and positive agents (e.g., youth and adults who support
healthy development, institutions that create climates conducive to growth, programs that foster change) to meet their basic needs and cultivate assets.
Through [their] initiative (sometimes combined with the support of positive agents), momentum builds, and youth who are capable of meeting basic needs challenge themselves to attain other goals; youth use assets to build additional psychological resources that facilitate growth. Ideally, PYD generates physical and psychological competencies that serve to facilitate the transition into an adulthood characterized by striving for continued growth. (pp. 2–3)
Through the benefits provided to youth via the intentional combination of these environmental resources and caring supporters in the context of PYD programs, youth are able to thrive. This healthy development is marked by the attainment of some of the following nine positive outcomes (Catalano, Berglund, Ryan, Lonczak, & Hawkins, 1998; Catalano, Berglund, Ryan, Lonczak, & Hawkins, 2002) targeted by positive programs (all of these positive outcomes are
addressed elsewhere in this book):
1. Rewarding bonding
2. Promoting social, emotional, cognitive, behavioral, and moral competencies 3. Encouraging self-determination
4. Fostering spirituality
5. Nurturing a clear and positive identity 6. Building beliefs in the future
7. Recognizing positive behavior
8. Providing opportunities for prosocial development 9. Establishing prosocial norms
Many authors call for a more complex understanding of what it means to study positive youth development with the conclusion that positive behaviors can only be promoted once one understands the types of pitfalls and difficulties that exist for youth today (Lewis, 2011; Pittman, 1991). Others counter by saying that focus on decreasing problems has overshadowed efforts to instead bolster positive growth (Lerner, von Eye, Lerner, Lewin-Bizan, & Bowers, 2010). To our understanding, this places researchers of positive psychology, with their commitment to balance both positive and negative sides, in an excellent position to study more about this important area. In addition, exploring both positive and stressful situations for youth in many different social identity circles is very important. It may be, for example, that different developmental assets exist for different populations (Holtz & Martinez, 2014). In some groups, such as African American youth, research has pointed to the fact that strong ethnic identity is related to positive characteristics such as higher self-esteem (Negy, Shreve, Jensen, & Uddin, 2003; Sellers, Copeland-Linder, Martin, & Lewis, 2006). In addition, Mexican immigrant children who have stronger ethnic identity have greater academic performance, particularly at schools that are predominantly White (Spears-Brown & Chu, 2012). These links do not appear to be found in White populations in some studies, however (Worrell, 2007). Thus, exploring a broader and more diverse group may add information about how to enrich the development of children and adolescents in different racial and ethnic groups.
Some of this work might look individually at different social identity groups without making comparisons with a majority group. Kenyon and Hanson (2012), for example, investigated programs that were particularly helpful for American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) youth. These researchers highlight the PYD program Project Venture, which is specifically designed for AI/AN youth and uses traditional American Indian approaches and values to help youth to develop many positive characteristics (you can read more about this impressive program below).
In addition, some researchers have noted that programs aimed at positive youth development may not be equally accessible to all youth for various reasons. For example, Fredricks and Simpkins (2012) note that African American and Latino youth do not participate in after-school activities (which can fulfill the function of positive youth development) as often as White youth. There may be many reasons for this finding, such as differences in cultural orientation, variations in feelings of belongingness, and/or combined effects of race and other social facets (e.g., socioeconomic status).
In addition, Evans and colleagues (2012) talk about the fact that studies on African American youth more often investigate deficits and negative outcomes, whereas articles on Asian American and European youth in these same journals tend to focus on positive development or standard outcomes. An example might be studying predictors of well-being in the lives of successful American Indian adolescents in addition to protection against suicide attempts in these same youth. Though articles like this often have good intentions, including attempting to help populations that are struggling, they have the additional affect of
stigmatizing and/or creating deficit models from which it is difficult for these groups to recover (Reyes & Elias, 2011). Making sure to include
underrepresented groups in positive youth development research may balance some of the more negatively focused research about these groups.
As the idea of positive youth development becomes more popular in today’s literature, researchers Peter Benson and Peter Scales (2009) note that the related concept of “thriving” has not been studied as much as may be warranted. They define thriving as “a specific expression of positive youth development” (p. 90) and discuss it as a process between self and environment that develops over time. Thriving youth are doing more than just “surviving” or “getting by;” they are achieving their potential and living a rich life that involves giving back to their communities and that brings them personal high levels of personal well-
being. Thriving is thought to be set in motion by the presence of “spark,” which the researchers conceptualize as “a passion for, and the exercise of action to nurture, a self-identified interest, skill, or capacity” (Benson & Scales, 2009, p.
91). In comparing youth who had spark with those who didn’t, those in the first group were significantly more advantaged on many developmental outcomes (Benson & Scales, 2009). Thus, assisting youth with development of spark and then facilitating the thriving construct as it develops is a worthwhile area of study in resilience research. Determining the origins of this spark, including examining potential factors such as environment, culture, personal strengths, and presence of role models, may result in increased positive youth development overall.
The impact of strong relationships, either with parents or other stable and consistent adults, appears to be greatly desirable in producing positive youth development. In one study, researchers measured adolescents’ perceptions of their parents’ success at several variables to determine whether or not the presence of certain parental behaviors appeared to be related to positive development in their children (Napolitano et al., 2011). Results showed that adolescents who had parents who were higher on maternal warmth (e.g., “My mother speaks to me in a warm and friendly manner”); parental monitoring (e.g.,
“My parents know who my friends are”); and involvement in their school (e.g.,
“How often does one of your parents ask about your homework?”) were likely to have developed certain other positive behaviors. This highlights the important role that parents play in their children’s well-being. This said, other research shows that it does not always have to be an actual parent who assists a child in developing these good traits. Bowers and colleagues (2012) found that non- parental adults were still very influential on the development of positive
behaviors and traits. Thus, it seems that even children who do not have parents who assist them in these ways can still thrive with the help from others outside their family. In looking at individuals we have each worked with over the years, we have heard many stories of teachers, camp counselors, coaches, and family friends who have gone above and beyond their duties to provide positive mentoring and caring for children who were not biologically their own. This research shows evidence of the potential of their positive impact.