THE 4-H STUDY
OF
POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT
Jacqueline V. Lerner
Boston College
and
Christina Theokas
Institute for Applied Research in Youth Development
Tufts University
Background and
Significance
A New Perspective About Youth
Scientists, practitioners, and educators agree:
 Youth are resources to be developed; they are
not problems to be managed.
 This vision replaces the traditional deficit model
of children and adolescents which is a model of
disease and prevention. In the deficit view,
people see children as broken or as destined to
be broken and feel that they need to fix them or
prevent these problems from occurring.
However:
Prevention is not promotion
Problem free is not prepared
Prepared is not engaged
The Positive Youth
Development Perspective
 All
children have strengths
 All
families, school, and communities have
assets –or the “nutrients” or “building
blocks” of healthy, positive development
– creating a good fit – between
child strengths and ecological assets will
promote positive youth development
 Aligning
Attributes of Positive
Youth Development:
“THE FIVE Cs”
 Competence
 Confidence
 Connection
 Character
 Caring
Contribution
Positive Youth Development Happens
in Context
INDIVIDUAL
Competence
Contribution
Confidence
Connection
COMMUNITY
PYD
FAMILY
Character
Reduced
Risk behaviors
Caring
SCHOOL
One Community
Asset for the
Promotion of
Positive
Development:
Effective Youth Serving Programs
The “Big Three” Features of Effective
Youth Development Programs*
 Positive,
sustained adult-youth
relationships
 Skill-building
activities for youth
 Youth
participation and leadership in every
facet of the program
Lerner, R.M. (2004). Liberty: Thriving and civic engagement among America’s youth.
“Time spent in youth programs was the
developmental asset that appeared to have
the most pervasive positive
influence…predicting…thriving
outcomes…Good youth programs provide
young people with access to caring adults
and responsible peers, as well as skillbuilding activities that can reinforce the
values and skills that are associated with
doing well in school and maintaining good
physical health.”
Note: This conclusion comes from a study of about 100,000 diverse youth in grades 6-12 from
across the United States. (Scales, Benson, Leffert, and Blyth, Applied Developmental Science,
2000)
Research Design
Goals and Research Questions
Goal # 1: To advance the understanding of the
nature of positive youth development.
Questions:

Is the model of PYD -- as represented by the five
Cs – useful and able to be empirically validated?

What characteristics of youth in combination with
what family and community characteristics are
related to the five Cs?
Goals and Research Questions
Goal # 2: To study the impact of communitybased youth development programs,
specifically 4-H and HealthRocks! as a
particular 4-H program, on children and
youth.
Questions:
 What is the role of these programs as a means
to promote PYD?

Do characteristics of the youth, family, or
community impact the role of youth development
programs?
Research Design

Pilot


Wave 1:




2003-2004 (6th grade)
Evaluate changes in PYD, risk behaviors, and assets.
Wave 3:

2002-2003 (5th grade)
Recruit a national, diverse sample.
Assess initial levels of PYD, risk behaviors, and assets.
Wave 2:


Develop a good measurement model of the Five Cs.
2004-2005 (7th grade)
Continue to evaluate changes in PYD, risks behaviors,
and assets.
Determine the impact of youth development programs.
Study Participants
Wave I participants of the 4-H Study are a diverse group of about 1,700 fifth
grade adolescents and approximately 1,200 of their parents. The sample
socioeconomic status, family structure, rural-urban location, and
geographic region of the United States.
Gender:
Males: 47.9%
Females: 52.1%
Race/Ethnicity:
Native American:
African American:
European American:
Other:
3.0%
4.1%
8.1%
57.9%
Asian American:
Hispanic:
Multi-ethnic/Multi-racial:
Youth and parents come from the following states:
Northeast: MA, NY
Southeast: AL, FL, NC
Northwest: WA, MT
Mid-Atlantic: MD
Mid-West: WI, TN, MO, MN
Southwest: AZ
3.3%
18.0%
5.7%
The Student Questionnaire
 More than 300 questions!
 Demographic questions
 About them, their household, the time they have lived
in their neighborhood, etc.
 Future Goals and Expectations
 Activity Participation
 School clubs, sports, lessons, after-school programs
 Relationships with parents, friends, other adults
 Involvement in positive behaviors
 Involvement in risky behaviors
Measurement Model for the Five Cs
Competence
Confidence
Connection
Character
Caring
SI: School
Grades
SI: Positive
Identity
TAP: Peer
Support
SI: Personal
Values
Eisenberg:
Sympathy
SI: School
Engagement
SPPC: Self
Worth
SI: Family
SI: Social
Conscience
SPPC:
Academic
Competence
SI: School
SI: Values
Diversity
SPPC: Social
Competence
SI: Community
SI:
Interpersonal
Values and
Skills
Measurement of Contribution
Two Components
1.
Ideology of Contribution: In response to open
ended questions, youth indicate a commitment to
giving back to the world around them.
2.
Participation in activities that reflect active
engagement with the world around oneself such
as: being a leader in a group, helping friends and
neighbors, participation in school government,
sports, religious youth groups and volunteering in
the community
Findings
Validation of Empirical Bases of the
Five Cs
Using LISREL 8.54, a confirmatory factor analysis
of the measures produced the first empirical
evidence for the presence of the Five Cs and their
combined relationship to form a second order
latent construct of PYD
Fit indices indicated that the model provided good
fit to the data:
X2 = 552, d.f. = 134
RMSEA = 0.043
CFI = 0.99
GFI = 0.97
Correlations between the
5C Factor Scores
1
2
3
4
1.Competence
1
2.Confidence
.628**
3.Connection
.744** .693**
4.Character
.676**
.630
.746
1
5.Caring
.405**
.378
.447
.407
5
1
1
1
The Five Cs and Individual and
Family Variables

Girls’ scores on:
Competence, Connection, Character and
Caring were higher than those of boys

European American and Latino youth reported
greater Confidence

Household income was positive related to:
Competence, Confidence, Connection and
Character
Contribution, the Five Cs and
Individual and Family Variables

Girls scores are higher on Contribution

Race/ethnicity was not related to contribution

Family income was negatively related to
contribution

PYD is significantly related to contribution

Of the individual Cs: Character and Competence
most strongly predict Contribution
How about 4-H Program Participation?

4-H Program Participation is not significantly
related to higher PYD scores

However 4-H program participation contributes
significantly to higher Contribution scores
3.5
3
2.5
4-H
2
no YDP
1.5
1
Contribution
What about HealthRocks!

Similarly, youth who have received Health
Rocks! do not show higher PYD scores.

However, incidence of smoking is less!
Incidence of Smoking
% Incidence
0.25
Health Rocks!
0.20
Health Education
Class
Other Program
0.15
0.10
0.05
No Program
0.00
School-Level Smoking
Prevention
Multiple
Programs
THE KEY QUESTION:
Does 4-H promote positive development?

Point-in-time analyses (e.g., analyses of
wave1 data) cannot answer this question

ONLY longitudinal analyses can answer this
question

Therefore, what do the longitudinal data tell
us about whether 4-H and HR! protects and
promotes?
4-H Participation and PYD
Confidence
Competence
0.3
0.3
0.127
0.047
0.1
0.017
-0.1
0.1
-0.008
-0.1
-0.122
-0.3
0.008
-0.001
-0.023
-0.3
5th Grade
6th Grade
Caring
5th Grade
6th Grade
Character
0.3
Connection
0.3
0.3
0.192
0.141
0.1
0.003
-0.1
-0.017
0.022
-0.004
-0.3
0.1
0.1
0.013
-0.1
-0.09
-0.025
-0.3
5th Grade
6th Grade
0.044
-0.006
-0.1
-0.034
-0.3
5th Grade
6th Grade
Others
4-H Participants
5th Grade
6th Grade
Summary of Findings

The positive vision and vocabulary of youth
practitioners and developmental researchers
has been validated and can be empirically
studied

4-H, even in very young youth, is having a
positive impact on youth contribution to self,
family, and community

HR! is associated with a low incidence of youth
smoking
Future Steps

Examine developmental changes in the Five Cs;
that is, what is the course of PYD through
puberty and into the higher risk adolescent
years?

Introduce additional contextual variables and
diversity into the analyses to better understand
what conditions promote positive development

Gain a more nuanced view of the relationship
between 4-H and HR!, PYD, and youth
contributions, that is, how and in what ways
does program participation help?