Sport and Youth Development: the Practice of Sport–Oriented Youth Development Programs in Tanzania

SPORT AND YOUTH DEVELOPMENT: THE PRACTICE OF SPORT–ORIENTED YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS IN TANZANIA

Chalukulu Bilinzozi John

Master of Educational Studies, UQ, Australia Master of Sport Science, NSSS, Oslo, Norway BEDPESC, UDSM, Tanzania Dip. Of Education, Tanzania

Submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements of the Degree of Doctor of Education

January 2017

Youth Research Centre

Melbourne Graduate School of Education

Melbourne University

ABSTRACT

This study explores the practice of youth and life skills development through sport in Tanzania. The study focuses on the quality of practice and the nature of life skills acquisition in selected sport-oriented youth development programs (SOYDPs). Drawing on the Generic Youth Development Framework (GYDF) (Wierenga & Wyn 2011) this study aims to answer one overarching question: To what extent do SOYDPs in Tanzania value young people and enable young people to do things of value? The study employs a mixed-methods approach, including surveys and focus groups, to examine young peoples’ participation in two youth sport organisations in the cities of Dar Es Salaam and Arusha. A total of 123 young people completed the survey and subsequently 20 participants (13 young people, 7 staff and volunteers and program providers/managers) participated in focus group discussions. The results revealed that the strengths of the programs include the support and encouragement they provide to young people in learning and growing through experience and reflection, and engaging young people in the real world by promoting active citizenship. In contrast, the results also showed that programs need to improve in areas that relate to practices pertaining to team building and recognition of young peoples’ strengths. Overall, the results suggest that the SOYDPs positively respond to the needs and wants of young people and that youth development would benefit from an increase in quality research within this growing area in Tanzania.

DECLARATION

This is to certify that

. the thesis comprises only my original work towards the Doctor of Education Degree . due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used . the thesis is less than 50,000 words in length, exclusive of tables, figures, references and appendices as approved by the RHD Committee.

Signed:

JOHN, Chalukulu Bilinzozi

iii

DEDICATION

This thesis is dedicated to all young people in Tanzania who play and love sport!

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank all participants from Tanzania (young people, volunteers and project managers); without their authentic input this doctoral thesis would not have been possible. This study has evolved and matured with the expert advice and support from my dedicated academic supervisors. I give special thanks to my principal supervisor, Prof Johanna Wyn and co- supervisor Dr Hernán Cuervo. I also extend my special thanks to the Chairperson of the National Sports Council of Tanzania (NSC), Mr Dionis Malinzi, the former Secretary General, Mr Henry Lihaya and all NSC staff for exempting me from office duties to pursue this study.

I extend my personal and sincere thanks to my lovely, beautiful and supportive wife, Julitha John, who continues to inspire me to strive for the best in all academic, professional and personal endeavours. My wife has dedicated time and finances to ensure I successfully complete this doctoral process, and I am very much indebted to her. I would like to thank my stellar children, Julieth and Johnson, who always encourage me to continue striving for the highest academic accolades. I also would like to convey my heartfelt thanks to my God-given sister-in-law in Australia, Jessica Miani; you will forever be in my thoughts for taking time out of your busy schedule to support me. And finally, I would like to acknowledge the Holy Trinity, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit for being my true source of inspiration, motivation and belief.

To God is the Glory, Amen!

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...... ii

DECLARATION ...... iii

DEDICATION ...... iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... v

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... vi

LIST OF TABLES ...... x

LIST OF FIGURES ...... xi

Chapter One: INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Background of Young People in Tanzania ...... 2

Youth marginalisation ...... 6

Youth Unemployment ...... 11

Drug abuse ...... 14

Youth on the Political Agenda ...... 18

National Youth Development Policy ...... 19

National Sports Development Policy ...... 23

Youth Participation in Sports ...... 25

Rationale for the study ...... 26

Statement of the problem ...... 27

Aims and research questions ...... 28

Significance of the study ...... 28

Thesis structure ...... 30

Chapter Two: YOUTH AND YOUTH DEVELOPMENT ...... 31

Introduction ...... 31

Understanding the concept of ‘youth’ ...... 32

Youth as an age category ...... 33

Youth as a relational concept ...... 38

Youth Development concept: Deficit approach versus Youth Development approach...... 41

Life skills ...... 46

Youth and Life Skills Development Programs ...... 48

Self-Esteem/Confidence-building programs ...... 50

Structured or Theory-Based Programs ...... 50

Community-Based Programs ...... 51

Youth Development Frameworks ...... 53

Generic Youth Development Framework (GYDF) ...... 56

Summary and the gaps to be filled ...... 59

Chapter Three: YOUTH SPORT ...... 63

Introduction ...... 63

Sport ...... 63

Youth Sport and Youth development ...... 66

Youth sport and learning performance ...... 69

Youth Sport and Social Development ...... 72

Youth Sport and Civic Engagement ...... 75

Youth Sport and Social Capital ...... 79

Sport-Oriented Youth Development Programs (SOYDPs) ...... 82

Summary ...... 83

vii

Chapter Four: METHODOLOGY ...... 85

Introduction ...... 85

Research design ...... 85

About the Youth Organisations ...... 88

Sample recruitment ...... 91

The choice youth organisations ...... 91

Recruitment of participants ...... 92

Research Instruments ...... 93

Survey: Generic Youth Development Framework Toolkit ...... 93

Focus Groups ...... 94

Data Analysis ...... 96

Quality of the Study ...... 97

Ethical issues ...... 98

Chapter Five: FINDINGS ...... 99

Introduction ...... 99

Section One: Quantitative data analysis ...... 99

Valuing young people ...... 100

Doing things of value ...... 108

Section Two: Qualitative Results ...... 117

Conclusion ...... 131

Chapter Six: DISCUSSION ...... 132

Introduction ...... 132

Valuing Young People ...... 132

Doing things of value ...... 136

Growth areas of the programs ...... 141

viii

Life skills acquired from sport-oriented youth development programs ...... 145

Conclusion ...... 152

Chapter Seven: CONCLUSION, LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..... 154

Conclusion ...... 154

Limitations ...... 156

Recommendations ...... 157

REFERENCES ...... 161

APPENDICES ...... 188

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Trends in population size and growth, 1967-2012 ...... 3

Table 2: Trends in Total Fertility Rate (TFR) in Tanzania ...... 4

Table 3: HIV prevalence by age in Tanzania ...... 17

Table 4: Age categories according to UN entities ...... 35

Table 5: Youth age, majority age and right to vote age in African countries ...... 36

Table 6: Perceptions of youth and adults ...... 40

Table 7: Survey questionnaire ...... 94

Table 8: Demographic characteristics of study participants and questionnaire response rate ...... 100

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Sample of youth development policies (Department of Youth Development, 2007) ...... 20

Figure 2: A shift from traditional youth services to youth development ...... 44

Figure 3: Generic Youth Development Framework - Reproduced from Wierenga and Wyn (2011) ...... 57

Figure 4: A summary of youth civic engagement activities according to CIRCLE (Keeter et al., 2002)...... 77

Figure 5: A chart of how young people perceive the indicators of good practice within the principle recognising strengths ...... 102

Figure 6: A chart of how young people perceive the indicators of good practice within the principle looking out for each other ...... 105

Figure 7: A chart of how young people perceive the indicators of good practice within the principle building the team ...... 108

Figure 8: A chart of how young people perceive the indicators of good practice within the principle learning and growing from experience and reflection...... 111

Figure 9: A chart of how young people perceive the indicators of good practice within the principle engaging in the real world...... 113

Figure 10: A chart of how young people perceive the indicators of good practice within the principle being active citizens ...... 115

Figure 11: A chart of how young people perceive and experience each of the GYDF principles...... 116

Figure 12: Themes and subthemes as extracted from participants' responses...... 118

Chapter One: INTRODUCTION

The idea of using sport as a tool for youth development seems to have worldwide appeal, judging by the mushrooming number of sport programs that claim to promote youth development (Holt, 2016; Mandela, 2011; Siedentop, Hastie, & van der Mars, 2011). I find this idea to be both intellectually fascinating and full of practical potential. As such, for the past six years I have dedicated my time to working and interacting with young people and to becoming acquainted with various youth development through sport practices in Tanzania.

To a great extent, the time I have spent working in the sporting industry, and my belief in the positive influence that sport has on youth development, inspired me to critically question the grand claims made by the youth sport programs promoting the idea of youth development in Tanzania. These programs assume that participation in youth sport among youth populations leads to positive outcomes in a wide range of areas. This assumption is also prevalent in the academic literature (Merkel, 2013; Siedentop et al., 2011). While I agree that sporting activities can be used as a vehicle for positive youth development, there are limited studies on youth development through sport in Tanzania and, as a result, Tanzania has limited evidence to support the claim that participation in youth sport leads to discernible personal and social progress in addressing the challenges facing young people.

Inspired by decolonial approaches such as the work of Connell (2014) and Smith (1999), recent research under the banner of ‘sport for development’—critiques attempts to produce and apply standardised frameworks. Instead they call for localised approaches informed by critical pedagogy (Kay, 2009; Lindsey, Kay, Jeanes, & Banda, 2017; Spaaij & Jeanes, 2013). In an African context, Mwaanga and colleagues (2013) have studied and advocated indigenous (non-western) discourses and approaches in sport-based youth development. This body of literature draws attention to the wider geopolitical context and (neo-colonial) power relations within which sport-based youth development

programs are situated. Localising youth sport programs may be important in building cohesion as well as facilitating pro-social behaviour in young people from various geopolitical areas. While this study acknowledges the wider geopolitical context of sports-based programs, selected sport-based youth development programs (SOYDPs) under study have a very strong relationship with their local communities including the leadership and community members. Thus to explore how they value young people and do things of value, the study draws on the Generic Youth Development Framework (GYDF), a youth development framework established by the Youth Research Centre at the University of Melbourne (Wierenga & Wyn, 2011). GYDF was preferred because it is comprehensive in scope, compartmentalised and flexible towards the contextual and localised circumstances of young people. It can be adapted to different local settings and invites empirical investigations of its efficacy for various components. It contains tools that local organisations can use to identify young peoples’ views, experiences and needs. Rather than promoting the use of a standardised framework, GYDF enables sports organisations to better understand the young people they are serving, through the critical use of evidence, to enable organisations to reflect on the relationship they have with their particular young people. Further, the framework supports youth organisations to engage in reflection and debate that will lead to improved good practice and develop new practices where appropriate. The GYDF is examined in more detail in the literature review chapter.

Background of Young People in Tanzania

The Government of Tanzania, in its first iteration of the National Development Policy of 1996, described youth as any Tanzanian resident between 15 and 24 years (Department of Youth Development, 1996); however, the revised National Youth Development Policy released in 2007 extended the age range to 35 (Department of Youth Development, 2007). The reasons for extending the age range to 35 are not clear, and are not explained either in the policy or in the national constitution. While the new age range (15-35 years) matches that proposed by the African Youth Charter (AU, 2006), the United Nations (UN) defines youth as any person within the range of 15-24 years (Division for Social Policy and Development, n.d). The UN youth age range

overlaps awkwardly with 'child' which in the UN definition covers age 0-17. A detailed discussion regarding youth as a concept is provided in Chapter Two.

Demographically speaking, Tanzania is one among many African countries experiencing a rapid increase in its population (Agwanda & Amani, 2014). According to the 2012 Population and Housing Census (PHC) results, the country’s population stands at 45 million (NBS and OCGS, 2013). PHC also shows that during the intercensal period 2002-2012, the population growth rate was 2.7% per annum (slightly above 1.2 million people per annum) (Table 1).

Table 1: Trends in population size and growth, 1967-2012

Tanzania Census year

1967 1978 1988 2002 2012

Total Population 12,313,469 17,512,610 23,095,882 34,443,603 44,928,923

Intercensal Increase 5,199,141 5,583,272 11,347,721 10,485,320

Size relative to 1967 100 142 188 280 (1967=100)

Average annual growth rate 3.2 2.77 2.85 2.66 (% p.a.)

Doubling time (years) 21.7 25.0 24.3 26.1

Source: National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) and Office of Chief Government Statistician (OCGS), Zanzibar 2013

With a high Total Fertility Rate (TFR) of 5.4, Tanzania is anticipated to see an upsurge in the population proportion of young people in the very near future (NBS, 2013) (Table 2).

Table 2: Trends in Total Fertility Rate (TFR) in Tanzania

Year TFR (Births per woman)

1991/92 6.3

1996 DHS 5.8

1999 DHS 5.6

2002 Census 6.3

2004/05 DHS 5.7

2010 DHS 5.4

Source: 1991/92, 1996, 1999, 2004/05 and 2010 TDHS and 2002 PHC

Looking at the population statistics, the future of Tanzania will be dependent on its youthful population who have been overlooked for too long. According to the 2012 national census, the percentage of young people aged 15-35 years is 34.7% of the total population (NBS and OCGS, 2013). The percentage indicates that the country is experiencing a situation referred to as a ‘youth bulge’1 (Urdal, 2006). According to Urdal (2006), a youth bulge may bring potential opportunities as well as a set of formidable challenges. It may provide a great resource for the country to reap a substantial demographic ‘bonus’ (also known as demographic ‘window’ or ‘dividend’). Demographic bonus occurs when the working-age population is predominant in the country, resulting in a low welfare dependency ratio. With good youth supporting policies, youth bulge could be an important factor for the country’s economic development, resilience, sustainability and productivity (UNECA, 2013).

On the other hand, absence of good policies that are able to accommodate the youth bulge could turn the mass of the youthful population into a source of possible disaster, a national risk factor that may require careful intervention (UNECA, 2013; Urdal, 2006).

1 A common phenomenon referring to a situation where a large share of the population is comprised of children and young adults (Urdal, 2006).

In his book The Ends of the Earth: A Journey at the Dawn of the 21st Century, Kaplan, after his travels in West African cities, depicts young men as “out of school, unemployed male youth” that seemed to be in the majority in the cities. He saw them as “loose molecules in an unstable social fluid that threatened to ignite” (Kaplan, 1996, p. 16). Similarly, in African Madness, Shoumatoff, describes young people he met in Nairobi as “detribalised young men, lost souls wandering in the vast space between the traditional and the modern worlds... howling in the streets of downtown Nairobi in the middle of the night” (Shoumatoff, 1988, p. xiv). What Kaplan (1996) and Shoumatoff (1988) observed more than two decades ago is still significant in the Tanzanian context. Currently, the country is experiencing high rates of urbanisation. The majority of urban migrants, young people, are active agents of the country’s radical transformation from a mainly rural to a predominantly urban region; thus, their observations provide a warning that the youth bulge is on the verge of bursting and posing a serious potential threat to both the security and stability of the country.

Population trends reveal that youth are becoming the major age group in Tanzania. This youth population is faced with a myriad of challenges that are not restricted to ethnic or religious background, but which affect young people across the world. In Tanzania, young people are subjected to different challenges such as marginalisation, high dependency rates due to unemployment, HIV/AIDS infection, a frail education system, school dropouts, poor reproductive health education, poverty, moral decay and peer pressure (Atkinson, McCurdy, Williams, Mbwambo, & Kilonzo, 2011; Department of Youth Development, 2007; Haji, 2007; URoT, 2013). The challenges that youth face portray them as needy, dependent and incapable of making any significant contribution to community development affairs. It is no wonder that they are marginalised by policies and are in a legally-weak position (Coalter, 2007).

While there are varied challenges that young people face, this study highlights three major challenges affecting young people in Tanzania: youth marginalisation, unemployment and drug abuse.

Youth marginalisation

The literature is abundant on how marginalisation can be measured and differentiated from other broader concepts about social exclusion, social discrimination and inequality; however, there remains no clear definition of marginalisation, and ongoing debate has not resolved the confusion surrounding this term. In an effort to define the term, UNESCO describes marginalisation as “a form of acute and persistent disadvantage rooted in underlying social inequalities” (UNESCO, 2010, p. 135). This definition suggests that the ideal is a society that upholds justice, and that the continuing debate over the term can sometimes delay the implementation of political and ethical initiatives to combat marginalisation.

Although it is hard to secure data regarding marginalisation, there is agreement that commonly marginalised groups in Tanzania include young people, particularly young females, people with disabilities, hard-to-reach groups like nomadic people, ethnic minorities, people living in poor households and informal settlements, people infected with HIV and AIDS and homeless children (Department of Youth Development, 2007; Jensen, 2010). According to Jensen, these groups are vulnerable not because they are inherently victims, but because they are subjected to particular marginalisation processes that place them in vulnerable positions. They have little control over their lives and resources, even those resources meant for them; they are victims of stigmatisation and subjects of negative public attitudes; and they lack opportunities for making a social contribution, perhaps suffering from low self-esteem and self- confidence as a result. Marginalised people may not enjoy the valued social services available in their society as they have limited or no access to services such as health, education and quality accommodation, and they lack both employment opportunities and access to leisure activities (Chigunta, 2002).

The consequences of marginalisation of young people, particularly those young people with poor socio-economic, legal, cultural or geographical backgrounds, may be dire.

According to the words of Christiansen, Utas and Vigh (2006) marginalisation has turned young people into:

A generation of people who have been born into social environments in which their possibilities of living decent lives are negligible and in which many have found themselves stuck in positions of inadequate life chances and bleak prospects. (Wright, 2015, p. 9)

Building on the words of Christiansen, Ultas and Vingh, a report produced by the Education, Audio-visual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) for European Union countries asserts that marginalisation may result in deep and long lasting effects on the living standards, social and economic engagement, health conditions and emotional lives of young people (Paolini, 2013). The report goes on to argue that marginalisation may also ensure poverty persists from one generation to the next. In turn, insecurity in living conditions, feelings of emotional instability, social and political exclusion, and unhealthy life styles of young people may exacerbate the conditions of marginalisation already existing in the society. The process may go on to produce a vicious cycle in which marginalised young people find themselves entangled in complicated problems such as material deprivation, social and emotional exclusion, and health issues that ultimately subject them to more serious risks of being marginalised.

Young people in Tanzania, who are within the majority, are still marginalised in areas such as decision-making bodies, education, employment, healthcare, and access to the status of ‘adulthood’ (Jensen, 2010). Of these, it is the employment issue that has most affected young people (Perullo, 2005). According to the United Nations (2007), marginalised young people who are unemployed and go without support, or rely on support from either the government or family members, may disengage from the communities in which they live and become isolated. They are also less likely to engage in civic and community activities such as volunteering. As for marginalised young people who also lack education, they are less likely to establish connections with the mainstream of the societies of which they are supposed to be part of, hence they may miss out on opportunities for social and economic mobility. While there is no reliable

data available, studies that explored the life of marginalised young people, - in particular children on the streets in Tanzania, report that young people from this group may end up involving themselves in antisocial or illegal behaviour such as theft, rape and murder, while others engage in transgenerational or transactional sexual practices as a means of generating income and securing basic necessities (Evans, 2004; Lugalla & Mbwambo, 1999; Wagner, Lyimo, & Lwendo, 2012).

The National Youth Development Policy of 2007 points out the existence of discrimination in the values and attitudes of the adult population in Tanzania in relation to young people, particularly young females, young people with disabilities and youth in special circumstances (Department of Youth Development, 2007). Young people are marginalised in decision-making bodies, excluded from formal participation in politics, and are unable to influence public policies, even those directly affecting their lives, such as education and job creation (Department of Youth Development, 2007; Evans, 2012). They are consistently positioned as lacking skills and qualifications, jobless, lazy, recipients of support and the cause of social problems (Perullo, 2011). They are commonly mythologised as incomprehensible, perplexing, ill-educated, and prone to violence, particularly when left alone. Further, they are regarded as people who are incompetent to look after themselves, rather than active people who can take part in the shaping of their own lives and that of their communities and who have something of value to offer. However, Perullo (2005) asserts that by treating young people as an homogenous population, society misses the oppositional characteristics of similar aged individuals who can be studious, reliable, trustworthy, hardworking, and socially influential.

In a report written for the Danish Youth Council, titled Young People’s possibilities for influence in Tanzania, Jensen (2010) reveals that young Tanzanians, both from rural and urban areas, live in a society that is largely shaped by traditional values, codes and a culture of silence. The report goes on to describe Tanzania as an age-hierarchical and gendered society in which adults, particularly men, make most decisions concerning

important matters. The country is an age-hierarchical system because adults have disproportionate power over young people and children. It is a gendered system in the sense that men (young and adult males) have more power over women (young and adult females) in terms of social, political, and military power (Department of Youth Development, 2007; Jensen, 2010). Young people are valued only as prospective decision-makers—of tomorrow, but not of today. As an expression of respect, young people are not allowed to speak out or challenge elders. Age is used as a barrier to prohibit them from running for public office, particularly government office, and from participation in the formal political sector; hence their voices are not heard. According to Jensen, factors that exclude young people from participation include ‘a combination of lack of skills and education, lack of confidence and the lack of space for youth to express themselves in the public realm’ (Jensen, 2010, p. 10).

The large mass of the youthful population in Tanzania lives in a situation of subordination vis-à-vis the policy-making bodies which predominantly consist of male adults (Englert, 2008). While the African Youth Charter encourages its member states to take steps that will guarantee youth engagement in parliament and other decision- making bodies (AU, 2006), it is very rare to find people under the age of 24 participating in formal political leadership in Tanzania. They are inadequately represented in the formal political organs such as parliament, electoral committees, political parties and public administrations. Participation remains ad hoc, dependent on the opinions and personalities of (adults) in power. Exclusion of young people from participating in political matters deprives them of various advantages. To summarise the work by Lansdown (2004), participation in decision-making bodies would: give young people a say, an influence in decision-making, contribute to the inclusion of young people in the decision-making bodies, help young people improve their civic skills and virtues, help young people make informed decisions based on public reasoning, and legitimise decisions young people make.

What about young women participating in decision-making bodies? How is marginalisation experienced in this group? An interesting and insightful study is provided by Massao and Fasting’s research that explored the position of women in sport governing bodies in Tanzania (Massao & Fasting, 2003). They noticed the underrepresentation of women of all ages within sports governing bodies; that women were not involved in decision-making bodies even on matters that related to them. In instances where women were included, there was often little mention of their roles and a tendency for them not to occupy or assume leadership positions within these bodies. Interestingly, the research also found that within marginalised groups in Tanzania, young women and young men experience marginalisation differently, largely contributed to by the culture of silence, unequal gender norms, religious factors, attitudes and power dynamics existing in the society. According to Massao and Fasting, predominantly male-favouring customs and traditions have meant that women’s participation is low compared to that of men in both decision-making bodies and education, especially at higher levels. Customs and traditions also affect women’s involvement in public meetings and political discourses. As observed by Jensen (2010), it is common for marginalised young females to be positioned at the fringes of the public sphere and excluded from the legitimate spheres of socio-economic, political and cultural processes, and rarely given a voice. At the family level, for example, men are customarily considered as the head of the household and women are socially marginalised to household chores. At the national level, prevailing attitudes still influence any appointment of women to positions of high profile; hence they are limited from having an impact upon decision-making and planning processes (Massao & Fasting, 2003). This reflects the existing patriarchal structures in this society in which young women have no voice to influence allocation of resources (Jensen, 2010). Chigunta (2002) concludes that marginalisation of young people, both young men and young women, from mainstream society pushes them to the streets where they create their own social worlds, also known as youth subcultures.

Though adults perceive young people as passive, in reality they are not idling, passively waiting for things to happen. When actively engaged in decision-making processes, they can make invaluable contributions to their communities. With this understanding, the

National Youth Policy of 2007 envisions Tanzanian young people as valuable community resources rather than passive recipients of services (Department of Youth Development, 2007). Young people possess energy, enthusiasm and dynamism and are innovative. These are assets that, if well tapped into, can add value to the nation (Gyimah-Brempong & Mwangi, 2013); however, Gyimah-Brempong and Mwangi (2013) caution that to effectively harness the assets found among young people, governments need to mainstream youth policies. This will provide checks and balances on the impact of government policies, strategies and actions on young people. Mainstreaming youth policies will also enable youth issues to break out of traditional domains and achieve broader recognition. Gyimah-Brempong and Mwangi (2013) add that unless policies adequately and practically address young peoples’ needs, these individuals may become frustrated, particularly when attempts are made to address their legitimate problems such as unemployment, low educational achievement, marginalisation in decision-makingand limited social mobility. In the case of Tanzania, the National Youth Policy of 2007, in one of its policy statements, requires youth programs to employ a youth development framework to support young people to develop life skills and leadership skills, to form positive relationships with responsible adults, and to make positive contributions to their communities (Department of Youth Development, 2007). The policy also puts youth at the centre, especially in the context of social and economic development and of societal transformations and interactions in Tanzania.

Youth Unemployment

There is a scarcity of reliable data regarding the youth unemployment rate in Tanzania following the lack of systematic efforts to collect data in the country (Agwanda & Amani, 2014). This complicates any attempts to gather evidence for the causes and consequences of unemployment. Nevertheless, the available information provides some indication that the rate of youth unemployment is relatively high in Tanzania. The United Nations Statistics Division in 2011 reported on Tanzania youth data that the unemployment rate among youth 15 and 24 years old in the formal sector averaged 8.8 per cent: 7.4 per cent were male and 10.1 per cent female (Agwanda & Amani, 2014).

These percentages suggest that young females fare worse than males. Being a male makes a young person in Tanzania about 4 per cent more likely to be employed in the formal sector. Similar findings were also reported by Msigwa and Kipesha (2013) in a study that examined determinants of youth unemployment in Tanzania. In another study that examined youth employment in East Africa, Haji (2007) reports that young people, particularly females and those from marginalised groups, are more likely to be concentrated in the informal sector. Haji goes on to write that work within the informal sector includes casual jobs, temporary jobs, unpaid jobs, petty trading and subsistence agriculture. The informal sector is associated with unsafe and exploitative conditions, with most of its employees going without secure income, employments benefits and social protection. This may explain the reason why employment informality overlaps with poverty.

In relation to youth unemployment in Tanzania, Shivji (2007) noted in one of his articles that, out of 800,000 youths, school and college graduates and young people who have migrated from rural areas to urban areas who enter the labour market every year, barely one-tenth could find formal jobs. According to Shivji (2007), while young people struggle to find jobs, a policy of privatisation and capital-intensive investments mean that scores of people are made redundant. Youth unemployment in Tanzania is aggravated by several traditional factors. These factors include a decline in the national economy, a frail education system, a dearth of work-related skills and business training, a lack of credit facilities, an emphasis on the formal sector alone, a general lack of incentives in the agricultural sector and rural areas, inadequate business advisory services, the high youth population growth rate, and cultural influences, particularly in areas where there is pessimism over job prospects (Garcia & Fares, 2008; Haji, 2007; Msigwa & Kipesha, 2013). Of all these factors, the economy determines not only youth labour market participation but also the state of the general labour market in the country. According to research, there is a correlation between failure of the economy to effectively utilise available resources and high rates of unemployment (Peter, 2013).

A report issued by the National Bureau of Statistics indicates that youth unemployment in Tanzania is higher in urban areas than in rural areas (NBS, OCGS, & MoHSW, 2010). The Bureau reports that urban areas reach 22.3% against 7.1% in the rural areas. In rural areas young people largely engage in some form of (semi) subsistence farming and livelihood activities (URoT, 2013). Farming activities involve the use of hand tools and depend largely upon unreliable rain-fed cropping methods and animal husbandry and, as a result, yield very poor returns. Livelihood activities include petty trade, handcraft work, fishing, tailoring and seaweed farming. The agricultural sector, however, which used to provide employment to over 80% of Tanzanians and is earmarked as an economic backbone to realising the poverty reduction strategy goals of Tanzania, is now in decline (Mashindano, Kayunze, Corta, & Maro, 2011; NSGRP, 2009). This decline is attributed to factors including unfavourable weather conditions, lack of financial capital, lack of advanced farming technologies, and poor marketing systems. The dwindling of the agricultural sector triggers the migration of young people from rural areas into nearby cities and towns in pursuit of jobs. The majority end up in informal jobs characterised by low pay and poor working conditions, hence escalating the problem of unemployment and poverty in urban areas. As noted by Mjema (1999) and shown through my personal experience of living in a rural area, the challenge for rural areas is high underemployment rates (that is people are not getting good jobs) rather than high unemployment. This follows from poor educational achievement among rural young people, poor infrastructure (power, roads, water supply, etc.) and communication systems. There is also an unfortunate attitude among young people that farming is a ‘dirty activity’ and an employer of last resort just because there are no proper facilities.

Youth unemployment is the concern of both the unemployed and of all members of society, including family members and the state. Everyone, particularly young people, expect to secure employment upon completion of their education; however, as noted by Shivji (2007), this has not been the case for every youth in Tanzania. Inability to secure a subsistent income exposes both urban and rural young people to a wide range of social evils, and they are susceptible to its damaging effects. An American sociologist, Wilson (1999), points out:

The consequences of high neighbourhood joblessness are more devastating than those of high neighbourhood poverty. A neighbourhood, in which people are poor, but employed, is much different from a neighbourhood in which people are poor and jobless. […] Many of today’s problems in …. inner-city ghetto neighbourhoods—crime, family dissolution, welfare, low levels of social organisation and so on—are fundamentally a consequence of the disappearance of work. (Wilson, 1999, p. 135)

By the disappearance of work, Wilson refers to the situation where involvement in, or attachment to the formal labour market is in decline. He does not mean that an individual is totally detached from all forms of work activity. Instead, one can officially be declared jobless, but still involve oneself in informal kinds of works such as unpaid housework or illegal economies that produce an income. Anecdotal evidence indicates that lack of employment opportunities, particularly in urban Tanzania, has led to increased numbers of young criminals and delinquent gangs (for instance, Kiboko Msheli, Begi Bovu, Komando Yosso and Mbwa Mwitu)2, substance abuse and drug trafficking, petty theft and unsafe sex (Perullo, 2005; Peter, 2013). These practices may contribute to additional social problems such as increased rates of HIV/AIDS infections among young people, family crises, mental illness and deaths. According to Hilker and Fraser (2009), the more young people engage in dangerous practices the further they exclude themselves from normal labour markets. White and colleagues (2008) argue that lack of employment may demoralise, depreciate youth’s human capital, and damage their employment prospects, culminating in social exclusion.

Drug abuse

The health and wellbeing of young Tanzanians is at high risk from the increased use and trade of illicit drugs such as bhang (cannabis), heroin and cocaine (Atkinson et al., 2011; Chigunta, 2002; Timpson et al., 2006). A report by the Drug Control Commission of Tanzania (DCC, n.d) shows that the number of young drug addicts who attend clinics just at the Mirembe Hospital in Dodoma region doubled from 290 in 2000 to 569 in

2 Names of youth delinquent gangs located in the city of Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania (Peter, 2013)

2005—a 96.2% increase. In a recent report, the Drug Control Commission (2012) shows that the number of drug addicts seeking treatment at its drug rehabilitation centres located throughout the country increased to 200,000 in 2011. Nsimba and colleagues specifically researched the core characteristics of drug addicts in Dar Es Salaam, the biggest commercial city in Tanzania. In their study, they randomly recruited a sample of 1198 people (113 adolescents aged below 20, 766 young adults aged 20-30, and 319 adults aged over 40). In their analysis they found that about 96% of male drug addicts were very young (below 30 years of age) and 5.5% of the female drug addicts were not over 20 (Chigunta, 2002). Out of 1198 people, 1009 either dropped out of school or completed only primary education. Fifty seven percent of the drug addicts were not married, and injection was the most common route for administering drugs. These findings send alarming signals to Tanzanian society because illicit drugs are destructive in nature and may have devastating consequences, not only to an individual young person but also to their family and society generally (Abdullah, 1998). Illicit drugs cloud the mind of the user against good judgement, diminish decision-making abilities, and lower their defences. It hampers youth’s ability to cope with social and emotional challenges and, as a result, they engage in risk-taking behaviour.

Research suggests that the problems of drug abuse may complement that of HIV/AIDS infection as drug addicts display poor or no control regarding sexual relations, and lack good judgment (McCurdy, Williams, Kilonzo, Ross, & Leshabari, 2005; te Lintelo, 2012; Timpson et al., 2006). Available data from the study conducted in Tanzania shows high HIV prevalence among young drug addicts (Ratliff et al., 2013; te Lintelo, 2012). For instance, according to studies that took place between 2003 and 2007, HIV prevalence was estimated to be at 42% among ‘people who inject drugs’ (Msami, 2004; te Lintelo, 2012) compared to 9% in the general population (TACAIDS, ZAC, NBS, OCGS, & Macro International Inc, 2008). In the subsequent studies that were carried out between 2009 and 2010, HIV prevalence among younger people who inject drugs was found to be around 31% and 35%, respectively (Atkinson et al., 2011; Bowring, van Gemert, Toufik, Dietze, & Stoove, 2011). These studies also reported an increase of HIV prevalence among women who inject illicit drugs from 55% to 68%, respectively.

The third Tanzania HIV and Malaria Indicator Survey 2011-2012 (THMIS III) indicated that mainland Tanzania has a high population of people infected with HIV, with the epidemic spreading predominantly through heterosexual sex (TACAIDS, ZAC, NBS, OCGS Zanzibar, & ICF International, 2013). THMIS III reports that 5.1% of all people (aged 15-49) who participated in the survey were HIV positive. The survey found a higher prevalence of HIV among women (6.2%) than among men (3.8%) and a higher HIV prevalence for both women and men in urban areas than in rural settings. The findings of this report also show a slight decline in HIV prevalence from 5.7% (2007- 2008 THMIS II) to 5.1% (2011-2012 THMIS III) among adults aged 15-49. Likewise, there is a decline in the HIV prevalence among men from 4.6% to 3.8% and among women from 6.6% to 6.2%. In relation to young people (15-24 years), THMIS III indicates that they contribute to 15% of total HIV cases. Two percent of the young people who participated in the survey (3% of young women and 1% of young men) were found to be HIV positive. The report shows that among the people tested for HIV between 2011 and 2012, HIV prevalence increased as age increased (

While HIV among young people is mainly transmitted through unprotected sex, the 2011-2012 THMIS III reports a 1% HIV prevalence among young adults who had never engaged in any sexual activity. This may reflect underreporting of sexual practices among young people, especially young females. The percentage may also suggest that there are other underlying factors in HIV transmission such as sharing of unsterilised needles and other sharps among young people; an issue that needs to be targeted in order to decrease the prevalence of HIV in this population. Because the period of youth covers the productive years for males and females, disruption caused by illicit drugs or HIV infection may severely interfere with the development of society and significantly retard the future economic growth of the nation. Therefore, according to the United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on HIV and AIDS, youth (15-24) is an important developmental stage to monitor if any UN member state intends to reduce HIV prevalence.

Table 3).

Table 3: HIV prevalence by age in Tanzania

Among the de facto women aged 15-49 and men aged 15-49 who were interviewed and tested, the percentage HIV positive, by age, Tanzania 2011-12

Women Men Total

Age Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Number HIV positive HIV positive HIV positive

15-19 1.3 2,153 0.8 1,944 1.0 4,097

20-24 4.4 1,699 1.7 1,449 3.2 3,148

25-29 7 1,691 2.5 1,053 5.3 2,744

30-34 9.2 1,320 6.5 1,013 8.0 2,333

35-39 8.0 1,269 7.1 1,007 7.6 2,276

40-44 9.3 901 7.1 892 8.2 1,793

45-49 10.2 722 6.5 631 8.5 1,353

Total 15-49 6.2 9,756 3.8 7,989 5.1 17,745

Source: National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) and Office of Chief Government Statistician (OCGS), Zanzibar 2013

The future of Tanzania relies upon the youth population being taken care of. In view of the severity of the problems that Tanzanian youth face, there is a need for active engagement with young people to help them deal with the challenges they face, as well as minimising the risk of their apathy. In addition, the country needs to commit itself to investing in the growth and development needs of its young people, regardless of their background. As noted in the Youth Development Policy of 2007, young people are an asset; it is therefore appropriate for the country to invest in such assets that promise a higher rate of return.

Youth on the Political Agenda

The Government of Tanzania acknowledges that young people have capacities and skills as decision-makers—they have ‘agency’—and consequently, youth development is a cross-cutting issue relating to this agency (Department of Youth Development, 2007). The government of Tanzania is aware that promotion of youth development cannot be left to one entity; it requires a multi-sectoral approach for effective implementation. In this respect, the government abides by the African Charter which states in Article 12 (a), that a “policy shall be cross-sectoral in nature considering the inter-relatedness of the challenges facing young people” (AU, 2006). As such, the Government of Tanzania has adopted various strategies to improve the life of its young people. These strategies include: inclusion of youth in the National Policy as an important group that needs special consideration; formulation of the National Youth Development Policy of 2007; and inclusion of a statement in the National Sports Development Policy of 1995 that emphasises the use of sport as a tool for youth development. Through these established strategies and policies, the government is determined to develop and implement programs that would give opportunities to young men and women to succeed in various aspects of life—in recognition of the fact that young people are an integral part of Tanzanian society, with a significant contribution to make.

National Youth Development Policy

The Government, through the former Ministry of Labour, Employment and Youth Development, introduced its first print of the National Youth Development Policy in 1996 (Department of Youth Development, 1996). This policy provided direction on youth development to young people, youth workers, parents, educators, the community, and to the development planners in various sectors in the country. It encouraged other sectors to develop relevant strategies and programs that will support young people to thrive in various spheres of life; however, the implementation of this policy has encountered a number of challenges, including a change in lifestyles due to globalisation, new cultures, introduction of new values and orientations. In 2007, the government, through the Ministry of Information, Youth, Culture and Sports, formulated a revised National Youth Development Policy, 2007. The revised policy seeks “to have empowered, well-motivated and responsible youth, capable of participating effectively in social, political and economic development of the society” (Department of Youth Development, 2007, p. 9). In its mission statement the policy calls for creation of an environment that will empower young people and equip them with employment opportunities and security. It addresses several issues relevant to young people in its 46 policy statements around 29 identified issue areas (Figure 1 for policy samples).

Figure 1: Sample of youth development policies (Department of Youth Development, 2007)

The new policy advocates for a partnership of stakeholders from various sectors to complement the government’s efforts to: empower young Tanzanians with skills and competence for employment; support young people to accept the responsibility of demonstrating good values, ethics and conduct; ensure that there is an environment 20

conducive to young people to partake in decision-making; and to ensure that youth- friendly social services are established and accessible. Both the 1996 and 2007 National Youth Development Policies were formulated based on human rights outlined in the constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania of 1977, amended in 1984 and 1995: the right to live; the right to be protected; the right to be developed; the right to develop oneself; and the right to participate in individual and community development.

The revised National Youth Development Policy of 2007 distinguishes itself from the first version in addressing several cross-cutting issues such as unemployment, poverty, environmental degradation, high rates of drug abuse, HIV/AIDS and other diseases that pose a challenge to young people. It acknowledges the importance of young men and women as the greatest asset capable of participating in the shaping of their own lives and of their communities, and in the development of the nation. In the same context, the policy emphasises the importance of preparing young people to be leaders, decision- makers, entrepreneurs, parents and guardians—because they have a vital role to play in the nation. For instance, to promote employment creation in the private sector, the policy encourages entrepreneurship skills training, empowerment of young people, high quality and relevant education, and introduction of gender and equity programs, as well as environment sustainability programs. Thus, the government aims at empowering, facilitating and guiding youth and other stakeholders in the addressing of young peoples’ development issues.

Critical analysis of the National Youth Development Policy of 2007 indicates that while youth development frameworks promote youth development, paying lip service to treating young people as partners and involving them as leaders, the policy places the responsibility on young people themselves to achieve these goals, rather than building new structures that are enabling for young people. The policy is silent on how it will achieve its objectives; instead it calls for stakeholders from various sectors and organisations, including government, civil societies, private sectors, community-based organisations, families and young people, to join efforts in promoting, facilitating and

addressing issues that confront Tanzanian youth. In its early pages, the policy nominates challenges faced by young people as lack of jobs, poverty, HIV/AIDS and other diseases, environmental degradation and drugs (Department of Youth Development, 2007, p. v). In other words, the needs of young Tanzanians relate to healthy lifestyles, prosperity, employment and a supporting environment. According to Chachage (2008) the policy fails to provide concrete evidence about the problems that young people supposedly face. Chachage argues that the policy did not conduct a thorough situational analysis to fully understand the needs of young people and how to address them appropriately for their prosperity and for a positive future for the country. Citing an example, Chachage argues that the policy fails to provide comprehensive statistical evidence of young peoples’ economic status. While the policy tries to provide background information in relation to the young peoples’ demands, the information is just a glimpse. Such a glimpse by policymakers, policy implementers and budgeting personnel is not enough to inform them of young peoples’ problems; they need succinct information about the needs of young people before they can prioritise them. The policy is also silent about the different demands of young people arising from their gender, sexual orientation, class, age or urban and rural origin.

Further, the authenticity of the process that led to the formulation of the policy is questionable. According to Chachage (2008), the policy fails to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the demands of young people that it outlines genuinely originated from young people themselves. It does not state whether there was a baseline study to determine the (then) current situation of youth in Tanzania. This is contrary to Article 12(g) of the African Youth Charter which categorically states that a “baseline evaluation or situation analysis shall inform the policy on the priority issues for youth” (AU, 2006). In the absence of a detailed situational analysis, one would question the reliability of youth demands described in the Youth Development Policy of 2007. The policy maintains that ‘certain’ youth groups had an opportunity to review the policy and touched on certain areas of their demands. Here it can be argued that the policy review embraced Article 12(b) of the African Youth Charter that states that the “development of a national youth policy shall be informed by extensive consultation with young people”. However, based on the statistics and scientific criteria, these groups were not

representatives of the country’s youth. When asked about the criteria and procedures used to access participants for the review of the National Youth Development Policy, Daniel Welwel—former national chairperson of Tanzania Youth Vision Association (TYVA) had this to say:

The criteria are somewhat unclear, because there was no logical or clear geographical representation of the young people. The only advantage organizations like TYVA had in the process, was their continued persistence and pro-activeness to participate…. the participation has never been consistent and inclusive. It is perhaps the most disjointed type of participation. (Barker, 2012, pp. 4-5)

Generally, the National Youth Development Policy of 2007 review falls short in its methodology—with a lack of broad-based participation.

National Sports Development Policy

The National Sports Policy of Tanzania was launched in 1996 and, as such, was entitled the National Sports Policy of 1996 (Wizara ya Elimu na Utamaduni, 1995). The policy provides guidelines on how the country should go about developing sports activities. It centres itself on sport and physical activities for the Tanzanian population—including its youth. In its objectives, the policy clearly states the need for sports promotion to achieve mass participation of Tanzanians in sport. It points out the need to develop sport in a more organised national framework, improving strategies for strengthening sport development and collaborating with other stakeholders to enhance sporting activities. The policy encourages participation of marginalised groups such as young people, girls and women in all aspects of sport, such as leadership and training activities. To summarise, the policy invigorates gender inclusiveness and inclusion of individuals with disabilities. The policy goes further by providing guidelines for various organisations and institutions responsible for sports activities, calling for collaboration among them in addressing different aspects of the policy. Though other organisations responsible for sports development exist, the policy is closely monitored and implemented by the Directorate of Sports at the Ministry of Information, Youth, Culture and Sports and the

National Sports Council. As far as young people are concerned, the policy provides written encouragement for youth sport.

In response to the National Sports Policy of 1996, several sports-oriented youth development programs have been established across the country to support young people with the challenges they face. These programs employ various strategies such as deficit-oriented, prevention-oriented and asset-oriented approaches to supporting young people in their development. According to Schulman and Davies (2007), each of these strategies has its specific purpose. For instance, the purpose of deficit-oriented approaches is to reduce incidences of risk behaviour. It is a paradigm that focuses on reducing impediments to positive human development (that is, negative peer influence or poverty). Prevention-oriented approaches strive to keep young people away from involvement in risk behaviour. Asset-oriented approaches strive to engage young people in positive, pro-social behaviour. Some of the youth development programs integrate sporting activities with life skills education. They believe that young people can, and mostly do, direct their own lives. They embrace the philosophy that sport can build character and promote youth development in different ways. Examples of such programs include the Tanzania Street Children Sports Academy (TSC)3, Beckwith International Leadership Development Project (BILD)4, Youth Empowerment through Sports (YES Tanzania)5, Jambo - Bukoba6, and Right to Play Tanzania. Generally, these programs espouse the acquisition of knowledge, skills, competencies and experiences by young Tanzanians as a way to ensure a smooth transition from childhood to adulthood.

3 TSC Sports Academy – uses football as a tool to support vulnerable children in the Mwanza region, and as a means to campaign for street children’s rights. The children represent a marginalised group and are considered a symptom of underlying societal problems relating to poverty, education, family, conflict and child abuse—which affect many young people in Tanzanian society to varying degrees. 4 BILD – a youth and leadership development-through-sports project run by the National Sports Council of Tanzania in collaboration with UK-Sport International. 5 YES Tanzania – a Scottish-based ‘capacity-building NGO operating in Arusha region, delivering life skills and education coaching programs to young people. 6 JAMBO – BUKOBA – a children-empowerment project run by the Kagera Region Administrative Office in collaboration with the German government.

Youth Participation in Sports

Despite the socioeconomic problems and limited facilities for stimulating sport, and young people in Tanzania love and participate in sport. They are introduced to formal competitive sport and games during their school years (NSC, 2009). Those who fail to attend formal education are introduced to formal sport either through local community sports clubs or youth sport programs that target out-of-school children. As for young people who are not involved in formal sport, they participate in other local and traditional games. In formal education, there are several tournaments organised by different educational institutions—the Ministry of Regional Administration and Local Government and Ministry of Science, Technology and Higher Education—almost every year or every second year for students. The tournaments span school class level to national level, bringing together children and young people from various schools and institutions across the country. They include UMITASHUMTA for primary schools, UMISSETA for secondary schools, UMISAVUTA for intermediate colleges (Certificate-, Diploma- and Advanced Diploma-offering institutions), and TUSA for Tanzanian universities. The majority of formal sports are modelled on Western sports (NSC, 2009; Orasmaa, Ndee, Frantsi, & Frantsi, 2015). Some of them have been partly adapted to form the curriculum of Physical Education (PE) that is seen in Western schools (Mafumiko & Pangani, 2008; Orasmaa et al., 2015). The PE curriculum for secondary schools focuses on: fostering students’ physical fitness; building and promoting both a mental and physical attitude of self-reliance; building and promoting a political philosophy of socialism; developing a socially acceptable character among students; and building and promoting cultural wellbeing in society (MoEVT, 2005). Apart from school sport programs, there are also other programs that include sporting activities for after school hours, on weekends, and during holidays. These programs include various community sports clubs and youth sport activities. In all cases, there is a higher participation of young males than females, which may be a reflection of cultural and religious attitudes about the role of females within Tanzanian society (Kallio & Häkli, 2010; NSC, 2009).

Experience shows that while most young people in Tanzania participate in sporting activities compared to those in other age groups, there are few programs that focus on using sport as a vehicle for youth development. Those that do attempt to operate within a youth development framework do so by integrating sporting activities with life skills education in order to: promote resilience and appreciation of achievements; provide opportunities for young people to build social competencies and skills required for problem-solving; encourage transfer of skills to other life situations; and to develop such competencies in sequence and in an incremental manner to allow gradual acquisition and application of the acquired skills. The programs comprise high levels of activity to ensure that all young people are engaged, use inclusive strategies such as programs for young people with special needs and provide opportunities for young people to experience success. In addition, the programs are associated with numerous positive developmental indicators such as emotion regulation, improved self-esteem, goal- attainment, problem-solving, academic performance and social skills (Holt, 2016). I acknowledge, however, that acquisition of the right set of attitudes and life skills through sport alone is not an end in itself. Tanzanian young people may need to acquire the right knowledge regarding their development to become good parents, productive workers and responsible citizens.

Rationale for the study

While there is a need to improve the value and quality of practice of youth and life skills development in Tanzania, a lack of resources hinders the gathering of data to provide an evidence-based analysis of the quality of practice and the nature of the life skills that young people acquire by participating in youth development programs, particularly youth sport programs. In addition, without critical reflection about the quality of practice and nature of life skills that youth development programs offer to young Tanzanians, programs most in need of assistance may miss opportunities for support. Hence, this study was proposed for four main reasons. The first reason is to provide research evidence and understanding of processes and conditions of youth and life skills development through sports as perceived by young people, volunteers and program providers/managers of SOYDPs. The second reason is to determine which life skills

young people acquire. The third reason is to provide an in-depth examination of how these programs improve young peoples’ life skills, especially in the context of Tanzania where there is a paucity of comprehensive research related to youth and life skills development through sport. Finally, the study aims to build on and add value to the literature of youth development, particularly in programs that integrate sporting activities with life skills education and use sport as a tool for youth development.

Statement of the problem

Increased concern about issues related to youth development in Tanzania is now evident in the proliferation of youth sport programs (Orasmaa et al., 2015). The programs provide opportunities for young people to take part in sport and sport-related activities. Some of these programs have developmental and/or instructional goals that are consistent with the values of youth and life skills development, while some are just ‘regular’ youth sports programs that may or may not necessarily include developmental goals. Integration of youth sporting activities with life skills education as an approach to youth development is a new concept in Tanzania. Admittedly, the success of these programs has been determined by measures of program reach, that is, the measure of the number of young people participating and the measure of participants’ satisfaction (Bulamile, 2008). These indicators however do not provide evidence of the quality and effectiveness of these programs.

Yet studies dealing with successful youth development through sports programs are limited; hence, so is the assessment of quality of practice and the nature of life skills that young people acquire from participation in these programs. To the best of my knowledge, no study has researched the quality of practice and determines the nature of life skills that young people acquire by participating in youth sport programs that integrate sport and life skills education in Tanzania. To be specific, no study has used the personal experience, analysis and reflections of participating young people, volunteers, staff and providers/managers of the programs, conveyed in their own language. This lack of systematic evidence is the impetus for this study.

Aims and research questions

This study set out to explore youth and life skills development through sport in Tanzania. Specifically, the study sought to collect research evidence on the quality of practice and the nature of life skills acquisition in Sport-Oriented Youth Development Programs (SOYDPs). As it explored the extent to which youth programs provide an effective environment for youth development, the study also sought information about youth experiences, staff/volunteer practices and program content, and how they interact with each other.

In response to the broad question: what is the quality of practice and the nature of life skills acquisition in youth development programs? this study examines SOYDPs that integrate sporting activities with life skills education. The study is guided by one overarching question that was derived from the GYDF: To what extent do SOYDPs in Tanzania value young people and enable young people to do things of value? To answer the overarching research question, sub-questions were developed to frame the study in relation to the two overarching values:

a. Valuing young people: To what extent, and how, do SOYDPs recognise young peoples’ strengths, build teamwork, and enable young people to look out for each other? b. Doing things of value: To what extent, and how, do SOYDPs engage young people with the real world, support young people into becoming active citizens, and support young people to be reflective, resilient learners? c. What life skills do young people gain from being exposed to SOYDPs?

Significance of the study

Findings from this study may contribute to future design of youth development programs, help in consolidating existing sports initiatives, and establish more effective youth development through sports programs. Program providers will be informed of 28

program aspects that need improvement to ensure sustainability and promote better outcomes for their programs. These aspects may include design, delivery process, and the usefulness of the program delivered to the young people with respect to the needs of the community. The information may also be useful in influencing policy and legislation for youth workers and educators who are working to improve the quality of youth development programs in Tanzania. Subsequently, this study may provide the impetus for youth development initiatives in Tanzania to think of developing a Youth Development Framework as a tool for evaluation.

Personal living experience shows that other than the National Youth Development Policy, which has adopted the problem-oriented approach to young people, to date, there is no framework for youth development that has been laid down to be used by organisations implementing youth development programs in Tanzania. Consequently, there is no coordinated approach to the key deliverables in the strategy to ensure that youth organisations create ongoing opportunities for young people in the country. There is also lack of coordinated strategies to ensure that youth programs support healthy development, wellbeing and positive relationship for young people within their communities. Each youth program operates in its own world independent of the other. Hence, lack of cohesion in the elements of youth development is obvious and it is hard to track and assess the outcomes of the programs. Presence of a youth development framework would have helped to accommodate diversity, and be accurately attuned to the profile of young people across the country. Youth development framework would also have helped in translating the policy statements alienated in the youth development policy and bring all partnerships to work together in strengthening and adding value to differing priorities for young peoples’ benefit in the country. For program providers, the framework is useful in providing insights into the value of their work, for checking whether a program has achieved its desired results, or for analysing who has benefitted more, and who less. Additionally, the framework may provide program providers with information they need to make strategic decisions about necessary changes in program design, planning, or implementation.

Thesis structure

This thesis is structured into six chapters. The first chapter is the introduction, which provides the backdrop to young people and youth related issues in Tanzania, describes the place of youth in the political agenda, discusses Tanzanian youth participation in sport, and outlines the rationale for this study. The introduction also states the aims of the research and research questions this study will explore, as well as justifications for the significance of this study. The second chapter establishes the theoretical foundation of the study. It attempts to identify, analyse and interpret issues related to youth development from previous studies and relate them to this study. It reviews the concept of youth and the confusion behind its definition, and analyses youth development and how a youth development framework, particularly the GYDF, can guide delivery of youth development programs. The chapter also discusses life skills, and categories of life skills, development programs, and attempts to show how important life skills are for personal and social development of young people. Chapter three demonstrates the potential impact of sport on youth and life skills development within a youth development framework. It demonstrates sport’s impact on academic performance, social development, civic engagement and social capital development among young people. The fourth chapter describes the methodology, which entails methods, data analysis, perceived limitations and delimitations of the study. The fifth chapter presents findings of the surveys and focus group interviews in relation to youth and life skills development through sport. Chapter six discusses the research findings using the GYDF and the youth and life skills development through sport literature. It draws upon the results presented in the fifth chapter. Chapter seven concludes the thesis by summarising and concluding the current study. It describes the limitations, proposes further research areas, and offers recommendations for improved operation and sustainability of SOYDPs in Tanzania.

Chapter Two: YOUTH AND YOUTH DEVELOPMENT

Introduction

This chapter provides a current understanding of practices within youth development research by looking at the contemporary status of literature relating to youth development. In particular, the chapter focuses on areas of interest related to the growing field of youth and life skills development. The overarching argument in this chapter comes from the Generic Youth Development Framework (GYDF) that when youth sport programs value young people and do things of value, they have the potential to support young people to realise their full potential (Wierenga & Wyn, 2011). To achieve its objectives, the chapter tries to draw evidence from various literature and programs operating within a youth development framework.

The chapter is structured into five sections. The first section reviews the concept of youth and discusses different perceptions in relation to the concept. The second section focuses on the concept of youth development and how it is conceptualised in the literature, as this underpins the conceptual framework for this study. The third section demonstrates a working definition of life skills and why are they important to young people, followed by a discussion on youth and life skills development programs. The fourth section analyses youth development frameworks and the direction they provide to communities for the organisation of services, opportunities and supports to help young people realise their potentials. This section also presents a brief situational analysis and the need for a youth development framework in Tanzania. It goes on to describe and demonstrate how GYDF can be adapted and used as a tool for planning, monitoring and evaluating youth sport programs from a youth development perspective. The fifth section concludes the chapter with a brief summary and draws to attention the key points from this review and identifies the gaps in the literature that needs to be filled by this study.

Understanding the concept of ‘youth’

While initially appearing simple, the concept of ‘youth’ is rather more diverse and complex, to the extent of not holding to one universal definition (Bennett, 2007; Spence, 2005; Wyn & White, 1997). Various criteria such as biological maturity, age, psychological development (e.g., adolescence), rituals, economic success, social success and generational relations have been used to describe the concept of youth (Spence, 2005; White & Wyn, 2013). Yet there is no common understanding of the exact definition of youth and the debate continues. Cuervo and Wyn (2012) indicate that the concept of youth is not a stable objective category, rather, it is a subjective category and its definition varies across time and cultures and reflects the biases of those defining it. They also demonstrate that the concept of youth has many meanings, which range from nature and nurture to cultural and sociological explanations and differs from society to society. Similarly, Barker (2012) argues that the concept of youth is a discursive construct that gains its meaning from different political, ideological, social and cultural ways in which we use the concept and assign values and characteristics to it. What Barker is trying to demonstrate is that the concept of youth is contextual and its definition depends on the social, cultural, political and economic milieu. Whereas these views demonstrate youth as a dynamic concept, other definitions describe youth as a static category and associate them with distinctive responsibilities (such as marriage) based on their age. Much of the continuing debate on how the concept should be defined revolves around the crucial question of whether youth should be defined as an age group, a transitional phase, associated with characteristics of becoming an adult, or as a discrete stage of life with its own characteristics. It is not surprising, therefore, that different governmental and nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), the public in Tanzania and elsewhere in the world understand and use the concept of youth differently.

In their book, Rethinking Youth, Wyn and White (1997) explore the concept of youth in two dimensions. The first dimension uses age parameters to categorise youth, while the second dimension describes youth as a relational concept. I will examine these conceptualisations in the next sections.

Youth as an age category

Describing youth as an age category is commonly linked with the period between completing school and becoming an adult in socio-economic terms—finding their first job (Jones, 2009). The argument behind this conception is derived from developmental psychology that relates age category to universal developmental stages, identity creation, normative behaviour and the connection between physical and social maturation (Wyn & White, 1997). Age parameters often reflect high upper age limits based on the physical, psychological, cultural, social, biological and political aspects, which explain the situation of youth in Tanzania. Describing youth as an age category also includes the ability to arrive at independent decisions and becoming financially independent. In this view, youth are characterised as being dependent, ignorant and less responsible, while adults are considered to be universally independent, knowledgeable and immune to the influence from peers (Wyn & White, 1997).

While knowing which age group we are referring to remains important, understanding of youth as an age category is also in line with the policy-favoured definition in most of the African governments (Department of Youth Development, 2007; Gyimah- Brempong & Kimenyi, 2013; Hofmeyr, 2012; Putnam, 2001). African governments prefer to define youth using age parameters or specific age markers because of the demographical and statistical significance this has for programs and policies (Nandigiri, 2012). They can easily quantify who gets what in policy terms such as benefits up to 18 years of age. Most young people in the world today are living in developing countries where they tend to constitute a large percentage of the population. Consequently, most of the development and population interventions target this group. Anecdotal evidence indicates that most of the programs and measures within youth development, and those that integrate young people into community prefer to describe youth in categorical terms. Categorising youth according to age is also assumed to be the easiest approach particularly in relation to education and employment.

Conceptualising youth as an age category leaves out many relational conditions for youth. Arguing against this conceptualisation, Kallio and Häkli (2010) state that “Childhood may be universal as a phenomenon but the position of a child is formed in relation to culturally and geographically specific institutions” (p.357). In addition, defining youth using an age category is fairly imprecise and may not be sensitive to culturally specific concepts of childhood, youth and adulthood (Cuervo & Wyn, 2012; Wyn & White, 1997). The two arguments imply that defining youth based on age cannot be universal as young people are not the same everywhere—one size does not fit all young people. Different states, societies and communities differ in the way they define and demarcate youth, even within a society people belonging to a wide range of ages are frequently treated as youth, and people of a wide range of ages at times may claim the space of youth, at a particular moment of time under definitive conditions (Ponthieux, 2004). White and Wyn (2013) assert that age is a category that is applied differently depending on the context and field of interest, e.g. education, health, work or financial support, time and place. Age has been used to define policies and laws that include and exclude young people in contexts such as obligatory schooling, voting rights, the right to acquire and own land or property, national identity cards, access to a driver’s license, marriage, employment and vying for elected positions. According to Putnam (2001) age-based restrictions that target youth deny them of opportunities to participate and contribute in development. They also expose youth to strict regulations whose interpretation and implementation relies mostly on the law-enforcing authorities. Laws are more protective and ostensibly mean to promote youth well-being by protecting them from the vagaries of public life. However, they portray youth as dependent, immature, vulnerable and people who cannot assume responsibility, hence need to be confined within the protection of home and school.

In an attempt to standardise youth programs for statistical and demographical purposes, international organisations use different age categories depending on the context (Table 4).

Table 4: Age categories according to UN entities

Age Reference Entity/Instrument/ Organisation UN Secretariat/UNESCO/ILO Youth: 15–24 UN instruments, statistics UN Habitat Youth: 15–32 Agenda 217 UNICEF/WHO/UNFPA Adolescent: 10-19, UNFPA8 Young People: 10–24, Youth 15–24 UNICEF/The Convention on Child until 18 UNICEF9 Rights of the Child The African Youth Charter Youth 15-35 African Union, 200610 Source: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/documents/youth/fact-sheets/youth-definition.pdf)

The UN defines youth as individuals within the range of 15 to 24 years of age without prejudice to other definitions from its member regions such as the Africa Union and states (Division for Social Policy and Development, n.d). For instance, while Botswana, Ghana, Sierra Leone, Lesotho, Zimbabwe, Swaziland and Mozambique define the youth population as those between 15 to 35 years of age, Seychelles, the Gambia and Kenya have arbitrarily lowered the upper age limit to 30. Zambia has the narrowest youth age range (18–25) and neighbouring country Malawi has the widest youth age range (10–35) (Table 5). More confusion derives from the fact that depending on the purpose and interest, administrative parts of the country do not necessarily use the same age categories when referring to youth (Wallace & Bendit, 2009). The government of Tanzania is not immune to this; it also faces the challenges of working with age. For instance, while the current National Youth Development Policy considers people aged 15 to 35 as youth (Department of Youth Development, 2007), the legal system allows women to marry at the age of 16 while the National Electoral Committee does not allow them to vote until they are 18 ("National Elections Act, Cap 343," 2010). The presence

7 http://www.unhabitat.org/pmss/listItemDetails.aspx?publicationID=3393 8 http://www.unfpa.org/emergencies/manual/8.htm 9 http://www.unicef.org/adolescence/index_66834.html 10 http://www.africa-union.org/root/ua/conferences/mai/hrst/charter%20english.pdf

of differing definitions within the same state sets up the potential for conflict in the establishment of youth-specific initiatives.

Table 5: Youth age, majority age11 and right to vote age in African countries

COUNTRY YOUTH AGE MAJORITY AGE VOTING AGE Botswana 15–35 18 18 Ghana 15–35 18 18 Malawi 10–35 18 18 Namibia 16–30 21 18 Seychelles 15–30 18 18 Sierra Leone 15–35 18 18 Tanzania 15–35 18 18 Zambia 18–25 - 18 Uganda 12–30 18 18 South Africa 14–35 18 18 Lesotho 12–35 21 18 Zimbabwe 15–35 18 18 Nigeria 18–35 18 18 Swaziland 15–35 21 18 The Gambia 15–30 18 18 Kenya 15–30 18 18 Mozambique 15–35 18 18 Mauritius 14–29 18 18 Source: http://www.youthpolicy.org/factsheets/

In much of Africa, the youth age range has been extended to 30 years and beyond. According to Chigunta (2002) this could be a result of the emerging phenomenon whereby young people take a longer period before they become independent. It may also reflect the inability of many youth to pursue independence following the poverty situation, lack of job and poor wages in contemporary Africa.

Wyn and White (1997) point out that another discrepancy on the usage of the age category in defining the concept of youth comes from both historical and existing cultural differences across the world. Using age category as a universal model to define

11 The age at which civil rights are accorded to young people

the concept obscures the relationship that social and cultural factors have on young people and their development. They argue that even though the life span of each individual can objectively be measured by the passing of time; still cultural understanding influences how individuals and societies give meaning to each stage of life. For instance, in the Western world ‘youth’ is viewed as a transitional period from childhood (a time of dependent relationship between parent/guardian and a child) to adulthood (independence) (Birditt, Fingerman, Lefkowitz, & Kamp Dush, 2008; Kehily, 2007). This definition is a central concept in most of the traditional definitions of youth and is more of a developmental view. However, even though the nature of transition of young people may be accepted across the world, the process itself and foci vary and are subject to change with time, culture and space (te Lintelo, 2012).

In his ethnographic field work that explored the meaning and place of ‘traditional’ forms of sex education within the cultural and historical context in Shinyanga (a region in Tanzania) Allen (2000) indicates that biological age is not a significant concept among the Maasai people. Traditionally, all young people regardless of the gender have to go through several initiations before they are regarded as adults (matured). According to Allen (2000) the Maasai culture recognises males and females as youth only after they have been through the initiation rites. Of all the initiations that Maasai people experience, circumcision is regarded as the most significant rite of passage. Circumcision, particularly for males, elevates Maasai men from childhood to young adults. As for women, they are recognised as adults based on the status of their husband. Allen adds that in some tribes in Tanzania, females regardless of their chronological age are regarded as youths until they have married. There are also cases where females marry at early ages and have children soon after entering puberty and hence become young adults; no longer to be regarded as youths.

In other African societies, a person ceases to be a youth and becomes an adult once having entered into legal marriage. As it was observed by Abdullah (1998) countries like Mali, the Ivory Coast and Senegal use the capacity to sustain marriage as a

qualification for a person to become an adult. Irrespective of chronological age, one will remain a youth unless married. As a result, it is common to find a teenage ‘girl’ who by virtue of being married to be regarded as an ‘adult’ while an unmarried 35 year old male considered a ‘youth’ and still be dependent on his parents for support. In a report published by the Women's Refugee Commission (2005), Lori Heninger and Megan McKenna write that in Darfur—a region in Western Sudan—its females remain as girls until their time of menstruation after which they are considered as women. However, this does not mean that girls aged between 11 and 18 experience life the same as those 18 years and above.

Discrepancies in the definition of youth based on age category have resulted in some researchers avoiding defining youth strictly in terms of specific age categories. It does not only hinder us from understanding the influence of social context in shaping the life of the young people, but also deceives us to view diversity as a deviation from normative lives and transitions (Cuervo & Wyn, 2012). This speaks to the unresolved controversy among researchers and policy-makers about this definition of ‘youth’. Because of discrepancies associated with defining youth based on age categories, Turner (2005) indicates a literature shift in the way youths’ characteristics and experiences are defined. Youth researchers now prefer to describe youth as a social status characterised by a period of life in which a person is either fully or semi- dependent on other people (adults or family members) for material sustenance. Nevertheless, defining youth based on whether they depend or semi-depend on adults, may just cause us to include other large sections of the population such as stay-at-home mothers and wage-earners who are co-dependent into this category. In the main, parameters like age, which dominated earlier literature, are discouraged because the significant transitions in life are not related solely to age.

Youth as a relational concept

Wyn and White (1997) urge youth researchers to ‘rethink youth’ as a relational concept and stop conceiving it in ‘categorical’ terms. They argue that thinking in that way

permits greater understanding of how the temporal and spatial processes shape the life of young people across the world. Wyn and White’s work could be also seen through the lenses of French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu. For example, Bourdieu (1993) argues that any attempt to define the concept of youth should be approached in relational terms, taking into account the social processes whereby age is socially constructed, institutionalised and controlled in historically and culturally specific ways. In support of Wyn and White (1997), Lesko and Talburt (2012) demonstrate how historical, political, and cultural contexts have influenced and are influencing the meaning of the concept of youth. According to Lesko and Talburt (2012), the concept of youth is a social shifter; it is a relational concept whose meaning is influenced by the dynamic context, social landscape of power, rights, knowledge and cultural notions of the people or agency. In the same vein, Wood, Westwood, and Thompson (2014) describe the concept of youth as a social construct that is shaped by the society, history, and culture and is therefore subject to change. Bourdieu (1993) suggests that, ‘Youth is just a word’; a concept that has been evolving and constructed through social processes such as families, schooling or the labour market. This implies that it is the cultural, social and political contexts in which young people grow up that determine how the concept of youth should be defined.

What youth experience in different socio economic and political environments and associated outcomes largely influence how they are conceptualised. At times experiences such as: poor living conditions, unemployment, conflict, war and the HIV/AIDS pandemic shape the social divide between young people and adults. In one of his essays, Lesko (2012) argues that binary categories such as male and female, civilised and savage, and adult and youth are culturally constructed and are typical examples of relational concepts that can be found in society. These categories are defined in relation to the other and are a clear illustration of asymmetrical power relations existing between the two categories. Table 6 provides more illustrations of how youth are perceived in relation to adults.

Table 6: Perceptions of youth and adults

Youth Adulthood Not adult/adolescent Adult/grown-up Becoming Arrived Pre-social self that will emerge Identity is fixed under right conditions Powerless and vulnerable Powerful and strong Less responsible Responsible Dependent Independent Ignorant Knowledgeable Risky behaviour Considered behaviour Rebellious Conformist Reliant Autonomous Source: Wyn and White (1997, p. 12)

Despite the existing confusions on where and how one places the concept of youth on a spectrum of understanding, issues of youth remain as critical and need to be tackled. Overall, the concept of youth is not a universal category but rather a relative category that is controlled and manipulated equally by specific and designed policies, structures, institutions and legal regulations. The concept also includes all the actions and strategies young people develop to cope with the challenges caused by such conditions (activity structures, institutions, etc.) in each historical period. So, unpacking who exactly we mean by ‘youth’ as a relational concept helps us to reflect on the inequities of history and how that has consistently excluded youth from access to things like knowledge, education, and information that is generally assumed to be their domain.

To avoid the pitfalls of a categorical conceptualisation I refer to youth as a series of transitions from adolescence to adult life, from being dependent to independent, and from being recipients of society’s services to becoming contributors to national economic, political and cultural life. I find this definition to be inclusive as it acknowledges youth as a social process and that youths are not passive but active resources in making the process more wholesome and meaningful. Additionally, the definition recognises the fact that the transition to become an adult associates with a continual maze of cyclical, reversible and uncertain pathways (Kimando, Njogu, &

Kihoro, 2012). The route to adulthood years also represents an important stage for youth; they build on the experiences of childhood and create the foundations for successful transition to adult life. During this period, young people start engaging in various developmental activities, become increasingly self-reliant, demonstrate maturity in their way of thinking and reasoning, and demonstrate bravery and courage in decision-making and risk-taking. How well young people master each of these activities may affect the degree of success each young person will experience during adulthood. While the developmental activities may be common to all young people, individual young people have different characteristics and backgrounds. These differences are notable in terms of gender, ethnicity, socio-economic and cultural background, sexual orientation, disability, religious belief, rural or urban location and family structure. The interaction of these factors affects the development process, life experience and outcomes of young people and, therefore, it is necessary for them to be considered within a youth development framework. For methodological purposes, I use the age period 15 to 24 proposed by the UN so as to reflect the age range of the young people in this study.

Youth Development concept: Deficit approach versus Youth Development approach

The concept of youth development stems from traditional youth program approaches that primarily seek to provide social control, treatment and training to young people (Pittman, Irby, Tolman, Yohalem, & Ferber, 2011). According to Pittman and colleagues, the traditional youth program approach, also known as deficit approach, is designed to identify, treat, fix and prevent specific problems such as teen pregnancy or drug abuse of a specific youth population — “at risk youth”. The approach receives favour among programs that focus on young people primarily as a problem or potential threat to the society and future stability of communities. Success of the programs that use the deficit approach is measured by the reduction of the problems in the specified population. However, this approach often fails to achieve significant results because of its narrow focus on changing certain behaviours and ignoring the basic developmental needs of young people. For instance, while the attention may be on educating young people to avoid certain negative behaviour (for example how to say “NO” to illicit 41

drugs), little attention is paid to meeting broader needs of the young people such as opportunities to participate in the community in meaningful ways. Additionally, the deficit approach divides young people into two groups: those considered being at high risk for problems, and those who are not. In this way, the approach focuses more on identifying problems and providing various supports to young people classified as at risk instead of providing them with fundamental positive supports like that which young people from affluent communities receive.

By contrast, youth development is proactive and looks at youth in a broader picture— universality. It addresses all youth equally, not just those identified to be at risk. This approach does not suggest that prevention programs and efforts offered by the traditional youth services should be abandoned. Instead, it seeks to strengthen and enhance the existing services and programs, opportunities and supports offered by the community (Pittman et al., 2011). Youth development also challenges community members to rethink community resources and how they can be used to positively improve the lives of young people, by meeting their needs and building competencies they need to become successful adults. Its objective includes strength-building as opposed to correcting deficits or fixing problems in young people (Gould & Carson, 2008; Seymour, 2012). As it emphasises the strengths that rest within all young people, youth development also includes concepts such as community youth development, developmental assets, well-being, noble purpose, civic engagement, moral development and thriving. According to this approach ‘problem free does not equate with being fully prepared’, therefore, young people are not problems waiting to be treated, rather they are valuable resources that need to be developed (Pittman et al., 2011). A lack of behavioural problems—such as not using illicit drugs, alcohol or not involving in crime acts and unsafe sex practice—is not equivalent to having the skills requisite to meaningfully engage in various community roles. In this way, prevention of negative behaviours is not the same as promotion in youth of positive attributes and healthy development. Accordingly, scholars working within youth development framework systems argue that it is more effective to build upon naturally occurring resources than to address the shortfalls of human functioning (Campbell et al., 2008). When young people are supported and actively engaged in community roles, they

evolve into a valuable partner, resource and significant contributor in planning and implementing activities in the community.

Klau, Boyd, and Luckow (2006) describe youth development as a coordinated process that involves a progressive series of activities and experiences that empower young people with social, moral, emotional, physical and cognitive competencies necessary to be successful and encounter life-challenges. In this context the overarching objective of youth development is to foster the development of personal, academic, citizenship and social competencies necessary for young people to thrive in life based on their strengths, capacities and formative needs (Wierenga & Wyn, 2012). To achieve its objectives, youth development provides challenging experiences that are appropriate, diverse and with sufficient intensity to empower young people to develop to their fullest potential. It also engages young people in pro-social behaviours and encourages them to avoid health-compromising practices and future-endangering behaviours (Holt, 2016; Perkins & Borden, 2003).

The concept of youth development demonstrates a considerable shift in thinking of how services and supports for young people should be extended (Pittman et al., 2011). Pittman and colleagues (2011) affirm that there have been major shifts in what youth researchers, policy-makers and practitioners contemplate about what the needs of young people are and how and where these needs can be met. The shifts are also notable regarding the mindset of the appropriate and expected time frames of program results. Based on the literature review, the paradigm shift from traditional youth services to positive youth development can be summarised as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: A shift from traditional youth services to youth development

Literature indicates that youth development programs are more likely to help young people to learn and develop across a full range of developmental areas such as social, cognitive, moral, cultural, vocational, civic and physical well-being while decreasing the chances of engaging in endangering behaviours (Pittman et al., 2011). According to Holt (2016) such programs do not just keep young people off the streets or prevent them from crime acts, but provide them with positive opportunities to gain hands-on experience, develop skills, gain career awareness and make contributions to the community through some form of voluntary community service. Lerner, Phelps, Forman and Bowers (2009) assert that youth programs can help to develop positive youth outcomes and provide balancing services, opportunities, and supports to empower youth participation—real decision-making power. Whitlock (2004) argues that services young people may acquire from a mere youth program may include all valuable actions with an intention of enhancing their health, safety, performance, well- being and physiological functioning. These elements are critical, but in themselves are inadequate to bring about positive outcomes.

Complementing mere programs such as youth sport with youth development provides opportunities in which young people convert from being service recipients to contributing participants. However, it should be noted that youth development programs can only achieve this by creating a meaningful and supporting environment whereby young people will be able to practice and expand on what they already know and acquire hands-on experience. For instance, young people may be given opportunities to participate in the planning and decision-making processes of issues that have impact on their life. Their voice may challenge adults to rethink how they incorporate young people in the process of planning, developing and implementing opportunities for them. In this way, young people are encouraged to exercise meaningful decision-making roles to eventually improve other personal competencies. It is also important for youth development programs to extend their support to young people by providing them with tangible activities that encourage group interaction, build interpersonal relationships and help young people access resources (Whitlock, 2004). According to Whitlock (2004) the support can be emotional, motivational or strategic, all of which may work independently or collectively to foster positive outcomes. As an independent entity, emotional support inculcates a sense of friendship, safety and nurturing. Motivational support seeks to help young people to learn about the importance of positive expectations, acknowledge the importance of guidance and understand the developmentally-appropriate boundaries. Strategic support is necessary to provide young people with access to appropriate resources and information. As a whole, the support provided by youth development programs creates a positive environment for positive development. While anecdotal evidence shows that it may be easier for singular youth development programs, agencies or service systems to work autonomously, experience shows that no single program can provide all the services, opportunities and supports that young people require. This is because youth programs are complex and diverse. In addition, as young people grow up, a range of social environments that is school, family, peers, social and economic realities, culture and neighbourhood groups that surround them, influence their life.

Ultimately success and sustainability of any youth development programs depend on the inter-agency and cross-system collaboration, which may involve partnership of

people from public and private sectors and community groups. The implication here is that youth development is not just a responsibility of professionals but needs the engagement of all community members. In addition, participation in activities meant to foster youth development and life skills ought to be voluntary and enhance intrinsic motivation, draw attention and be challenging, and require effort over a period.

Life skills

“The world of sport is not separate from the rest of the world. Sport breaks down barriers, promotes self-esteem, and can teach life skills and healthy behaviour.” By Jacques Rogge - former president of the International Olympic Committee (Rogge, 2004)

Rogge’s statement demonstrates how sport is valued as an avenue for personal development even in the higher echelons of the international sporting arena. However, from Rogge’s statement the question remains of what these life skills actually are. Within the field of youth development, life skills are one of the significant areas of research for young people and a key component for many youth-serving programs (Perkins & Borden, 2003). A review of literature indicates life skills to be associated with different terminologies and containing differences of emphasis such as character education, social-emotional growth, emotional intelligence, and resilience (Hodge, Danish, & Martin, 2013). Often these terms are implicitly defined or are simply used interchangeably with diminutive explanation. This makes it imperative to operationalise the term life skills, and to provide a clear definition of this concept. Having a clear definition of life skills determines how successful programs for skills development should be designed and administered (Gould & Carson, 2008).

Among the frontiers in advocating for life skills development in young people is Steve Danish of the Life Skills Centre at Virginia Commonwealth University. Danish with his colleagues describe life skills as “those skills that enable individuals to succeed in the different environments in which they live, such as school, home and in their

neighbourhoods” (Danish, Forneris, Hodge, & Heke, 2004, p. 40). On another occasion, Danish defines life skills as a group of psychosocial skills (rather than isolated behaviours such as learning how to drive, making a dress) and competencies required by an individual to develop certain desirable qualities such as making effective decisions, effective communication and developing coping and self-management skills (Theokas, Danish, Hodge, Heke, & Forneris, 2008). The World Health Organisation (WHO) describes life skills as abilities for adaptive and positive behaviour that help people to succeed and negotiate the needs and challenges of life (World Health Organization, 1999). WHO goes on to identify five primary areas of life skills that it believes can be applied across the cosmos to include: decision-making and problem- solving; critical thinking and creative thinking; interpersonal skills and communication; empathy and self-awareness; and ability to cope with emotion and stress.

In their attempt to draw disparate definitions together and contextualise life skills within a sport setting, Gould and Carson (2008) refer to these skills as “internal personal assets, characteristics and skills such as goal setting, emotional control, self-esteem and a hard work ethic that can be facilitated or developed in sport and transferred for use in a non- sport setting” (p.60). The implication from this definition is that not only do life skills help an individual succeed in the sport he or she participates in, but they can also help a young person, particularly when he or she successfully transfers these skills to non- sport settings. They promote youths’ capacity to deal with challenges that life presents and are similar to physical skills in the sense that one can learn them through practicing with people, demonstration, modelling, watching and imitating other people (Gould & Carson, 2008; Holt, Tink, Mandigo, & Fox, 2008). This distinction is what qualifies and differentiates life skills from other skills i.e., transferability to multiple spheres of life.

Despite the feasible similarities and differences within the provided definitions, life skills remain as those skills that help young people to face the challenges of everyday life in a manner that is appropriate for their age and experience (Hanbury & Malti,

2011; Hodge et al., 2013). These skills develop and improve as young people grow. While life skills carries multiple terms (Hodge et al., 2013), I choose to adopt the all- encompassing term ‘life skills’ because my study focuses on understanding the nature of life skills that young people learn through participation in SOYDPs. In addition, most of the interventions and initiatives to empower young people with life skills have mainly been under the purview of youth development researchers.

Youth and Life Skills Development Programs

Life skills development programs apply the philosophy and principles of youth development. That is, they provide opportunities for young people to participate in leadership of activities, focus on the development of life skills within a youth development framework, and promote caring adult-youth relationships (Pittman et al., 2011). The programs are structured, and the majority take place after school hours and go above and beyond simply filling in idle time by keeping young people off the streets. In a study established to unearth the essence of what a youth development program is, Roth and Brooks-Gunn (2003) used a two-pronged approach to identify specific characteristics of programs focusing on life skills development in young people. Firstly, Roth and Brooks-Gunn (2003) conducted a literature review from which they summarised three components central to youth development programs: goals, atmosphere and activities. Secondly, they conducted a survey of youth-serving organisations to investigate services young people receive from the youth development programs run by these organisations. In order to gain a clear picture of specific characteristics of a youth development program, Roth and Brooks-Gunn (2003) integrated the two lines of inquiry. To conclude their study they suggest three features: program goals (What and how staff believe their program can impact young people), program environment (Staff demeanour and attitude towards young people and relationship between staff and young people) and program activities (Nature and quality of activities young people are exposed to) as critical elements in clarifying the ambiguities associated with any youth development program.

To formulate the specific goals for interventions focusing on promoting positive youth development, Lerner and colleagues (2009) used the five attributes of a thriving youth (acronym 5Cs12) as categorised by Vamplew (2007). In relation to program environment, five dimensions were used to describe it. Programs should: create an environment that encourages the development of supportive adult-youth relationships and among peers; empower youth; inform youth of expectations for positive behaviour; provide opportunities for recognition; provide relevant and long-lasting services. In regard with program activities they suggested that the activities should adhere to the philosophy of youth development such that the emphasis is on providing opportunity for young people to build skills, engage in hands-on activities and challenging activities, and expand their horizons. The implication from Lerner and colleagues’ study is that youth and life skills development programs provide young people with enriching experiences leading to broadened perspectives, enhanced skills and improved socialisation. The program should provide young people with real challenges and encourage active participation. They should also give young people opportunities to learn and apply specific skills through participation in various activities such as: community volunteerism, learning communication skills, respect of the rule of law, time management skills, relationship-building and work and school preparedness. These activities assist young people in building skills and values such as self-esteem, sociability, tolerance, ability to make a positive change, and the decision of what to do and who to be that can be transferred and generalised to various domains beyond the immediate activities.

According to VicSport (2008) life skills development programs can be categorised into three groups: building young peoples’ self-esteem; teaching theoretical and practical skills; and community-based programs, as discussed below.

12 According to Vamplew (2007) the 5Cs represent five attributes of a thriving youth namely: 1. Competence in academic, social, and vocational areas, 2) Confidence or a positive self-identity, 3) Connections to community, family, and peers, 4) Character or positive values, integrity, and moral commitment and 5) Caring and compassion.

Self-Esteem/Confidence-building programs

According to Bandura (2006), self-esteem is how you judge your own worth or how much value you place on yourself. It relates to psychological well-being. Self-esteem programs empower young people, build their self-confidence and improve their resilience and psychological well-being (Fraser-Thomas, Côté, & Deakin, 2005). By building young peoples’ self-esteem, the programs help young people appreciate who they are, where they come from, where they want to go and how to get there. Programs help youth understand that through their personal worth, along with their ability, they can shape their lives and their community (Holt, 2016). Positive self-esteem and confidence can yield to better prediction, for instance, of leadership performance. A good leader provides security and self-worth to his/her group or organisation. To successfully build young peoples’ self-esteem through sport, Rockenfeller (2012) urges trainers to:

i. Avoid over stretching young people; rather work at a productive level to raise children’s self-esteem ii. Show confidence by acknowledging each young person’s problem-solving abilities iii. Create and maintain mutual respect iv. Give clues leading to possible solutions to problems to avoid damaging self- esteem.

What Rockenfeller (2012) recommends is important as young people are not born with self-esteem; they learn self-esteem through how their family and members of their community feel about them, and treat them. If, through a youth program, a young person is encouraged and helped in a desired area, and succeeds, their self-esteem is more likely to be improved.

Structured or Theory-Based Programs

According to VicSport (2008) structured or theory-based programs teach young people theoretical elements and skills to enable them to become effective future leaders. The teaching may take place in a classroom setting or involve excursions, group discussions 50

and workshops, and may last for one to two weeks. Skills taught include: decision- making, team-building, problem-solving, communication and public speaking, program-planning and conflict resolution strategies. In this case, a classroom may be any place convenient to run sessions. For instance, Red Cross Melbourne holds its sessions in various places such as Parliament House and Police Headquarters (VicSport, 2008). Structure-based programs do not anticipate young people to develop the skills over the few days they meet in the classroom. To provide ongoing development opportunities, the programs, through its personnel, conduct a follow-up meeting with young leaders at a future date to determine their progress and ensure that they are gaining the full advantage of the package.

Community-Based Programs

According to Perkins and Noam (2007) community-based programs are purposefully designed to provide youth with a positive yielding environment that ensures sustainability of positive relationships within and between young people and adults. They provide young people with an array of opportunities that enable them to develop their skills and competencies necessary for them to become engaged as partners in their own development and their communities. In fact, the programs provide opportunities for young people to develop connections to others, develop skills, and utilise those skills to give back to their communities and, as a result, increases their ability to thrive. Young people also gain an opportunity to work together with other peers and adults to realise a shared goal as well as practice problem-solving and decision-making skills. Further, the community-based programs provide opportunity not only for the young people to build cognitive and social competencies applicable to other spheres of life, but also to foster the development of initiative or intrinsic motivation rarely to be learnt in school settings. They support young people to become active citizens and serve the community in various areas of need from which the community may also benefit. Further, community-based programs call for young people to be aware and alert to the problems affecting the community and its outlook, and engage in finding solutions to these problems (Jones, 2009). In return the programs also benefit both the individual

participant and the greater community as they teach respect of the culturally diverse values and perspectives of the community.

Further, youth development programs stress the importance of engaging the broader social environment that influences the life of young people. This includes family members, friends, and the community in which they live. To realise this goal, community-based programs give opportunity for young people to work alongside adults in formal leadership capacities, such as serving in community committees. In this way young people gain opportunities to try new things, to make and learn from mistakes that help them develop as individuals and as active members of the community. In a descriptive study that explored perceptions of and preferences for leadership development by young people enrolled in an urban community agriculture program, Anderson and Kim (2009) discovered that by engaging in interactive instruction coupled with hands-on experience, young people are more apt to apply what they have acquired during training to other areas of their life. Among community-based programs are SOYDPs, which operate within youth development frameworks.

From the discussion above, we can deduce that life skills development programs focus on change of behaviour and/or on developmental approaches purposefully structured to foster young people in three areas—knowledge, attitude and skills. The programs empower young people with the ability to translate and transfer the acquired attitude, knowledge and values into realities—what to do and how to do it—as they provide young people with the scope and opportunity to do so. However, it should be understood that life skills per se are not a panacea of ‘how to do’ abilities. White and Wyn (2013) argue that presenting life skills as such may, in fact, be counter-productive because there are a constellation of other factors that may influence young peoples’ positive development. The factors may include social support, culture and the environment in which the young person lives. So, to realise their objectives, life skills development programs may need to have a well-defined framework. The framework is significant for planning, examining and evaluating purposes of the program from a

youth development context. The section below provides a review on various frameworks that are used to support the development of positive skills and attributes among young people.

Youth Development Frameworks

While this study focuses on exploring the youth and life skills development through sports, it acknowledges that the practice of youth development varies from program to program depending on the situational contexts, structures and time (Bohnert, Fredricks, & Randall, 2010). To negotiate a complex set of relationships found within youth development, there should be values, principles and guidelines that will inform youth practitioners about the way they should operate and what they should expect to achieve. Unless they have a tool—a framework—the program elements will lack cohesion and find it difficult to track their outcomes.

While developing a guide on framework for youth alcohol and other drug (AOD) practice for young people in Queensland, Crane, Buckley, and Francis (2012) described a ‘framework’ as a tool that highlights key components of a program. It supports program staff and service delivery partners to develop and deliver program activities in a consistent and evidence-based manner in accordance with young peoples’ needs. According to Crane and colleagues (2012) frameworks are inherently ‘reductionist’; they tend to simplify things more than they should be. In essence, what the frameworks attempt to do is to provide clarity to the logic of practice. They are more of a conceptual tool that can be used in the practice of a youth development program than a comprehensive statement of reality. They also indicate that deployment of youth development helps in developing a common language across a range of settings, from community based youth programs to youth development programs that target specific groups.

A review of conference proceedings, intermediaries and research reports reveals that the field of youth development does not fall short of frameworks seeking to illuminate how youth develop as well as what functions these frameworks can serve. Hanbury and Malti (2011) describe a quality youth development framework as one that is specific and well-defined to set a basis and scaffold for practice in a particular context. Hanbury and Malti (2011) go on to write about the quality of youth development frameworks and that it ought to be flexible, applicable across various situations that youth programs encounter and emphasise mutual, dynamic interaction between young people and society. They also argue that it is important for frameworks to be able to evolve and accept new changes in the light of various forms of evidence and experience over time.

Youth development frameworks go an extra mile toward providing an in-depth understanding regarding the process and outcomes of youth development. They inform us of the stages and processes young people go through, competences they can achieve, assets they have and the basic supports they require meeting their needs (Hanbury & Malti, 2011; Heck & Subramaniam, 2009; Wierenga & Wyn, 2012). They are also useful in mobilising and guiding community action on behalf of youth. In relation to youth programs, presence of a youth development framework is of significant value as it sets the focus and purpose particularly when the components of youth development (i.e., external and internal factors that support young people to thrive) are clear (Heck & Subramaniam, 2009). Clarity of these components simplifies the work of the staff and volunteers to program and achieve the specific positive outcomes (Hanbury & Malti, 2011; Heck & Subramaniam, 2009). A good quality framework simplifies the program evaluation process as it gives direction on which component the evaluation should focus. Further, the framework helps youth development programs in setting and identifying long-standing outcomes. Examples of the contemporary youth development frameworks include: GYDF (Wierenga & Wyn, 2011), Targeting Life Skills (Hendricks, 1996), Assets (Benson, Scales, & Syvertsen, 2010; Search Institute, 1997, 2007), The Four Essential Elements (Brendtro, Brokenleg, & Van Bockern, 1990), The Five Cs (Lerner, Almerigi, Theokas, & Lerner, 2005; Lerner, Fisher, & Weinberg, 2000 ) and The Community Action Framework for Youth Development.

Heck and Subramaniam (2009) reviewed the strengths, limitations and utility of the five most frequently used youth development frameworks: Targeting Life Skills, Developmental Assets, The Four Essential Elements, The Five Cs and The Community Action Framework for Youth Development. Heck and Subramaniam (2009) indicate that these frameworks help to give direction and purpose to youth programs. Frameworks also perpetuate the assumption that the ‘whole of community’ is a critical shaper of youth development through providing an opportunity for active participation, cultural expression, youthful experimentation, positive relationships and growth (Small & Memmo, 2004). While the frameworks differ in their terminology and in their focus on critical youth competencies, they share certain elements. The commonalities include six key developmental competencies: mastery and competence; independence and confidence; generosity, caring and compassion; initiative and purpose; involvement and contribution; and belonging and connections (Heck & Subramaniam, 2009). In their critical analysis, Heck and Subramaniam (2009) noted inconsistent levels of empirical support in each of the frameworks. They continue arguing that none of the five frameworks are linked to a scientific study that gives evidence of universal applicability.

In my perspective, although universal frameworks are recommended, they suffer one problem: they tend to downplay or overlook the need to tailor programs designed for young people to a particular environment or community. According to a relational developmental systems perspective, it is impossible for a universal framework to prevail because the world is variegated (Overton, 2010). Arguing against the use of universal, ‘one-size-fits-all’ approaches, Campbell and Erbstein (2012) recommend tailoring youth programs to a specific target group, and typically underrepresented youth populations and communities. Challenges associated with the use of frameworks, led Heck and Subramaniam (2009) to conclude that the suitability of which framework youth development program providers/managers are to use depends largely on the features that seem particularly relevant to the philosophy of the program they lead.

Generic Youth Development Framework (GYDF)

While there are several youth development frameworks, this thesis draws on the Generic Youth Development Framework (GYDF) (Figure 3). This framework was developed by the Youth Research Centre at the University of Melbourne, Australia (Wierenga & Wyn, 2011). The framework was implemented in the current study due to its relevance and its reflection on existing scholarly works that focus on youth development. It was developed following an extensive exploration of some existing frameworks that have notable influence in shaping the field of youth development, and academic theory and research on development of young people that have been used in this study and elsewhere.

According to Arnold and Cater (2011) evolutions in youth development programs have called for a wider insight of the evaluative needs of youth programs. They go on to add that contemporary evaluation approaches focus on evaluating the quality of the program and involve young people in evaluating the programs that affect them. The GYDF takes a strengths-based approach and has been stretched to accommodate the staff and volunteers who lead the programs at the community level such as young leaders, parents and program providers/managers responsible for planning and evaluation of the programs. It is this nature of inclusivity that singles out GYDF as one of the most current and comprehensive frameworks to be developed, and that can be used to discuss and inform good practice within SOYDPs.

The flowchart of Generic Youth Development Framework

Figure 3: Generic Youth Development Framework - Reproduced from Wierenga and Wyn (2011)

The GYDF is an aspirational framework that comes with a set of clear and user-friendly good-practice values, principles, indicators and comprehensive standards for implementation and evaluation. The developers focused on elements considered to be the most important for realising positive developmental outcomes for young people.

This resulted in a comprehensive GYDF that set focus on two overarching values, a set of six guiding principles and good practice within the context of youth development. As shown in Figure 3, the GYDF is governed by two values of youth development: valuing young people and doing things of value. Valuing young people establishes the contexts, structures, cultures and sets of relationships that foster youth development whereas, doing things of value highlights the experience for the stakeholders on how to run youth development programs. For the youth development program to value young people and do things of value, the GYDF has developed six principles and connections that can support young people to thrive and achieve their full potential. The principles are divided into two sets based on the two overarching values. The first set is comprised of three principles: recognising strengths, team-building and caring for each other. From these principles, it is the quality of the social relationships young people experience in the program that determines whether they should remain engaged and connected in an organisation. The second set is also comprised of three principles: engaging with the real world, being active citizens and becoming reflective, resilient learners. These principles determine how and why young people participate, remain engaged and develop through program-based activity. The important thing according to the second set of principles is the experience and the stretch component under which people strive to work hard and achieve things they did not think they could do. The two core value principles of the GYDF are demonstrated by examples of good practice. Good practice involves acknowledging participation of all participants, celebrating achievement, communication, supporting potential growing partnerships, recognising diversity, strengthening protective behaviours, serving the community, building character and identity, supporting commitment, and growing resilience, skills and attitudes.

To interpret the framework, the GYDF has developed several indicators to support youth programs to recognise elements relevant to their setting. These indicators were developed following a comprehensive literature review. They amalgamate the core values (i.e., ‘valuing young people’ and ‘doing things of value’) from which the basis of the framework is formed, with the two sets of principles developed from the same values, and lead to the formulation of the good practice. In GYDF context indicators

are observable and measurable signs that inform of the effectiveness of implementing a specific practice. It is from the indicators that one can determine the practical application of any program that focuses on positive youth development. The determination can be done at different levels, such as young people, program leaders, and provider-managers. Wierenga and Wyn (2011) add that these indicators can integrate curriculum, governance, evaluation and processes for inclusion and embedment of the asset-oriented approach across all these components.

Generally, GYDF is a simple user-friendly instrument for use by anyone working in the field of youth development, including researchers, planners, practitioners and policy-makers. It can be applied in almost all youth development programs in our dynamic social, technological and economic society. Equally, it can be applied to programs that focus on improving academic performance, as they are to community service programs. GYDF has adapted strength-based approaches because the approaches double as preventative approaches to various challenges that young people encounter in life (Wierenga & Wyn, 2011). Strength-based approaches also build on the strengths already possessed by the young people and those found within their environment to address risk factors whilst enhancing resilience.

Summary and the gaps to be filled

Within this chapter, literature and research related to the current understanding and practices of youth and life skills development have been explored. This review chapter began by introducing the concept of youth in its first section. The section demonstrated how the concept of youth is unstable, dynamic and contextual and may be defined depending on the social, political, cultural, and economic environment. It also presents two dimensions from which the concept may be understood: as an age category and as a relational concept. The lesson learnt from the two dimensions is that the concept of youth is a social shifter and that youths are an exclusively separate group and perhaps they can best be described based on the contexts and circumstances that surround them.

In the second section, the review discussed the concept of youth development and revealed that it is an emerging research field with an emphasis on positive youth development. Through the review of literature, this study identified six key youth development principles. First, the positive youth development has shifted its focus from focusing on problems to creating positive outcomes such as connections, competencies and supportive relationships and meaningful participation. The shift also implies that a deficit approach is no longer in use but rather a strengths-based approach. The second principle relates to active engagement of young people in meaningful ways. Young people work with adults as partners and are fully engaged in community activities, not simply being service recipients. When young people are fully engaged they become an asset rather than a liability (Campbell et al., 2008). The third principle involves focusing on providing all young people with fundamental positive supports and opportunities not just for those engaged in behavioural problems or perceived to be at risk for doing so. This means that all youth are equally addressed as they are equally important. The fourth principle involves the commitment of the community in supporting young people throughout their development as they adjust to their developmental needs. Community members need to rethink community resources and how they can be used to positively improve the lives of young people, by meeting their needs and building competencies they need to become successful adults. The fifth principle relates to providing opportunities for community involvement in youth development. The sixth principle places emphasis on collaboration among different community sectors and partners in youth development. The mentioned principles are crucial in promoting young peoples’ healthy development as they provide and create successful learning environments for young people to improve their skills, interests and abilities.

The second section also revealed that through youth development programs young people gain necessary competencies and attributes that can help them face the challenges that life brings. Depending on the focus, youth development programs can be classified into three groups: those that build young peoples’ self-esteem; those that teach theoretical and practical skills; and community-based programs. Among the programs that fall within community-based programs are SOYDPs. However, a literature search did not provide substantial evidence as to whether youth development

programs including SOYDPs in Tanzania adhere to youth development principles. In addition, the effectiveness of these programs remains somewhat unsubstantiated due to the current dearth of comprehensive, rigorous evaluations.

In relation to life skills, the third section of this chapter demonstrated how the terminology life skills can be defined and the existing challenges behind its definition. Essential features of a life skill were found to be those that: include relevancy and applicability to different domains of a young individual’s life; foster coping, resilience, participation and healthy development in young individuals; and allow young individuals to cope and thrive within their community. Philosophically, the value of young peoples’ personal development and how they can contribute to their communities comes first within youth and life skills development programs such as SOYDPs. While this literature review could not identify a clear definition of life skills from young people in Tanzania, definitions from other domains such as that of UNICEF and WHO may not necessarily represent views of the young people, young leaders or program providers/managers of youth sport programs in Tanzania. Thus, there is a need to explore what young people and those who labour for youth development perceive life skills are in the Tanzanian context.

In its attempt to review youth development frameworks, the fourth section of this chapter has demonstrated the importance of adapting a reputable and evidence-based youth development framework in the practice of any youth program. The chapter revealed that, though youth development programs including youth sport programs in Tanzania claim to deliver youth development activities, they do not have any youth development framework to guide their activities. As a result, each program operates as an independent unit and it is hard to ascertain outcomes. This raises a concern about the quality of these programs and the need for having a Tanzanian National Youth Development Framework that will help in accommodating the existing diversities, coordinating and monitoring all the youth development initiatives. As such the review discussed the GYDF and demonstrated how relevant it is for this study and youth

development in Tanzania. Its strengths-based approach makes the GYDF a relevant tool for investigating the quality of practice of SOYDPs and the nature of life skills they claim to impart to young people in Tanzania. There is no question about the adaptability of the GYDF, however, its suitability in youth development programs in Tanzania depends largely on youth development program providers/managers and on the features, that seem particularly relevant to the philosophy of the program they lead.

Chapter Three: YOUTH SPORT

Introduction

This chapter attempts to provide a current understanding of practices within youth sport by investigating the broad, contemporary status of literature relating to sport and youth development. The chapter argues that if sport is ‘youth-centred’ and youth sport programs value young people and do things of value, then they can provide excellent mediums to engage youth and foster positive development. Importantly, youth sport needs to be conducted in an appropriate environment while focusing on fostering developmental assets for young people to acquire positive sport experiences. By doing so, young people are more likely to become confident, competent, compassionate, connected, and character-rich members of society (Fraser-Thomas et al., 2005). In support of the overarching argument, the chapter is informed by literature reviews and research related to youth development through sports.

This chapter is organised into three sections. The first section reviews sport and the impact it has on people’s lives. The second section provides a detailed description of how sport can enhance the practice of youth development. It reviews literature related to youth sport and how it contributes to positive outcomes in the life of young people. The third section briefly discusses the practice of sport-oriented youth development particularly on the importance of youth and life skills development. The fourth section concludes the chapter with a summary and draws to attention key points from this review.

Sport

Sport is an umbrella construct that consists of a range of physical activities, processes and social relationships that may lead to sociological, psychological and physical development (Linville & Huebner, 2005). The United Nations defines sport as all forms of physical activity contributing to physical fitness, mental well-being and social interaction (UN, 2003: v). According to Green (2010) sport includes play, recreational

activities, organised, casual or competitive sporting activities, and indigenous sports and/or games. Activities within sport range from individualised sport such as cycling, to team sports such as soccer, and may require different sets of skills and competencies. In the context of Tanzania, sports or michezo13 (sing: mchezo) refer to playing games, making moves in a game, competitive sport, wasted time, recess, acting, working, or leisure activities (Leseth, 2010). Michezo is a non-discursive concept and is inseparable from concepts such as formal competitive sports, leisure activities, mass sports, and play. In fact, playing soccer, netball, playing bao14 or goat racing are all considered as michezo (sports) in Tanzania.

While the literature has used the term sport synonymously with other terms like physical education and games, this study uses sport as a generic descriptor to refer to all structured, supervised physical activities in which young people participate—both in and outside school—for the goals and challenges they entail. By its nature, sport is structured and governed by certain rules of engagement and how individuals should interact (Vamplew, 2007). Conditions, of course differ depending on the sport and often each sport has a coach, trainer or mentor or someone with knowledge in the sport whose responsibility is to take charge and manage the activity.

It is important to state that sport is not all about physical activity alone (Rasberry et al., 2011); it is an integral part of life for the majority of people whether they are active players, parents of participants, coaches or fans. Sport is potentially able to provide an appealing environment where people of different ages, culture, ethnicity—from all

13 Michezo – A Kiswahili term which relates to 'sports' but includes activities without any specific meaning, like play. They may or may not be structured, meaningful activities that have important place in the development of a country.

14 Bao, literally translated 'wood', is an abstract strategy board game in Eastern Africa, especially Zanzibar and mainland Tanzania. Bao belongs to 'Mancala' family of games that are played in many parts of Africa.

walks of life—are brought together and interact in a social manner (Fullinwider, 2006; Keim, 2006; Spence, 2005). Hartmann and Kwauk (2011) suggest that sport provides a forum for people to interact, assume diverse social roles, acquire certain social skills, such as discipline, patience and respect, and conform to the objectives of the team in regard to teamwork, bonding and connectedness. It may also provide opportunities for individuals to experience different emotions that may not be found in the other life contexts. His Excellency, the late Mr Nelson Mandela, the former president of the Republic of South Africa, encapsulated in one of his 2011 quotes that:

“Sport has the power to change the world, it has the power to unite people, inspire, it speaks to youth in the language they understand, sports can create hope where once there was only despair, it is more powerful than the government, in breaking down racial barriers,” (Mandela, 2011)

According to Mandela, sport goes beyond a mere pastime. It is a universal phenomenon with the power to motivate, empower, inspire and unite people regardless of age, race or level of wealth, including athletes, coaches, volunteers and spectators together. Comparatively, existing literature stresses the significance of sport participation for the processes of personality development and psychological well-being, by arguing that participation in sporting activities on one hand improves self-concept, self-esteem, self- confidence, energy, efficiency and well-being, and on the other reduces anxiety, depression, tension and stress of the participants (Bailey, 2006; Hartmann & Kwauk, 2011). Nevertheless, there are circumstances where sport can result in negative social behaviour (Merkel, 2013). Sport can discriminate and marginalise certain factions of the community. Discrimination may be demonstrated if behaviour is based on a personal characteristic protected by state law. For instance, a young individual may be refused or excluded from participating in a sporting activity not on merit of his or her sporting ability but on gender, race or socio-economic background.

In recent years a number of international movements have attempted to remobilise sport as an engine for social development, particularly in the most disadvantaged communities (Hartmann & Kwauk, 2011; Kidd, 2008). This responds to the fact that

potentially participation in sport is easy and less demanding economically and that sport is a potential tool for realising developmental goals worldwide (Donnelly & Coakley, 2007). Sport is also one of the most popular organised activities and has been commended for the role it plays in the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals and in globalisation (Beutler, 2008). More often sport is used for social intervention, crime reduction, conflict resolution, risk prevention, peace-building and development (Coalter, 2010; Keim, 2006; Kidd, 2008). However, for sport to lead to positive developmental outcomes—and it can and often does—importantly, it has to be structured and organised in purposive and systematic ways to achieve the desired effects.

Youth Sport and Youth development

According to Seymour (2012) youth development may involve a range of youth programs run by different organisations, communities, services and agencies involving a range of activities. The programs may include youth sport, life skills training programs for young people, and other youth programs that aim at specific problems and issues. Youth development programs offer exclusive and deliberate, structured, age- related activities, with an emphasis on non-academic youth development outcomes (Berlin, Dworkin, Eames, Menconi, & Perkins, 2007; Holt, 2016). Some of the programs may be strongly attached to the local community; some are specific, some are universal and some run for a short period but with high intensity impact (Lakin & Mahoney, 2006; Lawford, Ramey, Rose-Krasnor, & Proctor, 2012). There are also certain youth programs that are designed for the purpose of engaging young people to various activities and experiences over a long period of time (Apsler, 2009). While there is strong debate as to how many different activities young people should be involved with, how often they should attend program activities and for how long, there is significant evidence to support the positive impact that youth programs have on young people’s lives (Fredricks, 2012; Seymour, 2012). However, what this review emphasises and promotes is that while youth development is crucial, not one singular program—including youth sport—can meet the needs and interests of all young people in and of themselves.

Just as encapsulated by Mandela (2011), youth sport can be a powerful tool that attracts both young men and women and hence provides a forum to deliver messages that can help them learn important lessons about life. The messages delivered through youth sport have the potential to make significant and distinctive contributions to youth development in multidimensional domains such as cognitive, social, affective, lifestyle and motor development, and may stir a physically active lifestyle among young people (Merkel, 2013; Ogundare, 2002; Perkins & Noam, 2007). Siedentop and colleagues (2011) posit that youth sport is a significant tool that can foster positive developmental assets such as self-esteem and confidence, physical competence, social connections and moral decision-making. It may also shape young people on a positive life course and fortify them to meet future challenges such as peer pressure, unemployment, developmental challenges and unequal opportunities in political and other decision- making bodies. Merkel (2013) associates the power of youth sport to the belief that sport is structured, participation is voluntary and requires mental and physical effort over time, and builds relationships between participating young people and caring adults. Nevertheless, when integrated with life skills education, youth sport can help young people acquire competencies required to live a successful life, participate in civic activities, support and protect others, and engage in social relations and cultural activities (Holt, 2016).

Youth sport has also been used by various institutions including government agencies as a regulatory influence to change young peoples’ behaviour to conform to norms and in turn generate social order (Hartmann, 2001; Spaaij, 2009). Hartmann (2001) designed a well-known national program of Midnight Basketball League (MBL) in the United States to promote social inclusion of disadvantaged young people. The program aimed at reducing crime by young African American males from underprivileged neighbourhoods associated with high levels of recorded youth crime and delinquency. Under adults’ supervision, young males participated in basketball games during the so called ‘high crime' hours (between 10pm and 2am). Though the program was successful in reducing the crime rates and delinquency in the identified areas, Hartmann and Depro (2001) could not attribute the success to sports intervention. Instead, they call for further research on the role of diversionary youth sport programs on social control.

While analysing the Sport Steward program in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, Spaaij (2009) learnt that sport-oriented interventions tend to serve as a form of social control and regulation from which government agencies and partners use to civilise and regulate young people residing in impoverished urban neighbourhoods to normalise their behaviour, support them to attend to their social responsibilities and integrate into society. Further evidence to sustain the controlling and regulating role of youth sport programs can be drawn from researchers who speculate that sport can be used to preserve welfare of young people from a war torn area (Gasser & Levinsen, 2004; Richards, 1997). Based on his research conducted in Sierra Leone, Richards (1997) suggests that youth sport programs can offer not only resolution but also bring reconciliation in areas of military conflict. He goes to report that sport contributes to social opportunities in war torn areas where violence and child-soldiering have severely affected the health and wellbeing of young people. Similarly, Gasser and Levinsen (2004) report on how successful the Open Fun Football Schools program was in reintegrating divided ethnic communities in the war-recovering area of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Despite the positive outcomes, Gasser and Levinsen (2004) caution us that ‘football is something like frontline farmland: fertile, but likely to be mined’. The reviewed literature here in suggests that regulation and control are a feature of youth sport programs however, this study focuses on the ways in which these programs can also contribute to youth development especially on how they value and do things of value to young people. Further, the study argues that it is a matter of balance between the desire of the state to regulate and control young people—and the need for these organisations to provide spaces in which young people can be active participants and contributors.

In recent years however, there has been a flurry of publications—led by Coalter (2013), Haudenhuyse (2012), van Eekeren (2006) and others that explicitly adopt a critical realist approach to sport and youth development. Much of this recent research has revolved around the need to uncover the social processes, mechanisms and contexts that affect the outcomes of sport-based development programs. Questioning the relationship between sport and youth development, particularly how sport practices contribute to developmental outcomes, Coakley (2011) argues that this relationship

has often been more the focus of personal confessional statements than social research. This follows the notorious methodological challenges in tracking and assessing variations in outcomes and associated life changes along with the impact of other real life influencing factors over time. Additionally, there is neither an established mechanism nor framework that can analytically alienate developmental changes attributed by participation in sport from general developmental changes happening in the real life of the young people caused by other social forces and structural factors that are not connected to sports. Many of the developmental outcomes claimed to be attributed by participation in sport are, indirectly, due to the causal relationship between inputs and actual changes of behaviour, which are difficult to measure (Coalter, 2007; Timpson et al., 2006). Critical realists to sport and youth development continue to challenge those who view youth sport as the panacea to youth development. They argue evidence on how sport practices contribute to a qualitative difference to young people is not convincing and has been dealt with much scepticism (Coalter, 2013; van Eekeren, 2006). As such they have increasingly embraced ‘theory of change’ models to investigate sport-based youth development programs.

The next section discusses the sporting effects of sport on youth development, however, it should be noted that all the impacts are only a possibility.

Youth sport and learning performance

Literature provides mixed reports regarding the impact of youth sport on learning performance. Some well-controlled longitudinal studies validated by cross-sectional research suggest that learning performance is likely to be enhanced by increased sport (Stead & Neville, 2010). These studies provide strong evidence to support the argument that young peoples’ participation in sport enhances academic achievement, facilitates educational attainment, and prevents drop out from school (Hartmann, 2008; Martin, 2010; Stead & Neville, 2010). The studies go on to indicate that students who spend time doing sport and physical activity add value to their learning habit and attitude,

improve social capital outcomes—bonding, connectedness and attachment—and, as a result, excel well in academic realms.

Literature provides enough evidence in support of the potential power of youth sport in the prevention of absenteeism, thereby improving school attendance (Stead & Neville, 2010). However, it is important to note that this improved attendance is only significant if the students think and behave appropriately, stay focused and work productively whilst they are at their learning institutions. Stead and Neville (2010) write in their review article that the development of social capital through youth sport to target groups, may indirectly improve school attendance. This assumption is built upon the bonding, attachment and connectedness effect of sport on participants. An investigation on student relationship to school, conducted by Libbey (2004), indicates that school connectedness and satisfaction among the students are social capital outcomes associated with participation in successful school sporting activities. According to Libbey (2004) school connectedness and satisfaction improve school attendance, both of which have a positive impact on academic performance. Improved school attendance has also been reported to have positive relationship with improved grades in schools in Tanzania. For instance, the Sport Development Aid (SDA) project uses sport as a tool and engine for development to encourage all boys and girls to attend and complete a full course of primary and secondary education, promote gender balance and human rights and stimulate young people to become future leaders and good citizens (Bulamile, 2008; Crosby, 2009). Since its inception in 2004 more than 500,000 Tanzanian young people have benefitted from this project. An evaluation study conducted in 2008 in the Mtwara region that used a qualitative approach, revealed an increased school attendance rate and improved grades in school (Bulamile, 2008). According to Bulamile (2008), 67% of pupils, 95% of teachers and 62.8% of head teachers who participated in the study agreed to a large extent that sporting activities increased academic performance among pupils.

Anecdotal evidence on the potential power of youth sport on school attendance can also be found from the Grumeti Sport Works Project. The project is run by Right To Play Tanzania in collaboration with local schools in Serengeti district to provide sporting programs to underprivileged young people (Right To Play, 2013). Among other objectives, the project focuses on improving school attendance and holistic development of young people through sport and play programs. According to the report, Grumeti Sport Works Project has led to an increased school attendance among students particularly on days they practice sports. According to the report, days with sports practice reported significantly high attendance compared to other days. Student enrolment in schools participating in the project also increased dramatically. Similar relations between sport and school attendance has also been reported in projects run by Right To Play in El Salvador and Zambia (Right To Play, 2013). Systematic studies that involved US students reveal strong correlations between participation in high school sport, increased academic performance and school attendance (Holt et al., 2008). These findings are strongly supported by a systematic review of the literature that sought to describe the prospective relationship between sporting activities and learning performance (Singh, Uijtdewilligen, Twisk, van Mechelen, & Chinapaw, 2012). In their review, Singh and colleagues included prospective data and took into consideration the methodological quality of each study reviewed. Eventually, they corroborated that there is a positive longitudinal relationship between participation in sporting activities and academic outcomes. Though the relationship between sport and academic performance is well substantiated in the literature, Singh and colleagues argue that the explanatory mechanism behind this relationship is yet to be established by the literature. On the other hand, cognitivists argue that the acute cognitive benefits of sporting activities such as intellectual stimulation adequately compensate for the time taken from other academic subjects. Hence, sport causes no adverse effects on students’ academic performance (Ratey & Sattelmair, 2009). This argument endorses a far-famed Latin phrase ‘Orandum est ut sit mens sana in corpore sano’ meaning ‘Let us play that there may be a sound mind in a sound body’ (Renson, 2008).

On the other hand, there are also studies that suggest neither positive nor negative relationships between participation in sport and learning performance, and yet others

that indicate a negative association (Kahn, Hewes, & Ali, 2009). For instance, there are some scholars who argue that participation in sporting activities impairs student’s academic achievement because it drains energy; creates student absenteeism, as it takes student’s time away from the classroom and studying; diverts student’s talent from academic activities and the possibility of sport replacing school work (Khan, Jamil, Khan, & Kareem, 2012). Criticising these contentions Rasberry et al. (2011) assert that these contentions are oversimplified. Instead, the energy spent in physical activity improves children’s fitness and improves their health and well-being. Regarding the time taken away from classroom and studying for sport, Holt (2016) argues that time is not used to train functional skills like dexterity and balance only but it is also used to give students a refreshment, relief from boredom and time for mental diversion. It serves as a necessary break from the rigors of concentrated, academic tasks in the classroom. Research supports that participation in sport does not jeopardise the value of academic importance (Martin, 2010; Trudeau & Shephard, 2008). Instead, sport is potentially able to affect the whole student—offering academic, cognitive, emotional, physical, and social beneﬁts—that may not be fully appreciated when a decision is made to stop it. As Coe, Pivarnik, Womack, Reeves, and Malina (2006) reveal, sacrificing physical activity classes for classroom time yields neither negative impact on academic performance nor adversely affects school performance. Instead, students who spent more time in sporting activities maintained or improved their performance and attendance. This finding is validated by a previous review of three large scale studies conducted by Shephard (1997). In his review, Shephard supports the contention that increased levels of student participation in sport maintained or even improved academic performance despite reduction in the time for study of academic subjects. Overall, a review of existing literature suggests that participation in sporting activities is positively related to improved school attendance and academic attainments.

Youth Sport and Social Development

The belief that sport can positively affect the social development and prosocial behaviour of young people has existed for decades (Eccles, Barber, Stone, & Hunt, 2003). However, research regarding the social development effects of sport is equivocal

(Rutten et al., 2007). One school of knowledge has elucidated the close association between participation of young people in sport with several general indicators of social development, namely improved self-expression, self-esteem, social interaction, social integration, personal exploration, initiative, social connections, teamwork, empathy, social and moral skills (Hall & Banno, 2001; Holt, 2016; Trudeau & Shephard, 2008). This is because in sport young people not only acquire sport-specific skills and knowledge necessary for them to perform their sport, but they also become acquainted to rules and norms related to sport, such as respect for opponents, equal opportunities to perform well, teamwork, fairness, collective responsibility and sportsmanship (Rutten et al., 2007). Hartmann and Kwauk (2011) write that participation in sporting activities teaches young people the value of hard work, shapes character and develops leadership skills. The elements mentioned by Rutten and colleagues (2007) and Hartmann and Kwauk (2011) may be summarised by the concept of fair play that has now gained popularity to become a universal philosophy of respect for others and respect for rules, in various contexts of life ranging from sporting arenas, in politics and business to other competitive endeavours (Renson, 2008). Coatsworth and Conroy (2007) provide empirical evidence that youth sport as a component of extra-curricular activities, can help young people cope with negative pressure and learn to cope with peer pressure, and cultivate optimistic attitudes regarding future outcomes. Further evidence from intervention studies reveal positive outcomes as a result of young peoples’ participation in sport, which include improved moral reasoning, fair play and sportsmanship attitude and individual responsibility (Eccles et al., 2003).

The second body of knowledge contends that the competitive nature of sport, particularly contact team sports, is a major variable that imparts young people with antisocial behaviour and destroys character (Blomfield & Barber, 2010; Eccles et al., 2003) and impacts on the effectiveness of sport-oriented youth development programs (Holt, 2016). It may hamper the development of collaborative skills, render young people to undesirable negative experiences that put their character at risk or make them display a poor attitude particularly after the competition. The fact that teams competition is an integral part of sport, that there are winners and losers, and that pressures can sometimes go up, are all things to be considered as part of the programs

pedagogical approach. Any emphasis on ‘winning at all cost’ and the pursuit of victory must be discouraged as it may attribute to antisocial behaviours (Green, 2010). Thus, program leaders, coaches and others involved in youth sport programs need to manage and use competition as ‘teachable moments’. They need to design their program activities to emphasis more on cooperation than competition, agility than strength and reinforce on mastery of skills and effort rather than winning.

On a critical lens, Coakley (2011) questions the advocated social development effects of sport on young people. He argues that playing sport alone does not guarantee a regularly known pattern of social developmental outcomes suggested by several scholars. Instead, the outcomes relate to and depend on the amalgamations of social and contextual factors. In support of Coakley’s argument, research evidence suggests that three factors are necessary for positive social outcomes within youth sport programs: aims, nature of atmosphere set by organisations, parents, coaches and program managers, and activities (Merkel, 2013; Perkins, 2000). It requires a good and principled relationship between coaches and young athletes to reduce antisocial behaviour, and that young athletes are likely to build prosocial behaviour when exposed to relatively high levels of socio-moral reasoning while engaging in sporting activities (Rutten et al., 2007). Further, youth sport may need to establish supportive and caring youth-adult relationships, focus more on activities that accentuate skill development, and emphasise active participation and leadership. In order to establish supportive and caring relationships, and to prevent incidents of violence and aggression among young people, youth sport may need to involve suitably trained teachers, coaches and volunteers who will: pay more purposeful attention to situations that arise naturally through sporting activities; ask questions that will require critical thinking, propagate the philosophy of non-violence, respect, tolerance and demonstrate good behaviour, keeping in mind that young people regard them as their role model (Coakley, 2011; Miller, Barnes, Melnick, Sabo, & Farrell, 2002). To develop social skills and values, youth sport may need to place more of an emphasis on nurturing the development of personal competence and promoting physical activity, fun, life skills, sportsmanship and good health than merely having a focus on competition and winning.

Youth Sport and Civic Engagement

Apparently, it is difficult to discuss the relationship between sport and civic engagement within an established theoretical framework. This comes from the fact that there is little sociological research studying these two areas, and past evidence is mixed (Lopez & Moore, 2006). However, little of the available literature provides different potential explanations in relation to the civic effects of sport. In fact, much of the evidence leads to some positive relationship between sport and civic engagement. Before discussing the civic effects of sport, it is important to clarify the concept of civic engagement. Though the literature varies on the precise meaning of this concept, civic engagement may be described as ways in which citizens take part in the life of a community in order to bring about positive changes or make a difference for others or participate in shaping the future of the community (Shaw, Brady, McGrath, Brennan, & Dolan, 2014). It involves individual or collective actions that focus on improving the general well-being of civic life in a community, using political and/or non-political processes, and that provide opportunities for reflection. Civic engagement is also described as a ‘bedrock value of democracy’ in the sense that it has potential power to influence choices in collective action (Camino & Zeldin, 2002, p. 214). This implies that civic engagement involves exercising your rights and responsibilities and expression of concern for the state and its fate as citizens. Essentially, civic engagement has much to do with a person being ‘outward looking’ and can be summarised to include values, attitudes, beliefs, knowledge, feelings and behaviours in relation to the conditions beyond the immediate environment of family and friends (Amnå, 2012, p. 613). Civic engagement is a community-builder particularly when properly done.

Among the objectives of why sport is administered to school and youth organisations is the instilling of the values, skills, habits and developing the character that will lead young people to become more engaged, active and responsible citizens (Lopez & Moore, 2006; Mafumiko & Pangani, 2008). Another objective is to promote civic engagement that may eventually build social capital and valuable skills that can foster upward mobility. The objectives are derived from the assumption that sport helps young people realise their own potential by developing interpersonal and leadership attributes,

increasing their self-confidence, and acquiring the motivation and ability to bring about change (Blomfield & Barber, 2010). Innovations in Civic Participation (ICP) is an NGO that supports the development of innovative high-quality youth civic engagement policies and programs throughout the world (Innovations in Civic Participation, 2010). In its 2010 report, ICP highlights different areas where youth civic engagement activities manifest. The areas include: involvement in community service and volunteering; providing support to other people within the same community or social group; advocacy and campaigning such as raising public awareness, working to revamp or change legislation, and representation to government consultation bodies; youth media activities—forms of media production organised by young people for young people; participation in social entrepreneurship such as developing innovative solutions to problems facing society; and participation in mechanisms for learning and exercising leadership skills. Depending on the context, the setting and purpose of these civic engagement activities can be employed at any level from local grassroots to international level. Earlier, the Centre for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) in the United States of America (USA) examined civic and political behaviour of young Americans aged between15 to 25 (Keeter, Zukin, Andolina, & Jenkins, 2002). In their study report, CIRCLE classifies civic engagement into three classes: civic, electoral, and political voice (Figure 4).

Measures of civic engagement

Figure 4: A summary of youth civic engagement activities according to CIRCLE (Keeter et al., 2002).

In an attempt to identify the civic effects of youth sport, Lopez and Moore (2006) of CIRCLE used the 2002 USA National Youth Survey of Civic Engagement data to highlight the impact of youth sport on civic engagement. In their study, Lopez and Moore found that the high school students who participated in sporting activities were more likely to engage in politics and civic affairs than their counterparts. They noted high civic engagement in areas such as voting, volunteering and news-attentiveness among students who participated in sports. Another empirical study that explored young males, sport and civic engagement in Australia corroborated that sport provides a practical medium for young males to participate in civic activities and a motivation for them to feel they are engaged in the civic life of their society (Hall, 2007). Hall’s findings resonate with earlier research that revealed a strengthened sense of belonging to local communities among young males following their performances in public sport (Hall & Banno, 2001). The study attributed the link/network to the increased public recognition young males received from adults and peers in their local community.

While the civic effects of sporting activities have been established in most of the developed countries, it is difficult to know exactly what youth sport has impacted young people in Tanzania. However, this does not mean that young people in Tanzania do not participate in civic affairs; instead it is a wakeup call for more research. There are reports of young people’s civic engagement across a range of activities, such as volunteering through government and non-government organisations, neighbouring, involvement in school activities and contributing both material and moral support. For example, Tanzania Youth Alliance (TAYOA)15 is a non-profit, non-government organisation that envisions to empower youth with skills to fully engage in improving their quality of life that is free from two major life difficulties—poverty and disease. The organisation uses youth and other volunteers to provide consciousness and awareness to young people across the nation on various issues including HIV/AIDS, reproductive health, drug and alcohol abuse and other life skills education through school visits, workshops and seminars, information technology and media campaigns, both on TV and radio broadcasts. Experience shows that as more young people engage in community organised events, agree to participate as volunteers for local organisations and share their ideas in formal gatherings or meetings, their voices are likely to be heard and their new ideas might be incorporated before decisions and changes are made. In general, civic engagement provides the opportunity for sharing ideas that cultivate into an inclusive public decision-making processes. Civic engagement activities can also be spotted within BILD Tanzania. The organisation groups young people and uses sport to engage them in their communities through volunteering activities in order to improve leadership qualities, community engagement and spirit of altruism and loyalty (White, 2012). Group membership and volunteerism can build social capital for young people, enhance upward mobility and promote a range of positive outcomes that can benefit the young people and their community.

15 http://www.tayoa.org/tayoa/

Youth Sport and Social Capital

While the dynamics in which participation in sport enhances social capital have been studied and reported in various studies (Rosso & McGrath, 2013; Spaaij, 2012), this section reviews the impact of youth sport on social capital in the life of young people. To understand social capital discourse one needs to consider revisiting social capital theories developed by sociologists Bourdieu and Coleman, and by the political analyst Robert Putnam. Bourdieu (1986) describes social capital in terms of resources that give individuals access to group goods. He relates it to the size of network and the volume of previous accrued social capital commanded by the agent. And while he clearly maintains that profit is the core reason why individuals maintain links in a network, this profit is not necessarily economic. Coleman (1988) differs slightly from Bourdieu, in that he links the discourse with concepts of economics. He defines the social capital discourse as all aspects of social structure (private goods) used by actors—whether persons or corporate actors—within the society as resources to achieve their interests. For Coleman, social capital is productive and has a clear instrumental purpose—to achieve particular ends that without social capital would not have been possible. On the other hand, Putnam (1995) presents social capital as social networks established based on trust, norms and networks that foster coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit. These networks or social links may render people to develop trustful relationships among each other and so work as a team. From Putnam’s definition, communities rich in social capital are characterised by the following: sturdy community linkages and civic infrastructure; widespread engagement in the civic life of the community; a sense of belonging, unity and inclusion; and high levels of trustful relationships and reciprocal support. According to Ponthieux (2004) the definition proposed by Putnam has become so popular to the extent of being regarded as the ‘standard’ definition to social capital. Howson (2015) discusses the meaning of social capital to include tangible assets that are needed for daily living of all people namely, respect for others, goodwill, fellowship, tolerance, sympathy and social intercourse among the individuals, for example, between young people and members of the community they live in. Despite its high usage in the literature, the actual meaning of the discourse social capital and its measurement remain contested. Nonetheless, this review adopts Putnam’s definition rather than those provided by other scholars. Putnam is among the most well-known sociologists to advocate that participation in sport leads 79

to social capital development. Through his popular book Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, Putnam presents an image of the lone bowler to signify the dwindling levels of social capital in his country, the United States of America (USA) (Putnam, 2001).

In relation to youth development, the literature provides strong evidence that young peoples’ participation in sport contributes to social capital through inspiring social interaction and fostering of social relations and networks. Siedentop et al. (2011) assert that participation in sport positively influences social capital, and argue for the natural teaching ability of sport. They demonstrate in their book titled Complete guide to sport education, how coaches and trainers can encourage young people to work together, support one another, and improve their competence in sport and fitness skills for them to experience a successful future. They also argue that sport has the potential to teach young people about fairness, teamwork, and compassion, while also introducing the concept of ‘fair play’—a primary goal and central focus of any sports program. According to Fullinwider (2006) fair play requires young people participating in sports to give their best effort, respect the rights and feelings of others, demonstrate a spirit of sportsmanship, be helpful and not harmful, and participate fully and responsibly. In this context, learning and practising fair play fosters social capital outcomes (i.e., bonding, trust level, seek for support or support others) and that such outcomes are valuable outcomes that may lead to the development of other outcomes, such as human capital, that are also emphasised in broader society. In Australia, Atherley (2006) studied the elements of social capital at a community and regional social scale using twenty five sporting clubs located in the wheatbelt region of Western Australia. In her study, Atherley (2006) asserted that that social capital is vital to rural community daily life. She goes on to illustrate that district sport clubs are a focal point of rural life and that sport plays an integral role in the development of bonding and bridging social capital. While studying Somali Australians, Spaaij (2012) found out that social bonds and bridges developed through sports help in the (re)construction of community networks that have been damaged by war and displacement. Other studies that testify to the argument that participation in sport contributes to social capital development have also

been reported in the United Kingdom (Coalter, 2007; Collins, 2014; Crabbe & Brown, 2004), in Canada (Zakus, 1999) and in the United States of America (Putnam, 2001).

Although there is significant empirical evidence to support the positive experience of sport, there is also evidence that sport participation can be counterproductive, ineffective, or even misused, and can cause development of a deleterious character among participants (Blomfield & Barber, 2010; Fraser-Thomas & Côté, 2009; Kahn et al., 2009; Nchimbu, 2005; Shernoff, 2010). The researcher’s own personal experience working in the sporting industry has revealed that sport may lead to incidences of extreme forms of bonding (social capital) to the extent that participants may express very strong support to one member or team and inhibit the bridging to another member or team. On some occasions youth sport has been linked with increased frequency of violence, particularly team sports (Linville & Huebner, 2005), increased consumption of alcohol and smokeless tobacco (Holt & Jones, 2016) and stress and social exclusion among young people (Miller et al., 2002). While the outcomes may represent potential negative developmental trajectories, it is not necessary that they may be true for all young people participating in sport. When youth sport is associated with negative developmental experiences such as the absence of positive role models, negative peer influences, negative coach relationships, excessive pressures from adults to perform and the challenging psychological environment of competitive sport, it may have deleterious effects on participants (Holt & Jones, 2016). Experience teaches us that non-competitive sport may be more effective in fostering mutual understanding, positive relationships and empathy among young people. Nevertheless, the literature insists that the power of sport to build or destroy character has nothing to do with sport participation only (Coakley, 2011; Miller et al., 2002). It is the trainers, coaches, parents and other community leaders who have the determining factor on the experience of young people in sporting activities and on the quality or degree of attitudes, behaviour and character-building that may arise (Siedentop et al., 2011).

Sport-Oriented Youth Development Programs (SOYDPs)

Sport-oriented youth development programs (SOYDPs) are adult-organised and led sporting programs that integrate sporting activities with life skills education. Apparently, there is a significant increase in the number of programs designed to enhance youth development through sport across the world (Holt, 2016; Petitpas, Cornelius, Van Raalte, & Jones, 2005). Most of them are run as after school programs (Holt, 2016). According to Holt (2016) the programs are founded on the belief that participation in sport provides fertile ground for young people to learn particular skills and attitudes of considerable value in their life. They help young people to learn about themselves and develop various positive developmental assets and skills such as problem-solving strategies, communication skills, ability to work under pressure, collaboration with team members and within a system and receiving and benefitting from feedback, gaining the ability to set well-focused goals and to handle setbacks (Goudas & Giannoudis, 2010; Papacharisis, Goudas, Danish, & Theodorakis, 2005; UNICEF, n.d; Wicks, Beedy, Spangler, & Perkins, 2007). The programs also provide a structured test for learning life skills such as responsibility, conformity, persistence, risk-taking, courage, emotion regulation, and self-regulation (Papacharisis et al., 2005). A good example of integrating sporting activities with life skills education is when training a young athlete to practise deep breathing to control stress while taking a critical foul shot in basketball. This is a typical illustration of developing a social- emotional competency. However, it is not yet a life skill unless that breathing technique is transferred to other contexts, such as in the field of academia when writing an exam. Realisation of life skills is made possible because SOYDPs provide an environment that is specifically focused on giving young people a chance to participate in a range of challenging activities. The activities offered by the programs help young people to recognise their capacities and identities as productive employees and citizens in their communities. The programs also provide young people with an appealing context for establishing relationships with caring adults, such as managers, coaches, trainers, and other outstanding peers, while meaningfully engaging in community and civic life (Holt, 2016). When young people have acquired the desired life skills, they are in a better position to change their social circumstances.

Despite the conflicting evidence regarding the impact of sport on youth development, SOYDPs provides a positive context for youth development (Holt, 2016). This context is evidenced by: the sharing of several important characteristics found in other efficacious youth development programs (Holt, 2016); the focus on areas for intervention that essentially include self-efficacy, competence and pro-social norms (Hartmann & Kwauk, 2011); and their well-structured curriculum that is appropriate to the population of young people being served (Catalano, Berglund, Ryan, Lonczak, & Hawkins, 2004). The programs foster personal competence and, as a result, they help young people develop abilities to plan for their life, to be independent and to seek the resources of others when desired.

Like any other youth development program, the impact of SOYDPs depends on the ways in which it is administered and how and to what ends it is used. In this context positive outcomes are not guaranteed by the participation; rather it is the educational experience within the program that may facilitate the result. Petitpas et al. (2005) assert that in order to enhance positive youth development through sport and reduce the negative outcomes associated with sport participation provider-managers ought to plan carefully and consider a large number of factors. They ought to create clear positive goals about the sporting experience, emphasise fair play and sportsmanship as well as the skills to be taught and the lessons to be learned. With these goals in mind, the ‘winning at all cost’ attitude that can lead to negative outcomes is not promoted, and instead the learning process is emphasised. To conclude SOYDPs are potentially able to provide an avenue for the implementation of youth development programs (Fraser- Thomas et al., 2005).

Summary

This review of the literature provided an overview of the impact that sport, particularly youth sport has on positive youth development. The review looked at the concepts of sport and its impact on young peoples’ lives, youth sport and its developmental impact to the life of young people in Tanzania and elsewhere in the world. The review found

a couple of studies that argue for the potential power of sport as a tool for youth development and that if youth sport is ‘youth-centred’, values and does things of value and operates within a youth development framework then youth sport can provide excellent mediums to engage young people and foster positive development. The review also revealed that sport may lead young people to deleterious behaviour, affect students’ academic performance and be a source of marginalisation among young people. However, positive outcomes in young people may be determined by the aims, activities, and atmosphere set by organisations, parents, spectators, coaches and program-managers. Despite potential negative effects, the review maintains that sport for youth remains to be a staging post that provides a basis for positive youth development while addressing other elements of diversity and disadvantage further strengthens young peoples’ development and contribution to society.

The chapter also noted that much of this evidence regarding the benefits of sport to young people comes from the western world and that there is a dearth of literature on the impact of youth sport within the framework of youth development from Tanzania. As a result, a comprehensive understanding of how youth sport programs influence the development of young Tanzanians remains elusive. For instance, this review could not find any systematic research evidence as to how SOYDPs value and do things of value to young people participating in Tanzanian programs. Considering the current state of youth development in Tanzania and the failure to comprehensively evaluate the youth sport programs, research is needed to uncover the quality and nature of life skills young people gain by participating in these programs.

Chapter Four: METHODOLOGY

Introduction

This chapter explains the way in which the current research was designed, including a rationale for the choice of research methods. It provides information about the youth organisations, the sample population, the instruments used to collect data, and the data collection procedure, as well as demonstrating how data were analysed. The last section of this chapter shows how ethical issues pertaining to this study were managed.

This study was guided by the Generic Youth Development Framework (GYDF) from which one main research question was developed: To what extent do Sport-Oriented Youth Development Programs (SOYDPs) in Tanzania value young people and enable young people to do things of value? In response to the main research question, the study addresses three specific questions in relation to the two overarching values:

a. Valuing young people: To what extent, and how, do SOYDPs recognise young peoples’ strengths, build teamwork, and enable young people to look out for each other? b. Doing things of value: To what extent, and how, do SOYDPs engage young people with the real world, support young people in becoming active citizens, and support young people to be reflective, resilient learners? c. What life skills do young people gain from being exposed to SOYDPs?

Research design

A research design provides the glue that connects a research project together. It provides the logic of the research, its framework, and/or its structure (Kothari, 2004; Trochim, 2005). It shows how all the major segments of the research project work together to effectively address the central research question as unambiguously as possible. In fact, research design shows what question is to be studied, what data are relevant, what data are to be collected, and how the results should be analysed (Yin,

2013). This study is designed as an exploratory case study, with an emphasis on the discovery of insights into a new phenomenon: youth development through sports in Tanzania (Kothari, 2004; Yin, 2013). To the best of my knowledge, there is limited research on the development of Tanzanian youth through sport; hence an exploratory case study was deemed necessary to establish an understanding of how SOYDPs empower young people with life skills. The design was preferred as a means of establishing the groundwork for future rigorous research, and hopefully future improvements to youth development programs in Tanzania. It also provides the flexibility to explore future possibilities for research.

Lune, Pumar, and Koppel (2010) support the use of exploratory case studies in the social sciences. They describe cases as not entirely unique, but highly dependent on their situations. They add that case studies offer the researcher the opportunity to triangulate multiple methods and theories providing rich contextual explanations as a result. Cohen, Manion, and Morrison (2013) are keen to underscore the important role a case study plays in producing credible accounts of complex relationships:

The case study researcher typically observes the characteristics of an individual unit–a child, a clique, a class, a school or a community. The purpose of such observation is to probe deeply and to analyse intensively the multifarious phenomena that constitute the life cycle of the unit with a view to establishing generalizations about the wider population to which that unit belongs. (Cohen et al., 2013, p. 296)

Robert Yin (2013), one of the prominent and seminal authors with regard to the use of case studies to identify phenomena, describes exploratory case studies as a means of defining the necessary problems, issues and questions for developing subsequent studies. According to Yin, case studies may be small scale research but they are significantly valuable as preliminaries to major research. He adds that case studies can generate rich data that may bring understanding to variables and phenomena that may deserve further critical investigation.

The case study provides the researcher with opportunities to use various data collection methods. Kervin, Vialle, Herrington, and Okely (2006) support this contention:

One of the keys to an effective, rigorous case study is utilising multiple data collection sources, including documentation, archival records, interviews, observations, and artefacts such as work samples. (Kervin, Vialle, et al., 2006, p. 70)

To explore the issue of youth development through sport in Tanzania, this study employed a mixed-methods approach. The philosophical assumption underpinned the choice of mixed methods was a commitment to understand and advocate for young peoples’ views and their role in shaping how youth sport organisations implement a youth development approach. This underpinning philosophical view is reflected in the design of the survey and interview with the former being the dominant. Gorard and Taylor (2004) remind us that use of mixed-methods—also referred to as ‘combined methods research’—in education and social research studies is not a new phenomenon. Its use can be traced back to at least 1855, and, in the early nineteenth century, the work of the 'Hawthorn factory'. According to Gorard and Taylor (2004), mixed-methods approach carries significant impact in the sense that:

Figures can be very persuasive to policy-makers whereas stories are more easily remembered and repeated by them for illustrative purposes. It can also lead to less waste of potentially useful information …Combined approaches can be particularly useful when the background theory for an investigation is minimal, and where one of the main purposes of the study is to generate useable theory…Above all, if social phenomena tend to have multiple empirical appearances, then using only one method in each study can lead to the unnecessary fragmentation of explanatory models. (Gorard & Taylor, 2004, p. 7)

My decision to employ mixed-methods was also informed by Punch and Oancea’s (2014) recognition that both quantitative and qualitative methods are valuable in their own right, but neither is complete in itself; each method has its own strengths and weaknesses. And thus, to gain more insight into complex phenomena such as youth development through sport in Tanzania, it was imperative to ‘combine the methods in

a way that achieves complementary strengths and non-overlapping weaknesses’ (Punch & Oancea, 2014, p. 290). The approach helped in bringing together survey and focus group data to create a more coherent, rational and rigorous whole (Nudzor, 2009). In support, Siraj-Blatchford, Sammons, Taggart, Sylva, and Melhuish (2006) argue that:

The use of mixed methods has, we believe, provided a study of pre-school influence that is more meaningful, and provides a wider evidence base for both policymakers and practitioners than reliance on any one form of data gathering and approach to analysis would have achieved. We would argue that complex and pluralistic social contexts demand analysis that is informed by multiple and diverse perspectives and that this is more fruitful than reliance on only one philosophical position or methodological approach (or indeed, belief). We argue that our conclusions or rather our ‘inferences’ are therefore stronger for having applied a mixed-method approach. (Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2006, p. 77)

Importantly, utilisation of a mixed-methods strategy strengthens the reliability and validity of the study (Ary, Jacobs, Sorensen, & Walker, 2010); thus, this exploratory case study sequentially integrated survey and focus groups data collection techniques. The survey used a GYDF Toolkit, to collect data in relation to how the SOYDPs in Tanzania value young people and do things of value, and to collect examples of good practice as the programs attempt to empower youth with life skills. Focus groups assisted in gaining deep insights into how participants (young people, volunteers and program providers/managers) perceive the quality of practice and the nature of the life skills young people gain by participating in SOYDPs (Detailed information can be found under the research instrument section).

About the Youth Organisations

Two non-governmental youth organisations delivering sport-oriented youth development programs were selected as case studies for this study. The organisations are in two different metropolitan cities: Arusha and Dar Es Salaam. According to Lune et al. (2010) case studies offer the researcher the opportunity to triangulate multiple methods and theories providing rich contextual explanations as a result. Kervin, Vialle, et al. (2006) support this contention:

Cohen et al. (2013) are keen to underscore the important role a case study plays in producing credible accounts of complex relationships:

For this study, the first youth organisation came from Dar Es Salaam. The organisation is located in an area believed to have the largest concentration of low-income residents due to the nature of local industry, poor infrastructure, and the poor quality of social services (Green, 2001) . The organisation targets children and young people (10 to 30 years) living around this community. Its mission is to educate and create awareness about health and other issues affecting the community, such as corruption and environmental protection, using sport, traditional dance and drama. The second youth organisation is based in Northern Tanzania, Arusha city. This non-government organisation uses sport for development and capacity-building. Though Arusha city is one of the fastest growing cities in Tanzania, it still struggles with high levels of unemployment, poverty and poor prospects for its citizens (Magesa, Shimba, &

Magombola, 2011). According to Magesa, Shimba and Magombola children are the most vulnerable in the population, with many of them finding their way into the streets in an attempt to earn a living. In the long term, these children end up unskilled and jobless, often resorting to crime or other antisocial behaviours to survive (UNICEF, 2012). The youth organisation in Arusha envisions seeing vulnerable young people in Arusha educated, empowered and living free from poverty, abuse and exploitation. To achieve its vision, the organisation focuses on four key program areas: education, health and well-being, livelihoods, and capacity building in local youth organisations and among young leaders to enable them to deliver life skills education to young people. It uses sporting activities and local games to deliver its youth development programs.

While there are notable differences in missions, structures, and approaches between the two selected youth organisations, there are certain characteristics that are common to both. Neither is gender-based but rather open to all young males and females aged between fourteen and thirty in their communities. Sport is used as ‘bait’ or as a ‘vehicle’ to attract, retain and empower young people with life skills for healthy and successful life experiences. Sport is also used to raise awareness of various issues affecting their communities. The focus of learning life skills is through experience: active, hands-on learning. All learning and training activities take place after school and on weekends under the supervision of trained staff and young leader volunteers. Program activities combine team sports (soccer, netball, volleyball and basketball), local games, and academic and enrichment programs, with the overall goal of ensuring that young people who join the organisations graduate as resilient young adults. Sporting activities and local games are seen as alternatives to anti-social behaviours such as drug use and crime, and as antidotes to the problems that stem from lack of self-esteem, idleness, poverty, marginalisation, and alienation. The organisations also run sports competitions called Bonanzas. They are used as an incentive for young people and as a way of measuring the success with which the volunteers and staff are teaching young people the program content of “Life Skills through sports and games”.

Sample recruitment

According to Cohen et al. (2013), sample design is one of the fundamental factors in determining the quality of a study. Other determinants include the appropriateness of methodology and instrumentation. Questions regarding sampling often arise when the researcher is required to define the population on which the research will focus before any attempt to collect data is initiated. Several factors such as cost, time and accessibility often restrain researchers from gaining information from the whole population. Taking these factors into consideration, sampling for this study was done in two stages. The first stage involved selecting two youth organisations as case studies. Further, the second stage involved recruitment of participants from the chosen organisations for participation in survey and focus groups.

The choice youth organisations

Sample design within a case study is often a non-probability such as the convenience sampling strategy (Cohen et al., 2013). Convenience samples do not involve randomised processes to select from the population, but rely on the personal judgement of the researcher in deciding who will participate in the study (Creswell, 2008; Patton, 2002). Anecdotal evidence shows that there are numerous youth organisations focusing on youth development through sport and games in Tanzania; however, I selected two convenient youth organisations as case studies. These organisations are in two metropolitan cities—Arusha and Dar Es Salaam. The logic underlying the selection of the two organisations was that they are the leading, youth and sport-focussed agencies in the metropolitan cities, well-governed, pro-active and with a tradition of project development informed by regular research. Thus, similar results might be predicted (literal replication). The current status of the organisations was confirmed through reports from the National Sports Council of Tanzania and Regional Sports Officers of their respective cities, confirming that both have active youth development through sport programs. Other factors determining sample selection included expense, time constraints and ease of access. Through the two case studies I was able to investigate many variables that provided in-depth knowledge of youth development through sport in Tanzania.

Recruitment of participants

As previously stated, this study employed a mixed-methods case-study approach. The quantitative component required completion of a survey questionnaire by 125 participants (that is, young people aged 15 to 24—further details are included in the research instruments section). All participants were to come from the two conveniently selected organisations. The survey questionnaires were directly administered to the participants by the researcher in one of their regular meetings. I adopted this approach because of its high response rate, its low cost, and the fact that I needed to be there physically to provide clarification about instructions, to answer questions that could arise, and to render assistance where needed (Ary et al., 2010).

The qualitative part of the research consisted of focus group interviews. The focus groups anticipated involving a sample of 20 participants. A criterion-sampling strategy was used to secure focus group participants for the collation of rich verbatim information (Creswell, 2008; Patton, 2002). According to Creswell (2008), criterion sampling involves participants who meet certain criteria and who have experienced the phenomena being studied. Approximately 6 to 7 young people from each organisation were used as group participants. The selected young people were those who had been involved in SOYDPs for not less than a year. Subsequently, criterion sampling was used to secure 7 serving and active coaches/trainers, volunteers/leaders and providers/managers from the organisations.

Young people were involved because they are the beneficiaries of the program. The study therefore expected to capture their reflections, opinions and experience of participation in the programs.

Staff and volunteers were involved because they play an essential role in the organising and delivery of the programs’ content. Their roles include developing and running the programs on daily basis. Staff and volunteers possess a variety of different skills and knowledge that can maximise benefits for participating young people.

Program providers/managers were included in this study because they are responsible for the vision and management of the programs. They were expected to provide information and their reflections on the programs’ operations, staff roles and organisational responsibilities.

Research Instruments

This study employed a mixed-methods approach to data collection with a survey being the initial data collection method, followed by focus groups.

Survey: Generic Youth Development Framework Toolkit

A survey questionnaire was employed to gain an overall picture of the quality of the practice and the nature of life skills acquisition in SOYDPs. The survey questionnaire was derived from the GYDF toolkit. The toolkit consists of different checklists for different categories of people participating in youth development programs which have been developed following an extensive literature research in youth development across various organisations (Wierenga & Wyn, 2011). They have been tested within Army Cadet Organisations in Australia and proven to be reliable and valid instruments for evaluating youth development programs. The questionnaire consists of indicators, presented as a checklist, that can be used by SOYDPs for various purposes such as benchmarking for their practice, monitoring the program’s progress, and for determining weak areas that need to be strengthened (Wierenga & Wyn, 2011). These indicators helped the researcher to collect evidence on how the SOYDPs value young people and do things of value, for young people, as perceived by young people. They also informed the researcher about the nature of life skills that young people gain from participating in the SOYDPs.

Table 7 presents the general format of the survey questionnaire adapted from GYDF and contextualised for this study. The questionnaire consists of 48 items that required a total of 96 responses. Each young person was asked to complete the survey by describing their experience based on the key indicators in a written format.

Table 7: Survey questionnaire

CORE VALUES: PRINCIPLES Indicators of Total Responses good practice per indicator Valuing young - Recognising strength 6 12 people - Looking out for each other 6 12 - Building the team 12 24 Doing things - Learning and growing from 9 18 of value experience - Engaging in the real world 9 18 - Building active citizens 6 12 Total 48 96

Focus Groups

Three focus group interviews, two involving young people and one with the coaches/trainers, volunteers/leaders and providers/managers of the youth organisations, were conducted. They were designed to complement the quantitative component, clarify issues raised, and fill in any apparent gaps in the completed questionnaires’ data. Focus groups helped the study to gain insight into, and interpret the quantitative findings in more depth and with additional context reflecting embedded design (Ary et al., 2010; Creswell & Clark, 2007). Specifically, they helped to explore participants’ perceptions of any development of life skills knowledge and application offered by the programs; the uniqueness of the programs; how the programs related to the interests of the community and the sport setting; the strengths and shortfalls of the programs; and to elicit recommendations participants may have had for future improvement of the programs. Equally important, the use of focus groups honoured participants’ time commitments, was less labour intensive, more cost effective, and easily organised in

the limited time frame I had. Additionally, focus groups provided an environment whereby participants piggybacked off answers from each other. The sessions lasted for 1 to 1.5 hours for each group of 6 to 7 participants. To obtain a complete and accurate record of each participant, all sessions were recorded. This provided the researcher with the freedom to focus, listen, respond more rapidly, and to ensure clarity of understanding, as well as maintaining eye contact and good rapport. The recording was also useful for referencing purposes during transcription.

The focus group interviews centred on the following questions:

1. What do you think young people need in order to thrive in life?

2. What is your understanding of life skills?

3. What type of skills-building experience does your sport-oriented youth development program offer?

4. What do you consider to be the strengths of your youth sport program compared to other youth organisations you know about?

5. What would you consider to be the weaknesses of your youth sport program?

6. How can your program be strengthened to make it more effective or successful?

The first and second questions ensured a mutual understanding among the participants of the concept of ‘life skills’ while ascertaining the level and nature of life skills developed by the SOYDPs in Tanzania. The questions also helped to clarify participants’ understanding of the purpose of the study. The third question was intended to capture participants’ views on how they see and reflect on their program activities. The fourth question was designed to capture participants’ views on the strengths of their program activities, in terms of valuing and doing things of value to young people as compared to other youth programs around. The fifth and sixth questions enabled participants to highlight areas of weakness within their program and propose strategies for improvement.

Data Analysis

Survey data and transcribed texts from focus groups were analysed independently, in accordance with the objectives of this study. This was done to achieve mutual enhancement of the analysis and understanding of each component by the other (Patton, 2002). According to Green (2007) the point at which quantitative and qualitative strand interacts—point of interface—is the most salient and critical is when using mixed methods. In this study, data from survey (quantitative strand) and focus groups (qualitative strand) were integrated in the final interpretation stage from which focus groups complemented the survey. The general data analysis process adopted the steps conceptualised by Onwuegbuzie and Teddlie (2003):

a) Data reduction—this step involved analysing quantitative data using descriptive analysis. The process involved use of Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 22 and Microsoft Excel. I performed a cross tabulation analysis to explore the response of all participants on each question. Further I summated and calculated averages of all responses on each indicator from young people, program leaders and program providers/managers’ responses. This was followed up by examination of the pattern to determine which principles are important and frequently occurring, and which are weak areas on which SOYDPs need to focus.

Analysis of qualitative data began shortly after focus-group interviews, with the transcription of focus-group interview sessions. I extracted words and concepts from interview transcriptions for the purpose of generating themes (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Essentially, each of the main questions stood as a theme to complement the quantitative component. In order to elicit the subthemes from the transcripts, a standardised iterative process was employed. A code was later assigned to each of the generated subthemes. This approach is consistent with, and often used in qualitative methodology (Glaser & Strauss, 2009). The transcripts were read repeatedly and subtheme appearances tallied. In events where respondents mentioned an established subtheme once or more than once,

that subtheme was counted only once. A frequency total was then established for each subtheme (Appendix 3).

b) Data display—involved visual presentation or description of quantitative data (tables) and qualitative data (lists).

c) Data correlation—involved correlating qualitative data collected from focus groups with quantitative data from survey to ascertain whether they reflected similar findings.

d) Data consolidation—at this stage, quantitative and qualitative data were combined to produce a new data set.

e) Data comparison—included comparing analysed data collected from quantitative and qualitative data sources; and finally

f) Data integration—whereby analysed data from both qualitative and quantitative components and interpretations will be integrated into a coherent whole.

Quality of the Study

To ensure quality of data, this study addresses three issues: reliability of information generalisability and validity of data. According to Ary et al. (2010), data can be reliable only when it is consistent (that is, a researcher would get the same results when assessing the same data). In this exploratory case study, the use of multiple methods (survey and focus groups) provides a triangulation to the study, thus improving the level of reliability. The questions asked in the survey were complemented with focus group questions. Owing to the fundamental nature of exploratory case studies and the limited sample size, the conclusions of this study cannot be generalised beyond the studied organisations (Yin, 2013). I understand that convenience exploratory case studies provide significant data samples, but these cannot be used to draw decisive, and generalisable conclusions about the population under investigation (Ary et al., 2010). Nevertheless, the analysis of the organisations will be of direct relevance to a wider set of youth development/sport organisations in Tanzania. Validity may refer to the authenticity or truthfulness and therefore defensibility of the data (Kervin, Valle, Herrington, & Okely, 2006). Validity of the data was strengthened using a standardised

questionnaire extracted from the GYDF toolkit. In the focus groups, I had opportunities to probe, question, and paraphrase responses in seeking clarity about the intended meaning of the participants’ comments.

Ethical issues

According to Hennink, Hutter, and Bailey (2010) ethical issues permeate all types of research. Before the selected organisations were invited to participate in this study, they were contacted by telephone. Later on, a formal invitation letter was sent to each organisation with further information about the project. I am aware of the fact that privileged information may be given which could be damaging if made public; therefore, the subjects were assured of their privacy, anonymity and protection. While survey questionnaires bore no names, to protect privacy pseudonyms have been used in the group interviews to conceal real names. I clearly, verbally, explained the purpose of the study to each participant in order to obtain their informed verbal consent (Morgan & Symon, 2004). Participants were freely invited to participate in the study through a brochure (Appendix 1) and issued with a plain language statement explaining the nature and purpose of the study and the importance of their responses. Participation was voluntary, and participants were enabled freedom to respond or withdraw anytime from the study, without consequence.

Approval to conduct the study was given by the Central Human Research Ethics Committee at the University of Melbourne before any attempt at data collection (Ethics ID 1442747). In addition, study approval to access young people for participation in this study was sought from the National Sports Council of Tanzania and respective youth organisations. At all stages of the research project, the data collection process took place while participants were in their own environment (Arusha and Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania).

Chapter Five: FINDINGS

Introduction

This study was designed to explore youth and life skills development in Tanzania. Specifically, the study sought to collect research evidence on the quality of practice and nature of life skills young people may gain through participation in SOYDPs. This chapter presents the results from two analyses of the data collected from three categories of participants—young people, staff and volunteers, and program providers/managers—using survey instruments and focus group discussions. The first section, the quantitative component, analyses the data generated by the survey questionnaire. The second section analyses transcribed discussions from three focus groups.

Section One: Quantitative data analysis

This section explains the main findings from the survey of young people. To achieve the empirical objective of the study, analysis and presentation of the results followed the overarching values and principles of the GYDF as they appear in the general survey questionnaire format (Table 7). Cross tabulation analysis on each element was performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) in order to understand the perceptions and experiences of the young people in relation to the practice of SOYDPs (Appendix 2). Further, I summated and calculated averages of all responses on each element to determine the strengths and weaknesses of the programs. Results are displayed using tables and charts. While the vertical axis of the charts represents the importance of the element, how often the element is experienced by the young people is plotted along the horizontal axis. Each point represents the two measurements (Importance vs. Frequency) for each element. Items judged to be important, and often experienced by the participants in the youth development program, are referred to as the strengths of the program. These items tend to cluster themselves at the top right hand corner of the chart. Items judged to be important by participants but not present at the rate that participants would want them to be, represent growth areas. These items tend to cluster themselves at the bottom left hand of the chart. It is these last items which the programs need to pay extra attention to.

Participants’ demographics and questionnaire response rate

Table 8 shows the number of participants of different age groups who participated in the survey. Gender has been included in the sample to understand if the opportunities to participate in youth sports were affected by this variable.

Table 8: Demographic characteristics of study participants and questionnaire response rate

PARTICIPANTS YOUNG PEOPLE GENDER TOTAL

MALE FEMALE AGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

FREQUENCY 51 24 7 5 9 7 9 5 2 4 54 69 123

RESPONSE 41.5 19.5 5.7 4.1 7.3 5.7 7.3 4.1 1.6 3.3 43.9 56.1 98.4 RATE (%)

Table 8 shows that out of the 125-young people who were expected to participate in this study, 123 (98.4%) completed the questionnaire. The higher the response rates the more accurate, useful results (Creswell, 2008). The majority (78%) of the participants were between the ages of 15 and 19 years. In terms of gender, young females represented the highest number of participants 69 (56.1%) against their young male counterparts 54 (43.9%).

Valuing young people

The overarching value, valuing young people, in the GYDF establishes the contexts, structures, cultures and sets of relationships that foster youth development. The three major principles, which include recognising strength, looking out for each other and building the team, were analysed. The results are discussed in the sections below.

100

Principle: Recognising strengths

According to the GYDF this principle consists of two good practices: recognising achievement and prioritising participation. Each of the practices is linked to a set of three indicators:

Recognising achievement

This practice is primarily concerned with how SOYDPs recognise and celebrate both the personal and community benefits resulting from young peoples’ contribution to their programs and to their community, through being given opportunities. In the survey, all the indicators were rated high by more than 70% of the young people. ‘I am able to achieve at the right level for me’ was rated the highest (62.1% quite often, 12.9% sometimes, 75.0% combined). Further, over 70% of the young people rated they wished it to continue to happen more often in the future. Overall, the results suggest that programs were committed to ensuring that young people gain opportunities to participate in a range of healthy, communal activities and achieve accreditation for personal achievements both in and out of the programs.

Prioritising participation

This practice ensures that young peoples’ participation is given a high priority in various activities organised by the SOYDPs, such as in decision-making, planning and reporting processes. The majority of the young people report that ‘I have responsibility for my organisation’s achievements’ (64.3% often, 18.3% sometimes, 82.6% combined). More than 74% of the young people also report that they could influence what they do in their programs. They say that this experience should continue to happen in future at a higher frequency than now. The findings suggest that young people are to some extent involved in the designing of the program activities and in decision-making processes, however, the programs need to invest more in this area (Figure 5).

101

To determine areas in which the programs are succeeding, and those that need to be improved, I summated and calculated averages of all responses on each indicator within the principle recognising strengths. The results are displayed in Figure 5.

2.90 I have responsibility for my organisation's achievements

Young people's I am able to achieve at 2.80 achievements are the right level celebrated

I am able to influence My achievements are what we do in our recognised in the program program 2.70

2.60 Low Low IMPORTANCE High I am able to give feedback on the quality of our program 2.50 3.70 3.80 3.90 4.00 4.10 4.20 4.30 Low FREQUENCY High

Figure 5: A chart of how young people perceive the indicators of good practice within the principle recognising strengths

In relation to the strengths of the programs, Figure 5 shows that program activities provide opportunities for young people to take responsibility for the achievements of their organisations. This is an important aspect of the program as it seeks to develop youth agency rather than adopting a rigid, top-down approach. The programs also provide freedom to achieve at the level that is appropriate for each young person thus, aiming to pay attention to the social particularities of everyone. Conversely, the chart shows that the programs need to improve in the way they celebrate young peoples’ achievements. They also need to provide more room for

102

young people to be involved in influencing, shaping, designing and contributing to the development of the programs.

Principle: Looking out for each other

According to the GYDF, this principle emphasises how young people can be strengthened to care for their own bodies and to look out for each other. In the main, young people need to be supported to position themselves protectively in relation to the challenges they encounter in life. The principle has three good practices—allowing challenges and risks, protecting and supporting, and communication—each linked to a set of three indicators. Young peoples’ responses to each of the practices are analysed below.

Allowing challenges and risks

Although every youth development program has a duty of care for the safety and wellbeing of its participants, the GYDF requires programs to provide young people with graded activities that are challenging and offer opportunity for them to experience success. In the survey, the majority of young people strongly agree that they are able to get things wrong and to learn from their mistakes (69.0% always, 12.1% sometimes, 81.1% combined). Over 50% of the young people report that they understand the risks associated with participation in challenging activities and that they could manage them. These findings suggest that SOYDPs help young people to understand the importance of learning how to engage with and manage some of the risks associated with challenging activities.

Protecting and Supporting

The GYDF points out that all youth organisations have a responsibility to safeguard young people by providing support as they engage with risky activities. In the survey, more than 80% of the young people report that ‘I feel I belong in my organisation’ (72.6% often, 8.5% sometimes, 81.1% combined). This is an indication that the programs help them find a sense of belonging to something worthwhile. Some (66.7%) strongly believe that the programs

103

provided them with clear and constructive feedback and wished it to continue at the same frequency as it does now. Conversely, more than 55% of young people indicated that the programs are not doing enough to actively engage them in risk assessment and planning for safe activities. This is one of the areas on which the programs may need to work.

Communication

According to the GYDF, youth development programs need to design activities that promote communication skills among young people. This can be achieved by providing young people with opportunities to speak and to listen, within teams, across difference classes and races, and within the organisation. In the survey over 60% of the young people strongly agree that program activities provide them with opportunities to interact with people in the community. Some young people (56.9%) report that they understand what is expected of them by their leaders, and wish this situation to continue. The findings suggest that the programs clearly communicate to the young people the processes and outcomes they expect.

To determine the strengths and weaknesses of the programs, the study summed up and calculated averages of all responses on each indicator within the principle looking out for each other. Figure 6 below displays the results.

104

2.90 I am abe to get some things wrong and learn from them I understand what is I feel I belong in my expected of me by my organisation leaders I feel safe to participate 2.80 in activities that involve risks I understand the risks and how to manage I interact with people in them the community as part of my program activities 2.70 I receive clear feedback on where I can strengthen my activities next time 2.60 Low IMPORTANCE High IMPORTANCE Low When I give feedback to my leaders I find it is 2.50 taken seriously I am actively engaged in risk assessment and planning for safe activities 2.40 3.40 3.60 3.80 4.00 4.20 4.40 Low FREQUENCY High

Figure 6: A chart of how young people perceive the indicators of good practice within the principle looking out for each other

Judging from Figure 6, the programs appear to be doing well in at least five areas. They help young people learn how to embrace mistakes, develop a sense of belonging to the organisation, enable young people to feel safe to participate in any activities regardless of associated risks, understand what is expected of them by their leaders, and have opportunities to interact with people in their respective communities. Conversely, the chart shows that the programs need to design more activities that will help young people understand risks and how to manage them. Overall, the program activities supported young people in understanding the importance of looking out for each other.

105

Principle: Building the team

A good team is better than the sum of its members. The GYDF argues that effective team- building development brings together a group of young people from diverse backgrounds, experience and with different skill sets. To test whether the programs encouraged young people to work as a team, the three good practices of the GYDF were analysed:

Fostering teamwork

The GYDF points out that fostering teamwork is the perfect way to take young peoples’ minds off their own challenges, and to help them acknowledge diversity and difference so that they feel more comfortable interacting with peers and other adults in the community. In the survey, young people (77.6%) report that teamwork is the most common element in SOYDPs. They also report that they learn teamwork skills through participation in the program activities (88.8% very important, 10.3% quite important, 99.1% combined). Generally, there was strong agreement among young people that the programs empower them to work as a team to achieve their goals.

Supporting potential (to grow and lead)

The GYDF demonstrates that the strength of any youth development program lies in how it supports young people to grow and to lead others. This may involve recognition of young peoples’ capacities, mentoring of young people, and the development of their leadership skills. Regarding this element, young people felt supported to develop their talents and skills (67.2% always, 12.9 sometimes, 80.1% combined). More than half of the young people strongly agree that they work with adults in program activities and that they are mentored in their organisations. They say that this aspect should continue in future at the same frequency. The results suggest that programs actively support young people to become leaders and change- makers in their communities.

106

Welcoming diversity

Welcoming or recognising diversity is about creating a climate in which every young person feels welcomed and accepted for who he or she is. It follows the idea of respecting but also celebrating the social characteristic of each individual as an important member of society. The survey shows that young people strongly agree that SOYDPs welcome everyone, regardless of age, gender, race and ability. They indicate that they have equal opportunity to take part in any activities organised by their organisations at a level they choose. Over 73% of young people strongly support the statement: ‘I feel welcome to participate in any activities in my organisation’. They wish this continues to remain the case into the future, just as it is now. Some (70.9%) strongly agree with the statement that ‘I can take part in activities that are at my level’.

To identify the strengths and weaknesses of the programs, I summated and calculated averages of all responses on each indicator within the principle building the team. Figure 7 shows young peoples’ perceptions towards various elements within the principle building the team.

107

I feel welcomed to 2.90 I develop teamwork participate in any skills as a participant activities in my organisation Teamwork is part of my I feel supported to organisation experience develop my talents and skills I can take part in any activities in my 2.80 organisation

I have opportunities to meet outside my usual social circle 2.70 I am mentored in my I work in a team with youth organisation adults in program activities Low IMPORTANCE High IMPORTANCE Low

2.60 3.65 3.75 3.85 3.95 4.05 4.15 4.25 4.35 4.45 4.55 Low FREQUENCY High

Figure 7: A chart of how young people perceive the indicators of good practice within the principle building the team

The chart above indicates that the programs appear to be successful in areas like making teamwork a part of organisational experience among young people, welcoming young people to participate in any program activities of their choice, and in supporting young people to develop teamwork skills, talents, and personal skills as participants. Overall, the above chart shows clear confirmation from young people that the programs engage young people in group activities that develop camaraderie, belonging and teamwork.

Doing things of value

According to the GYDF, this value highlights the significance of learning and growing from experience for young people, and the importance of working hard to achieve things that they never thought they could. Within this value, the three principles of: learning and growing from experience and reflection, engaging in the real world, and being active citizens, were analysed. 108

Principle: Learning and growing from experience and reflection

According to the GYDF, it is important for youth development programs to create opportunities for young people to develop practical knowledge and skills through doing and living experiences. To achieve focus, the GYDF recommends three practices: developing skills in life and careers, gaining positive attitudes and building character, and building resilience and capacity.

Developing skills in life and careers

Principally, among other focuses, a youth development program is expected to help young people develop work and career-related skills and other positive attributes. In the survey, young people felt that ‘I learn practical life skills’ to be central to the SOYDPs experience (63.5% said very important, 4.3% quite important, 67.8% combined). Further, ‘I learn work and career- related skills’ was ranked second (57.4% very important, 2.6% quite important, 60.0% combined). The results suggest that the program activities promote and build personal attributes that young people require to successfully thrive in life. Additionally, the results demonstrate that life skills, including work related skills, are a significant part of the programs’ activities and that they are fostered in young people.

Gaining positive attitudes and building character

Within this element, youth development programs are expected to help young people gain positive attributes: personal, societal and cultural attitudes and values. In the survey, the majority of the young people strongly agree that program activities help them learn how to show respect to others (75.0% said often, 12.9% sometimes, 87.9% combined). ‘I learn how to reflect on actions and communications with others’ was the second highest ranked indicator (62.6% often, 20.0% sometimes, 82.6% combined). These results suggest that SOYDPs ensure that the curriculum enhances the development of positive attitudes and attributes.

109

Building resilience and capacity

This element deals with how youth development program helps young people develop a capacity for adapting to change and to dealing with stressful situations in a healthy and flexible manner. In the survey, more than 80% of the young people strongly acknowledge that SOYDPs help them develop the ability to ‘bounce back’ under tough conditions. Young people (81.1%) felt supported in reflecting on their capacities. For some (65.2%), ‘I learn how to work with other people’ was the second highest indicator; with these individuals hoping that this would continue into the future. Importantly, these results suggest that the program activities focus on fostering young peoples’ ability to face and overcome challenges.

In order to identify strengths and weaknesses of the programs, I summed up and calculated averages of all responses on each indicator within the principle learning and growing from experience and reflection. The results are displayed in Figure 8 below.

2.95

I learn how to show respect

2.90

I learn how to solve I am supported to reflect problems on my capacities

2.85 I learn how to work with other people I learn practical life skills

I learn how to cope and I learn work and career- face problems related skills I learn how to reflect on 2.80 actions and communications with others I engage in activities that enable me to combine

Low IMPORTANCE High IMPORTANCE Low the theory I have learned with practice 2.75 4.00 4.20 4.40

Low FREQUENCY High 110

Figure 8: A chart of how young people perceive the indicators of good practice within the principle learning and growing from experience and reflection.

From the chart above, it seems young people have a positive experience of how the programs’ activities help them learn to show respect; however, there is a need for the programs to improve in how they support young people in learning how to solve problems, reflect on their capacities and work with others. They also need to pay extra attention to how they support young people to learn work and career related skills.

Principle: Engaging in the real world

This principle is about how youth development programs endeavour to support young peoples’ participation in the real world. The GYDF links this principle to three practices:

Embracing challenges

Young people strongly agree that SOYDPs expose them to challenging activities which make them feel confident in taking on new challenges. This was reported to be very important and the most frequently occurring element (73.3% often, 19.0% sometimes, 92.3% combined). Over 80% of the young people felt challenged by the activities offered by the programs. The results demonstrate that it is important for youth development programs to provide opportunities for young people to challenge themselves to achieve social, physical or intellectual feats that (from a young person’s perspective) seem daunting. The challenges help young people to learn and grow.

Hands-on experiences

The GYDF emphasises the importance of involving young people in hands-on activities and work with the community. This helps young people to gain skills and knowledge as well as developing positive attributes such as confidence and teamwork. Over 80% of the young people

111

strongly agree that SOYDPs invest in the development of skilled people. They say that this should continue into the future to the same extent.

Contributing to the community

In relation to the practice contributing to the community, young people strongly agree that SOYDPs help them understand the value of serving the community (75.0% said often, 10.3% sometimes, 85.3% combined). More than half of the young people agree that the programs provide them with opportunities to engage with the community in activities that are meaningful for both young people and the community. These results demonstrate the significance of youth development programs in supporting young people to participate in civic activities—in other words, giving back to their community.

To identify the strengths and growth areas of the programs, I summated and calculated averages of all responses on each indicator within the principle engaging in the real world. Figure 9 shows the young peoples’ responses on each of the indicators within the principle engaging in the real world.

112

2.95

I feel confident to take on new challenges I understand the value 2.90 of serving my community

In the program I gain 2.85 In the program I am In the program I learn hands-on-experience supported to learn by from practical activities doing

2.80 In the program I I feel challenged by the engage with wider I am exposed to new activities undertaken in community experiences the program

2.75 In the program I do activities that make a Low IMPORTANCE High IMPORTANCE Low difference in my community

2.70 3.95 4.05 4.15 4.25 4.35 4.45 Low FREQUENCY High

Figure 9: A chart of how young people perceive the indicators of good practice within the principle engaging in the real world.

Judging from the chart above, two items appear as strengths of the SOYDPs. Firstly, the activities help young people understand the value of contributing to their communities. Secondly, the activities build confidence in young people to take on new challenges. In contrast, the chart indicates that the programs need to engage young people more with the wider community and to provide them with more practical skills. Overall, the programs created opportunities for young people to build skills, to interact with adults, and to help their communities.

113

Principle: being active citizens

This principle requires that youth development programs provide young people with opportunities to exercise leadership and actively engage with their communities. To ensure that youth programs engage young people with their communities, this principle emphasises two good practices: building collective identity and leading in communities.

Building collective identity

According to the GYDF, collective identity helps a young person to categorise him or herself as a member of that particular program, thus engaging with the beliefs, behaviours and philosophies related to the program and its members. In the survey, 81.0% of the young people strongly felt that they were part of something bigger than themselves. Some (80.7%) reported that participation in the community activities organised by the programs made them feel confident to take on new challenges. They wish this element to continue into the future to the same extent. These results suggest that participation in program activities helps young people gain a sense of belonging, and, in essence, an identity greater than that of the individual.

Leading in communities

This practice concerns how youth development program prepare and empower young people to become community leaders. The survey suggests that SOYDPs provide young people with access to experiences that foster leadership skills, confidence and awareness. For instance, young people report that they understand what is expected of them as leaders in the community (71.7% said is very important, 3.5% quite important, 75.2% combined). Some (65.5%) strongly agree that, through program activities, they lead in a way that makes a difference in their community. They hope that this element continues into the future.

To analyse the strengths and weaknesses of the programs in relation to the principle being active citizens, this study summed up and calculated averages of all responses on each

114

indicator. Figure 10 shows the young peoples’ responses on each of the indicators within the principle being active citizens.

2.90 In the program I experience being part of something bigger than myself I feel confident to take on new challenges 2.85 I understand the value of my organisation I understand what is expected of me as a leader in the community 2.80 In the program I lead activities that make a difference in the community

2.75

2.70 In the program I engage with the community on a regular basis Low IMPORTANCE High IMPORTANCE Low

2.65 3.70 3.80 3.90 4.00 4.10 4.20 4.30 4.40 4.50 4.60 Low FREQUENCY High

Figure 10: A chart of how young people perceive the indicators of good practice within the principle being active citizens

The chart above suggests that the programs are successful in helping young people develop a collective identity. They have made young people feel as though they are part of something bigger than merely a program in itself. In addition, they have developed confidence in young people to take on new challenges. Conversely, the chart indicates that the programs need to improve on how they can make young people participate more actively in planning and leading community activities or events.

115

Finally, I determined the strong and weak areas of the SOYDPs in relation to the six principles of the GYDF. To do so, I summed up and calculated averages of all responses on each principle. Figure 11 shows young peoples’ perceptions and experiences in relation to each of the principles.

2.86 Learning and Engaging in the growing from real world 2.84 experience and reflection

2.82

Being active 2.80 citizens

2.78 Building the team

Recognising 2.76 strength

2.74 Low IMPORTANT High IMPORTANT Low Looking out for 2.72 each other 4.00 4.05 4.10 4.15 4.20 4.25 4.30 Low FREQUENCY High

Figure 11: A chart of how young people perceive and experience each of the GYDF principles.

From the chart above, the principles learning and growing from experience and reflection, engaging in the real world, and being active citizens seem to be key strengths of the SOYDPs. These principles are regarded as the most important and are judged by young people to be happening frequently. The chart also shows growth areas to which SOYDPs need to pay extra attention. These areas include practices that lead to team-building and strength recognition. The principle looking out for each other was given the least value by the young people. A detailed discussion on the strengths and weaknesses of the SOYDPs is provided in chapter six of this report.

116

Overall, the results from the survey suggest that involvement in a coordinated, progressive series of activities and experiences puts young people in a better position to successfully overcome challenges in life, as well as realising personal goals, thus becoming socially, cognitively, emotionally, morally and physically more competent.

Section Two: Qualitative Results

This section presents results generated from focus groups that ran shortly after the survey was administered. Twenty people participated in the discussions, of which fourteen were young people comprising two focus groups. The remaining six people were adults (volunteers, staff, and program providers/managers) who formed their own focus group. In brief, focus groups were necessary to complement qualitative findings, as they helped the researcher: explore participants’ perceptions of the development of life skills and knowledge, and the application of both; the uniqueness of the program; how the program relates to the interests of the community and the sports setting; strengths and growth areas; and to explore any recommendations participants may have had for future improvements to the programs. These issues relate to the two overarching values established in the GYDF.

To analyse focus group data, I followed the procedure described in the methodology chapter under Data analysis section. Essentially, the analysis involved extraction of words and concepts from interview transcriptions to generate themes and subthemes. This was consistent with a thematic analysis approach espoused by Glaser and Straus (1976). Each of the main focus group questions stood as a theme from which subthemes were generated (Figure 12).

117

Figure 12: Themes and subthemes as extracted from participants' responses.

118

What do you think young people need in order to thrive in life?

In response to the above question four subthemes were raised by the participants:

Basic needs

Participants commented that, for some young Tanzanians, the transition to adulthood can bring about a number of challenges in meeting their basic needs. They indicated that finding high quality education and safe and affordable housing in Tanzania was no longer easy for the majority of young people. Similarly, young people felt that food, clothing, love, security and good health were not part of their daily experience in the community in which they lived. Young people from Dar Es Salaam lamented that they were missing the care and support from parents and caregivers.

Life has become tough, I am struggling with school, no one looks after me and my siblings, I have to work hard to get money otherwise we will starve. (Young person, 18years)

From parents and caregivers, young people were asking for things like learning materials, encouragement, and positive guidance and counselling about education. All participants emphasised strongly that basic needs must be met to ensure the long-term wellbeing of young people in their communities.

Preparedness

Focus groups reported that young people need to be schooled (preparedness) in various competencies, ranging from academic, social and vocational to cultural. Young people strongly argued that the life-changing qualities of training would be of great benefit for their future; that they need to be taught how to fish rather than being given a fish. A young person had this to say:

119

Sir, I would be very happy if you give me money today, but how about tomorrow? Give me something (mentioning a work-related skill) sustainable that will get me out of here, that can make me somebody in five years...understand? (Young person, 23 years)

The sort of work related skills that young people desired were those that could be locally applied, such as modern farming skills (especially in areas where rains are not consistent), animal keeping (cattle, goats and chicken), construction and driving skills.

Connectedness

Participants described connectedness as establishing positive relationships and experiences with others. Specifically, young people pointed out that they need relationships and experiences that will help them develop a sense of belonging—to be attached to family and community— and to feel valued for the contributions they make to others and their community as a whole. Young people were very pleased when their parents and other community members appreciated the activities they were involved in that contributed to their community, activities such as cleaning up the environment and tree planting. This is what a 19-year-old female had to say when she was asked what community means to her:

As for me, community is a group of individuals/people who associate and live in my community. These people can be my leaders, trainers and everyone living in my community. Also, community it can be people whom we can share emotions, values and depend on each other. For example, parents, family members, and team mates. (Young female, 19yrs)

According to the young people, the feeling that they are valued and accepted in their community is likely to help them improve their sense of self, their psychological wellbeing, their school performance, and their social competence. Finally, they added that connectedness may contribute to their emotional wellbeing (security, belonging and identity).

120

Life skills

Life skills, particularly confidence, were emphasised by young people as being things they needed to thrive in life. They commented that sufficient confidence would most likely support them in being persistent, assertive, engaged and enthusiastic. One young person articulated that:

It requires confidence for a young person to participate in some of the program activities, for instance, being an umpire in a soccer match or being a team captain can be stressful and distressing at times. If I had no confidence I think I would have given up with the tasks. (Young person, 16yrs)

Young people went on to indicate that life skills helped them to make safe and informed decisions, to avoid people and situations that could jeopardise them or corrupt their behaviour, and to make the right social connections. This last point paved the way for me to ask the second question.

What is your understanding of life skills?

Participants expressed a clear understanding of the term life skills by using a mix of different descriptions such as abilities, competencies and knowledge that can help young people thrive in life. They connected these descriptions to certain topics in a local context; for instance, the ability to make a good decision was strongly connected to decision-making around sexual behaviours which could lead to contraction of HIV/AIDS, whereas competencies were more prominent in discussions about respect for others, critical thinking, communication, and problem-solving. Adults (volunteers, and program providers/managers) connected life skills to behaviour, knowledge or understanding that young people adopt and use to effectively deal with the challenges associated with daily life and work. When participants were asked in a follow-up question why life skills are necessary for young people, there was consensus among them that life skills help young people to gain refusal and negotiation skills to protect themselves from negative influences and situations. One 18-year-old male commented:

121

I have learnt that life skills are important particularly when a young person learns how to make sensible choices and apply the skills in appropriate time to protect himself from the influence of other people in this life. As for me I cannot take drugs just because my best friend is using them, drugs will ruin my future. (Young male, 18yrs)

A young girl from Arusha stated:

As a young girl, I have made a decision not to get pregnant until I am physically and emotionally matured…even after that I will only involve myself in responsible and safe sexual practices. (Young girl, 15yrs)

Young peoples’ views indicate that life skills help them to understand themselves, as well as leading to growth in personal responsibility. The responses also suggest that SOYDPs may have influenced their understanding of the term “life skills”.

What type of skills-building experience does your sport-oriented youth development program offer?

When participants were asked about the life skills-building experiences that their programs offer, educational sports-related activities ranked at the top of the list. They reported that educational sports-related activities were used to impart life skills that empowered them to make positive decisions that would protect them and promote both their health and positive social relationships within community settings. The activities provided young people with opportunities to explore and develop different interests. The following are selected, direct interview quotes highlighting participants’ perspectives:

Through sporting activities, we have been encouraged to work as a team and communicate with each other and make quick but viable decisions especially when we are in a game situation (competition). The experiences have made me learn that speed and precision in decision-making also matter in the life outside the sporting world. (Young person 20yrs)

122

Through simulation games we emphasise that all young people have equal rights and need to be respected in society…We do all this just to help change things in our community. (Volunteer)

We use soccer drills and techniques to raise awareness on malaria and safe sex practices to both young people and community members. (Program manager)

It was also reported that youth organisations provide young people with opportunities to engage in civic activities that benefit the community:

I am proud of my organisation, last month we were asked to engage as volunteers in delivering HIV/AIDS awareness to young people. With the support of our leaders, we went out into the community and ran workshops to youth on sexual health. We also used drama and traditional dances to deliver messages about the effects of stigmatising people living with HIV. Very educational! (Young person 19yrs)

The comment above is an example of community activities in which young people participate, and which, according to program providers/managers, staff and volunteers, encourage community awareness, involvement and contribution, and improve young peoples’ confidence and self-esteem.

Along with sporting activities, young people were also actively participating in planning, organising and managing sports bonanzas. The events were used to emphasise selected themes such as: the importance of using mosquito nets to prevent mosquito bites and hence malaria; the importance of hand washing (hygienic behaviours); and the impact of corruption on the community. Young people from Dar Es Salaam informed the study that they were actively involved in the campaigns in favour of women's emancipation both through arts programs and through performing activities focused on the cleanliness of their community such as cleaning water trenches and picking up rubbish. When asked how young people were benefitting from such activities, staff and volunteers said that they helped young people develop leadership skills and good citizenship.

123

What do you consider to be the strengths of your program compared to other youth organisations you know about?

In relation to the strengths of SOYDPs, participants mentioned four areas:

Firstly, transferability of the skills acquired from the program activities. A young person claimed that:

Most of the things we learn and do are also applicable to other social domains in the community. For example, we can still use soccer as a communication tool to 'kick' malaria out of our community. (Young person, 17yrs)

Another young person who also works as a part time broadcaster in a local radio station commented that:

As a young leader, the program has empowered me with leadership skills, particularly teamwork, confidence, communication and organisation skills. I am no longer shy and can confidently plan, organise and deliver my radio programs with clarity to listeners. (Young person, 23yrs)

These responses suggest that the program content was relevant and that young people appreciated that they could apply the knowledge gained in real life settings.

Secondly, support that young people receive through participation in SOYDPs. For instance, young people described their leaders as people who treated them with respect and who were supportive at all times. One participant had this to comment:

Our leaders are not controlling us; instead we are free to choose what we want to do, decide on how we will do it, and with whom. They have always been there whenever we needed them… They are amazing people! (Young person, 19yrs)

124

Thirdly, young people informed the study that SOYDPs offered relevant content in the context of addressing some of their problems of young people and providing hope for positive change. One volunteer stated that:

Young people in our community are subjected to several risk factors that have led some of them to engage in unhealthy behaviours such as drug and alcohol use, unsafe sexual practice, violence, crime and truancy or school drop-out. So, our program activities include those that inform young people of what is morally good and what is wrong and consequences of their actions. In fact, we foster moral competence. (Volunteer)

Young people demonstrated that HIV/AIDS education provided by the programs has yielded significant positive outcomes in their knowledge of, attitudes toward, and perceptions of people with HIV. Young people also indicated that the programs utilised sport for environmental improvement. They were involved in planting trees, street cleaning and the digging of drain trenches to reduce the flooding caused by heavy rains (Dar Es Salaam). In short, there was a consensus among participants that SOYDPs have added value to each individual young person and to the community at large.

Fourthly, social contribution to the community was mentioned as one of the strengths of the SOYDPs. One program manager reported that:

Our organisation organises sporting events such as sport tournaments and bonanzas. These programs attract a cross-section of the community, making them an effective way of developing social networks in the community. (Program manager)

According to the participants, sporting events are used as focal points for personal interaction and community engagement that effectively strengthen community cohesion and resilience. One program provider from Arusha commented that:

Our programs emphasise on social interaction—which we believe to be important for building a supportive environment to support changes in behaviour and attitudes. We

125

believe through social interaction we will able to reduce social isolation and build social inclusion in the community. (Program provider)

Similarly, young people stated that their community was subsequently benefitting from their newfound knowledge being shared with family and community members. One prevalent example shows young people discussing the topic of HIV/AIDS trans-generationally, which had helped to reduce the negative stigma that is normally directed towards people suffering from this virus.

What would you consider to be the weaknesses of your youth sport program?

In relation to this theme, participants were required to identify areas of weakness on which the programs needed to work. Poor communication between the program leaders and local leaders was mentioned as the main problem. Participants indicated that poor communication had led to several conflicts and misunderstandings. It was reported that there were incidents in which youth programs organised events for young people without informing, or asking for consent from local leaders; which is a necessary requirement for programs that require utilisation of a publicly shared domain. Consequently, the events were halted as they interfered with or coincided with other community activities. In one specific incident, program leaders either knowingly or unknowingly bypassed local community leaders when organising an anti- corruption campaign. Consequently, the campaign was not supported at its initial stages, and failed to achieve its objectives. Confirming this was a local leader based in Dar Es Salaam who complained that youth sports programs barely consulted them in their events:

The leaders of this organisation [naming the organisation] do their things as if they are not part of us. They barely involve us in whatever event they plan for. Whenever they have an event, they just discuss it among themselves. You will just hear about it may be a day before it happens or on the day of the event especially when they are stuck and need your help. Anyway, we will see where they will get to. (Local leader on personal interview)

Another problem is the perceptions of some community members of young people as program participants and of the programs themselves. As mentioned by a staff member:

126

Some community members have negative attitudes towards sports; they intimidate their children from participating in any youth development program…. They are not ready to let their children participate in sports, and if a child decides to participate out of his or her parent’s will, he or she would be a victim of corporal punishment. (Staff)

This study identified that some community members incorrectly perceive the young people who participate in the programs as only those with chronic problems: for example, thugs who commit crime, are violent, vandalise houses, and disrupt communities and schools; and (drug) users who drink, practise unsafe sex, and prefer hedonistic lifestyles. To some parents, SOYDPs were just places where young people hang out and continue with their immoral behaviour. As a result, there existed some reluctance among some parents to let their children step into the programs.

Girls were reported to be the predominant victims of parents’ negative preconceptions of and attitudes towards youth sports. Using traditional and religious grounds, some community members, particularly Christians and Muslims, consider girls as physically weak and less capable than boys, hence they would want to protect their daughters, supervise them, and shield them from (perceived) threats to their safety, and physical, sexual, and mental wellbeing. For instance, the study was informed by the program providers/managers that some Muslim parents were reluctant to allow their children, girls in particular, to participate in SOYDPs because they believed that the programs would corrupt them morally due to the amount of time they spend with boys and the attire required during sporting events.

How can your program be strengthened to make it more effective or successful?

Participants indicated that effectiveness and sustainability of SOYDPs depend upon the success of various factors. Four main areas surfaced in the discussion: infrastructure, collaboration/networking, program awareness and investment.

127

Infrastructure

Participants suggested that basic infrastructure is required to support implementation of sport- oriented youth development program activities. They identified the need for improving sports facilities, including training grounds, and improving meeting facilities and/or other suitable buildings with shelter and shade that young people can use during their activities. They argued that upgrades to existing facilities or construction of new infrastructure would not only encourage young people to attend but also enhance participation in various codes of SOYDPs.

Collaboration/Networking

Participants perceived that effectiveness and sustainability of SOYDPs depend upon developing collaborative partnerships with the community which, in their opinion, should include building a broad base of support of community stakeholders. They recommended that SOYDPs harness the guidance, involvement, and support of community members and local leaders, and that skilled youth workers be employed to propose ideas and lead activities in meaningful ways. They added that local leaders in particular should be involved at all stages of program development to encourage them to buy into the programs and actively support the programs’ goals and guiding principles. As mentioned by one volunteer:

Our community comprises of people from different backgrounds with varying skills. So, developing collaborative partnerships with community stakeholders is very important. It broadens the possibilities of our youth to exploit opportunities beyond neighbourhood boundaries. (Volunteer)

The message participants were trying to convey is that successful delivery of the expectations and goals of the youth program requires the community to take ownership of the program. By engaging the community, clashes that create gaps between the program and community are minimised, while cohesion is improved such that local leaders recognise, appreciate and support the program’s activities in their community.

128

Provide Awareness

Participants suggested that SOYDPs need to disseminate information through education and awareness activities in relation to youth development issues and local community needs. They argued that it is important for SOYDPs to share information and deliver positive messages regarding the importance of their program activities for youth development.

One participant from Dar Es Salaam shared her inspirational testimony that:

My father used to get angry at my trainer over my participation into youth sport program. He would scream and curse at my trainer every time they met on the streets. At home, he would shout and even lock me inside whenever I asked for his permission to attend youth programs. One day he was invited by a local leader to attend one of the workshops organised by our youth organisation. From that workshop, his perception towards youth sport program was totally transformed. What he heard and saw made him find values in what the organisation was doing to young people and decided to let me attend the program unconditionally. (Young girl, 17yrs)

What focus group participants are trying to suggest here is that it is a benefit to the community to understand the youth sport program, its effect and significance in the lives of young people, the goals and plans of the program, and the ways in which the community can assist and be involved in program activities.

Investment

Participants highlighted the need for individual, group and government support to ensure the sustainability of SOYDPs. They suggested support in the form of government policies, funds, or materials such as sporting infrastructure, sports gear, and relevant literature. They called for the government to develop policies that increase key support and opportunities for all young people, such as opportunities for out-of-school sport-oriented development programs or youth involvement in civic activities through volunteering. This was confirmed by one of the young participants:

129

I think it is high time for sport-based youth development program to encourage interested people to invest in youth. We, young people, need more training in order to improve our decision-making skills if we are to excel in life. (Young person 21yrs)

In the view of the participants, investing in youth development and strengthening the human services workforce in youth sport programs can help young people overcome the challenges of life as they navigate adolescence and prepare for adulthood.

Cultural awareness

Participants recommended that SOYDPs become more mindful of cultural sensitivities and strive to provide meaningful, culturally relevant, gender- and age-appropriate sporting activities. As one young person commented:

I am from this place and would like to inform program providers that before they introduce their programs, it is important they take time and effort to understand our culture. It will pay off in the long run. (Young person 22yrs)

When asked why it is important for programs to consider their culture, one participant stated that:

Understanding of our culture is a good way for program providers to gain a comprehensive overview of our community. They will know the context of our community, which will help them tailor their program objectives to our norms and culture, thus increase chances of success. (Volunteer)

Generally, participants called for the programs to understand and respect the existing cultural differences among community members. Programs cannot adopt a one-size-fits-all approach; programs that work in Dar Es Salaam may not adequately accommodate the unique needs and strengths of young people in Arusha.

130

Conclusion

The results presented in this section arose from two analyses of the data that were collected from three categories of participants using survey questionnaires and focus group discussions. The first phase provided analyses of the data generated by the survey questionnaire. This survey highlighted the practice of the SOYDPs in relation to how they value and do things of value for young people. The results suggest that SOYDPs are working towards supporting young people to learn and grow from experience and reflection, engage in the real world, and become active citizens. The survey also identified that the programs needed to improve in areas that foster team building and strength recognition. The second phase, focus groups, provided the study with crucial insights into participants’ interpretations and perceptions of the practice of SOYDPs in relation to how they value and do things of value for young people in Tanzania.

The next chapter discusses the findings from the two data collection sources. The chapter will correlate quantitative data from the survey with qualitative findings from focus groups and observations to ascertain whether they reflect similar findings. The chapter will also attempt to combine, compare and integrate analysed data collected from quantitative and qualitative data sources into a coherent whole. Interpretation of the data will be conducted with a comparison of empirical evidence from relevant literature. Ideas, insights and quotes from the participants, drawn from the thematic analysis undertaken, will be utilised to complement and more fulsomely clarify the findings presented in the quantitative results. Further, responses from this chapter will be used to assess the reaction of the participants to the survey and enrich discussion of the study’s findings.

131

Chapter Six: DISCUSSION

Introduction

This chapter discusses the research findings using the Generic Youth Development Framework (GYDF) and the youth and life skills development through sports literature. It draws upon the results presented in the previous chapter. While the purpose of this study is to investigate youth and life skills development in Tanzania by examining the quality of practice and nature of life skills acquisition in young people participating in SOYDPs, the study was guided by one main research question: To what extent are SOYDPs in Tanzania valuing and doing things of value for young people? In relation to the main research question, the study developed three specific questions. This chapter addresses the research questions of this study, now restated:

a) To what extent and how do SOYDPs recognise young peoples’ strengths, build teamwork, and enable young people to look out for each other? b) To what extent and how do SOYDPs engage young people with the real world, support young people to become active citizens and to be reflective, resilient learners? c) What life skills do young people gain from being exposed to SOYDPs?

Valuing Young People

One critical question that seems to be often overlooked by youth development programs is why young people remain engaged in their programs. The GYDF emphasises that positive social relationships between young people and adult leaders is a vital element in keeping young people engaged and connected in any youth development program (Wierenga & Wyn, 2011). Positive social relationships contribute to positive outcomes such as the acceptance of social responsibility. Additionally, they are associated with improved emotion regulation, empathic self-efficacy and prosocial behaviour (McDonough, Ullrich-French, Anderson-Butcher, Amorose, & Riley, 2013). Analysis of the indicators of good practice demonstrated positive experiences in relation to all three principles within the first GYDF overarching value— Valuing young people. Of them all, the principle building the team was highly rated by the young people participating in SOYDPs, followed by recognising strengths.

132

Building the Team

Team building is one of the central components of the youth development framework (Wierenga & Wyn, 2011). The GYDF demonstrates that the strength of any youth development program lies in how it supports young people to grow and lead, fosters partnerships, and welcomes diversity in its activities. The current survey results demonstrate that the most highly valued experiences by young Tanzanians who participate in the programs are those that foster teamwork (Figure 7). Over 77% of the young people agreed that SOYDPs often encourage them to work as a team. More than 99.1% of the young people also report the acquisition of teamwork skills through program activities. During the focus group interviews, some young people mentioned being involved in collaborative experiences, group activities, and networking with teammates. These young people talk about the importance of teamwork skills and affirm that:

Every time we meet for training we get involved in team building icebreakers, ideas and team building games such as team architecture (tower building). The activities are full of fun, but to enjoy the fun you must work with friends. Through them, I have learnt how to deal with challenges related to teamwork, for example listening, and to achieve shared goals with fellow teammates. (Young person 21yrs)

Our group activities make us work as a team; we respect each other and agree to disagree when we differ in opinions, and accept decisions reached in our group. I have also learnt to understand that in our team we are not the same, each one of us has a different ability. I wish our community would work as how we do in our program. (Young person 17 years)

Young peoples’ comments were supported by adults. One volunteer commented that:

Through sporting activities and simulation games we emphasise that unity is power and that when all young people respect each other and work as one to accomplish a goal, everyone enjoys the benefit. …We do all this just to help change things in our community. (Volunteer)

The comments above confirm what other authors such as Hartmann and Kwauk (2011) and 133

Holt et al. (2008) have reported in their work. Holt and colleagues (2008) demonstrate that team-building activities can help young people acquire teamwork skills: communication, planning and task coordination, decision-making, problem-solving, and goal-setting. Hartmann and Kwauk (2011) add that young people can acquire social skills, such as respecting the rights and feelings of others, and conform to the objectives of the team with regard to teamwork, bonding and belonging. Team building activities, such as morning musters and drills offered by Cadet Programs, helped Australian Army Cadets to develop teamwork skills (Wierenga & Wyn, 2012). In the same vein, a study which examined how young Canadians learn life skills by participating in high school soccer teams found three outcomes related to life skills: initiative, respect and teamwork (Holt et al., 2008). Teamwork was the only skill that young Canadians claimed that they could learn and transfer to other areas of life. Holt and colleagues (2008) suggest that young people in Canada, similar to young Tanzanians, demonstrated the skills not as a result of direct teaching from adult trainers but incidentally through the strengths in the programs, which enhanced the development of these skills. The nature of the SOYDPs requires young people to participate in team sports in which they are introduced to the ideals of fair play. As demonstrated in the literature review, fair play fosters social capital outcomes (that is, bonding, trusting, seeking support or supporting others) which may lead to the development of human capital, a valuable outcome emphasised in broader society (Fullinwider, 2006).

Teamwork is very important in the contemporary world where an individual cannot work in complete isolation from co-workers or a supervisor. While young people can claim responsibility for outcomes in their lives, it is still important that they learn how to share, collaborate and assist one another, and to celebrate achievement of goals together with peers. At some point in life one will require other people’s strengths and emotional support. In the labour market, employers need to be reassured that individuals provide a good ‘fit’ for their organisation—that they are able to develop networks and closer positive relationships with colleagues and make valuable contributions. In the context of a school setting, teamwork promotes deep learning, especially when it is accompanied by meaningful group interaction, problem-solving, mutual dialogue, cooperation and collaboration (Tarricone & Luca, 2002).

134

In accordance with the GYDF, the SOYDPs incorporated teamwork through instructional play such that young people learnt about collaboration and respect. There is strong awareness among young people that a good team is better than the sum of its members, and that the program activities help to build camaraderie, teamwork and belonging.

Looking out for each other

For young people to thrive, they need to belong and feel connected to a positive, caring family, organisation, or community. According to the GYDF, positive social relationships help young people remain engaged and connected, hence developing a greater sense of personal identity and increased understanding of others in the world around them. In the survey, over 80% of young people from both Arusha and Dar Es Salaam reported experiencing a sense of belonging while welcoming participation in activities that involved taking risks (Figure 6). They also indicated that they could learn from adverse situations. These experiences were also reflected in focus group discussions where young people indicated that they were happy to participate in the programs’ activities since the programs offered caring relationships. Specifically, they received love, friendship and affirmation from peers and adults, while leaders and other members of staff acted professionally, were available for assistance, and treated young people with respect. This kind of environment afforded young people the freedom to work together with other peers and adults to realise shared goals, as well as practise problem-solving and decision-making skills. In the main, the current SOYDPs sustain caring and healthy relationships among young people and with adults, with the aim of reinforcing the goals and values of the programs through trust, fun, and positive role modelling. The impact of a caring environment has also been reported in the Australian Army Cadets program survey (Wierenga & Wyn, 2012). Young Australians indicated that the Cadets program helped them feel safe and supported in taking appropriate risks, and they wanted the program to continue running with the same regularity.

The GYDF insists that a caring, protective and supportive environment is an important determinant of young people remaining engaged within a youth development program

135

(Wierenga & Wyn, 2012). What the SOYDPs in Tanzania are doing is consistent with the principles of youth development which, according to Pittman et al. (2011), include promotion of caring adult-youth relationships. Pittman and colleagues add that a caring environment makes young people feel safe, valued and supported, which in turn helps them develop a sense of belonging to the program. It provides young people with opportunities to develop connections to others, develop life skills, and utilise those skills to give back to their communities; as a result it increases their ability to thrive (Perkins & Noam, 2007). In the opinion of participants, SOYDPs in Tanzania seem to be on the same page with the GYDF and other modern youth development frameworks that emphasise the provision of tangible activities that encourage group interaction, build interpersonal relationships, and help young people feel protected, thus ensuring that they remain engaged in the program and realise their full potential (Heck & Subramaniam, 2009; Merkel, 2013; Pittman et al., 2011; Wierenga & Wyn, 2011). Reflecting on the GYDF, the design of the programs enhances what is taught in training by extending young peoples’ learning beyond the organisation and into the community, while helping to foster the development of a sense of looking out for each other.

Doing things of value

The second value of GYDF—doing things of value—highlights the experiences of young people in the conduct of sport-oriented youth development program activities. The value consists of three principles: learning and growing from experience, engaging in the real world, and being an active citizen. The principles describe how and why young people participate and remain engaged, and how SOYDPs support them to grow and become both active citizens and reflective, resilient learners. While the survey indicates positive experiences in all three principles, and good practices within this value, the principle engaging in the real world was most valued by the young people participating in SOYDPs. The principle engaging in the real world was followed by learning and growing from experience and reflection, and being an active citizen.

136

Engaging in the real world

The element engaging in the real world was most valued by young people participating in the SOYDPs. This supports the literature which argues that youth sport programs provide a context in which young people can learn how to engage in the real world by embracing challenges and contributing to their community through active citizenship (Hall, 2007; Lopez & Moore, 2006). To my knowledge, there is no empirical study that has reported a relationship between youth sport and civic engagement in Tanzania; however, results from the survey indicate that SOYDPs help young people understand the value of contributing, or giving back, to their communities (75.0% said often, 10.3% sometimes, 85.3% combined). Focus group participants support the claim in reporting that young people civically engage in various public activities as volunteers. They mentioned examples of civic activities to include organising and managing youth sport tournaments and bonanzas, participating in awareness campaigns on diverse social issues such as the problem of women’s emancipation, issues of corruption, HIV/AIDS, and participating in environmental improvement activities such as picking up rubbish and tree planting. According to the GYDF, participation in civic activities is one way of expressing active citizenship and one of the most important steps towards building healthy communities. Young Tanzanians are introduced to physical education and sporting activities for the purpose of learning valuable skills, habits, values and positive character traits that may help them to become more engaged, active and responsible citizens (Mafumiko & Pangani, 2008). Involvement of young people in volunteering activities builds social capital for young people, enhances upward mobility, and promotes a range of positive outcomes that can benefit not only the young people but also their communities.

Over 80% of the surveyed young people agreed that their organisations invested in the development of skilled people who can fit well into the community. They report in the survey that they are often exposed to new, challenging activities which instil in them confidence and determination (73.3% often, 19.0% sometimes, 92.3% combined). According to staff and volunteers, some of these activities are challenging but carefully designed to help young people become good citizens and to develop leadership skills. They are carefully structured to improve young peoples’ confidence and self-esteem. During focus group interviews, young people admitted that challenging, such as officiating at sporting matches and sport bonanzas, and

137

participating in awareness campaigns, enhanced their confidence to take on new challenges. In most of these activities adults did not predetermine the goals; instead, young people were given a voice in choosing what to do, setting goals and implementing plans.

Participation of young Tanzanians in civic activities has also been reported by White (2012) and Wijeyesekera (2011). White and Wijeyesekera both argue that civic activities improve leadership qualities and community engagement, while enhancing a spirit of altruism and loyalty. Research on the other hand indicates that active citizenship empowers people, particularly young people, to build up their skills and talents and to engage in economic, political and social interactions, thus encouraging them to become leaders of positive change within their communities (Blomfield & Barber, 2010; Coalter, 2007; Collins, 2014; Crabbe & Brown, 2004; Putnam, 2001; Zakus, 1999). Findings from this study support those of other research reports suggesting that participation in SOYDPs promotes civic engagement that may eventually build social capital and valuable skills that can foster upward mobility and promote a range of positive outcomes that are important for young people and their communities.

Learning and growing from experience and reflection

Learning and growing from experience featured as one of the most valued principles experienced by young people. This is an indication that the programs were committed to actively engaging young people in hands-on experiences. The experiences equipped young people with skills for life and for work, and instilled in them positive attributes necessary to thrive in life. In the survey, more than 80% of the young people comment that they learn practical skills, how to show respect, solve problems, and reflect on their capacities. The same percentage of young people report that the programs employ experiential learning techniques and wished they would continue to do this in future. Of all the skills that young people acquired, learning how to show respect outweighed them all (Figure 8). During focus group interviews, participants commented that in the programs they learnt how they should treat players from opposing teams, officials and fans with respect, courtesy and consideration. These findings echo the argument presented by Rutten et al. (2007) that, apart from acquiring sporting skills,

138

participation in youth sport programs helps young people learn about the various values, rules and norms for both sport and society. In essence, young people participating in SOYDPs acquired knowledge about the concept of fair play which, according to Renson (2008), can become a universal philosophy of respect for others and respect for rules in various contexts of life ranging from sporting arenas, politics, workplaces and other competitive environments.

Reflective practice is significant to young people, particularly for self-development. It contributes to future personal growth as it addresses how young people think and feel about themselves and about situations in the past, present and in the future. In the survey, over 81% of the young people stated that they had opportunities to learn how to reflect upon their actions and capacities. This was strongly supported during focus group interviews where young people claimed that at the end of every activity, whether this was a community activity or sporting event, they had opportunities to sit down and reflect on the activity in the presence of adult mentors. This helped them make sense of what they had been doing while engaged in the activity. In the process of reflection about experience, they learnt such things as how to control anger and stress, deal with success and failure, and value and respect diversity (through demonstration). In other words, according to the GYDF, reflection on actions and experiences helps young people to become resilient, that is, to develop adaptive capacities. According to (Dewey, 1986), reflection upon an experience and application of the new knowledge or idea leads to true learning or real understanding of the situation; otherwise experiences (without reflection) may not be educative. Opportunities to reflect upon actions and activities mean that the experiences can be meaningful and positive. Reflection also leads to improved awareness of thoughts, attitudes, values or actions, and helps young people consider other possible solutions to a challenging problem. It is the bedrock of effective leadership, particularly in complex and multicultural workplaces (Roberts & Westville, 2008). Effective leaders are reflective, in that they take time to consider their actions and decisions, and hypothesise how to learn from them.

These results demonstrate that young people perceive sport-oriented youth development program activities to be meaningful and purposeful. They have demonstrated what the GYDF

139

emphasises, that is, they create opportunities that encourage young people to develop practical knowledge and skills through lived experience. Young people were involved in the planning and organising of the processes of their programs and of community activities alongside adults. Consequently, they were able to interact with people of different ages, cultures and ethnicities. They worked together with adults as equal partners, with roles and responsibilities for each group well defined. Such experiences helped young people to understand the value of respect for one another’s ideas and contributions and the importance of establishing positive relationships with adults, while helping them develop a positive attitude towards work and community.

Being Active Citizens

The GYDF strongly advocates that being an active citizen leads to building a collective identity. While this study could not find any documented aims and objectives in relation to developing active citizenship from the studied SOYDPs, program activities clearly demonstrate that they envision promoting active citizenship among young people in order to develop social capital and valuable skills. This is demonstrated in the survey where 81% of the young people felt themselves to be part of a bigger program and identified themselves with the broader youth organisation. This arises from the fact that young people engage with the thoughts, behaviours and ideas attached to the broader organisation and its members. As argued by Chau (2007), participation in community sporting activities fosters collective identity, among other things. Chau goes on to assert that participants of a smaller program that is part of a larger program tend to develop a sense that they belong to a larger program and identify themselves with that broad program, that is, they develop a collective identity.

Of equal importance, the SOYDPs provided young people with social support and a shared identity that was potentially able to influence their day-to-day functioning. Theories of collective identity demonstrate that a young person who participates in a youth program is likely to categorise him/herself as an affiliate of that program and thus engage with the philosophies of that program. Building on theories of collective identity, Futch (2013) adds

140

that collective identities among young people may be a result of self-categorisation and recognition of group membership. While evidence supporting the role of SOYDPs in building collective identity is somewhat weaker in Tanzania, however, findings from this study suggest that promotion of community or group activities fosters the building of collective identity that is associated with positive youth development outcomes such as increasing social capital and respect. The group activities also support young people to work in cooperation with adults as partners and to be actively involved in community activities, not simply to be service recipients. In this way, young people turn from being potential liabilities to assets.

The survey indicates the high frequency with which young people agree that SOYDPs prepare them to become active citizens (Figure 11). For instance, 80.7% of young people report that the programs provide them with opportunities to engage in various community activities as a group. The activities have built in them the confidence to take on new challenges. They have also encouraged young people to categorise themselves as members of the community, and to understand what is expected of them as leaders; specifically, as people who can bring about change in their communities. Through focus group discussions, participants commented on the importance of being connected to the community. In the view of participants, connectedness helps them develop a sense of belonging, of attachment to one’s family and community, and to feel valued for the contributions they make to others and to their community as a whole.

Growth areas of the programs

While this study envisaged the development of an understanding of how SOYDPs value and do things of value for young Tanzanians, it also explored areas that were identified as important by participants but were not given attention by the programs. Analysis of the surveys shows considerable variation between what young people anticipated from SOYDPs and what they experienced. This study refers to these as growth areas in the programs or as weaknesses that the programs need to address. One growth area that the programs needed to work on, as reported in the survey, was the constant focus on young peoples’ achievements. Though celebration of young peoples’ achievements was reported to be important, it was not happening as hoped by the young people. The GYDF points out that celebrating young peoples’

141

achievements is a part of good practice within a youth development framework and a vital component in supporting young peoples’ progress and engagement with program activities (Wierenga & Wyn, 2012). It makes young people feel successful and valued, and helps them to believe in themselves as contributors to the community, thus stimulating their aspirations. By recognising the significance of supporting and celebrating young peoples’ achievements, SOYDPs demonstrate how they value young peoples’ strengths, thereby operating in accord with world-class youth development practice. It therefore remains important for youth programs, adults, community and the state to have young peoples’ efforts recognised, celebrated and shared.

The second weakness relates to how young people engage in decision-making processes. While young people report that they are able to influence what they do in their programs, this was not happening with the frequency they anticipated (54.3% often, 19.8% sometimes, 74.1% combined) (Figure 5). During focus group interviews, young people identified sporting events as something over which they had significant influence, particularly when they assumed certain roles such as team captain and umpire. Nevertheless, they indicated that they would wish to have more influence in program decisions such as when, where and how program activities should take place. Apparently, there are limited formal and accepted structures that promote young peoples’ participation in decision-making processes in Tanzania. Young people are regarded as people with little power or voice, who cannot challenge adults but rather must do what they are told and accept whatever happens without question; they cannot be trusted (Youth Development Department, 2007). As indicated in the literature review, culturally Tanzania is an age and gender hierarchical society that reinforces the silencing of young people and the denial of their agency at almost all levels (Jensen, 2010; Panelli, Punch, & Robson, 2007); however, according to the GYDF, supporting participation of young people in decision- making not only benefits the organisation and the community but also the young people themselves. By developing program activities in partnership with young people, programs are more likely to be sustainable and effective at engaging the population, and hence to have a greater influence. When young people are involved in decision-making and ‘have a voice’, particularly on matters that affect their lives, it is likely that their decisions will be well received and more readily adopted, thus helping young people feel that they belong.

142

In relation to the third weakness, more than 50% of the young people reported that they understood the risks of engaging in challenging tasks, and that knowing how to manage them was important, but the programs had not yet provided enough experience of such. While in the previous findings young people reported being engaged in the planning and organisation of various activities, they expressed the view that programs were not actively engaging them in risk assessment and planning for safe activities as they had anticipated they would (Figure 6). According to the GYDF, at times it is important to let young people navigate the risk with which they are about to engage on their own, to let them find solutions to managing the risk, and to learn from the consequences of their choice. In this way, without adult intervention, young people acquire hands-on experience, including with mistakes (Worthy, 2005). In a survey conducted by Wierenga and Wyn (2012), Australian Army cadets reported that participation in risk assessment procedures enabled them to better engage in hands-on experiences. Authors like Markham (2011) suggest that hands-on experiences provide young people with the opportunity to develop self-confidence and emotional resilience because the experiences teach them how to handle successes and failures, thus building resilience. While SOYDPs can provide opportunities for young people to engage in risk assessment and planning, how best this can be done remains a challenge for programs.

A forth weakness relates to how SOYDPs provided information to community members. It was noted that SOYDPs were not doing enough to provide adequate information to the community on their objectives or on the importance of such programs and on the benefits, they might bring to the lives of their children. This problem was also reported by participants of focus groups when they were asked to suggest what they considered to be the weaknesses of their youth sport programs. Participants clearly commented that some parents were reluctant to let their children participate in the programs due to their lack of effective awareness of what the youth programs were offering. They pointed out that it was important for the community to understand: what a sport-oriented youth development program is; how it affects the lives of young people; the significance of such a program; the specific plans for the program; and the ways in which the community could contribute and become involved. Focus group participants urged program providers to identify the cause of this problem and devise strategic actions to build community awareness.

143

A fifth weakness relates to identification of and addressing the barriers to participation for young people and potential staff in SOYDPs. In the survey, program providers/managers commented that it was important for organisations to examine and address the barriers that exclude young people and potential staff from participating in the programs. According to program providers/managers, this item was very important, but it was underrated in the operation of SOYDPs and needed to be reconsidered. White and Wyn (2013) point out that for any youth development program to achieve its objectives, including being effective at initially engaging young people, the program needs to understand that young people have agency, choice and self-directive capacities. Young people need an understanding of what, how and why they are participating in the program. Failure to identify the barriers and meet their needs may disengage them from the program. During focus group discussions, participants were asked what young people needed in order to thrive in life. In response, participants identified various items such as preparedness, connectedness, confidence, guidance and engagement. While some of these needs were addressed by the programs, a survey of staff and volunteers indicated that the programs were not doing enough to identify and tackle the barriers that exclude young people and potential staff from participating in the programs’ activities.

The literature suggests that the reasons for young peoples’ participation in youth development programs include the desire to learn a variety of life skills, the desire to have fun, and the hope that they will develop relationships with a variety of people (peers, coaches) (Holt, 2016; Perkins & Noam, 2007). Their participation can, however, be diminished, inhibited or interrupted by a number of factors. Knowing what these factors are can assist in minimising their impact. While surveying Australian Army cadets, Wierenga and Wyn (2012) noted that hindrances that excluded cadets and staff from participating in the Cadet organisation’s activities were identified and addressed accordingly. Consequently, cadets remained engaged because they were satisfied with the services and support extended to them by the Cadet organisations. Balsano (2005) carried out a study to explore social impediments to youth empowerment in the United States, and identified a list of social factors that interfered with the participation of young people in youth development programs. The factors include: limited civic knowledge among young people, negative attitudes by community members towards young people, poor communication between young people and adults, limited opportunities for young people to engage in a meaningful way, pervasive marginalisation among young people,

144

loss of community pride, and a pervasive sense of hopelessness among young people. Balsano’s list is not exhaustive; rather it provides a snapshot of some of the social factors that may impede young peoples ‘participation in youth development programs. Although Balsano’s list relates to a developed country, the factors appear to be common to all geographical locations and may still be valid in the Tanzanian context. For instance, it was learnt during focus groups that some parents have negative perceptions about young people who participate in SOYDPs, describing them as youth with chronic problems, thugs and drug users and a burden to the community. Other parents considered girls as physically weak and less capable than boys. As a result, they were reluctant to let girls participate in programs’ activities. Generally, some parents perceived the programs as of no significant value, as they were seen merely as places where young people gained nothing other than an introduction to immoral behaviour.

Life skills acquired from sport-oriented youth development programs

Despite the variations in responses, participants demonstrated a clear understanding of the concept of life skills. During focus group discussions, participants described life skills using a mix of different words such as abilities, competencies, and knowledge that could help young people live successful lives, overcoming the challenges that life presented in their environment. They also referred to life skills as behaviours, values or understandings that a young person needed to have in order to do something, or fulfil an aim. While it was important to ask participants about their general understanding of life skills, their responses reflect what Goody (2001) and Ouane (2002) demonstrated in their article, that life skills may be defined in relation to particular life situations, and defined differently in different stages of life. The choice of words in the definitions given by the participants to some extent mirrors the definitions provided by Danish et al. (2004) and Theokas et al. (2008), that life skills are abilities: a group of psychosocial skills and competencies required by an individual in order to develop certain desirable qualities such as making effective decisions, communicating effectively, and developing coping and self-management skills. In many of the definitions provided by young people, the individual and workplace dimensions slightly outweighed the social and citizenship dimensions; however, there was a clear acknowledgement of the importance attached to each dimension.

145

Results from both survey and focus groups support findings from other studies, such as that of Holt and colleagues (2008) and Gould and Carson (2008), that young people may develop life skills through participation in SOYDPs. Delgado and Staples (2007) indicate that life skills may be classified into different clusters depending on the focus of the program or organisation. Based on the findings of this study, of the philosophies of the youth organisations studied, and of the principles of youth development, life skills acquired by young people may be classified into four groups: social skills, healthy competitive skills, sportsmanship and leadership abilities.

Social skills

One of the factors that entices young people into participating in youth sport programs is the social aspect of sport (that is, the development of social skills, interaction with peers, creation of new friendships, and opportunity to be part of a –team-belonging) (Coakley, 2007; Fullinwider, 2006). Social skills constitute a vital component of healthy social development in young people. They facilitate interaction and communication with other people in a positive way. As demonstrated in the results chapter, SOYDPs provided young people with opportunities to engage in both sporting and civic activities as a group. Young people participated in team sports and community work alongside adults. Through these activities, young people learnt how to work as a team; they related to each other, and shared similar experiences and objectives as well as building networks (that is, social capital). In the main, SOYDPs provided young people with a platform for satisfying their basic needs for relatedness as well as teaching them the key to social skills as respectfulness and conformity with the objectives of the team in regard to teamwork, bonding and connectedness (Holt et al., 2008; Renson, 2008). According to the GYDF, participation in community activities benefits not only the community but also young people in helping them develop social skills in addition to physical skills.

The literature is clear about the relationship between youth sport programs and social skills development (Holt, 2016; Trudeau & Shephard, 2008), social capital formation (Hartmann &

146

Kwauk, 2011; Rosso & McGrath, 2013), and personal achievement (Fraser-Thomas et al., 2005). For instance, while studying how young people can develop life skills, Holt et al. (2008) discovered that youth sport programs helped young people to learn social skills through interactions with peers, skills that were retained into adulthood. Positive social skills help young people to increase their self-esteem, develop healthy relationships with peers, and improve their academic performance (Bandy & Moore, 2011; Holt, 2016; Trudeau & Shephard, 2008). Levesque (2011) adds that the relationships and connections developed through sport often last forever. According to the GYDF, immersion in a friendly, caring and supportive environment enables young people to create networks with peers and learn social skills that may last a lifetime and can be applied in all life domains; however, as far as this study is concerned, time was a constraint in observing and assessing how young people apply the acquired life skills in a real-life setting. This merits further research.

Healthy competitive skills

The nature and philosophy of the programs studied suggest that young people acquired healthy competitive skills through participation in sporting activities. According to Shields and Funk (2011), positive competitive skills promote a winning attitude, however individuals strive together as a team to achieve a common goal and the reward is communal. Healthy competitive skills do not restrict individual team members from competing to improve their own placement within the group, but encourage them to do so in a cooperative manner, while maintaining mutual respect and pleasant interactions.

As reported earlier, participation in team sporting activities and events provided young people with an experiential learning environment. Young people were engaged in various organised sports competitions—youth leagues and tournaments—in which they competed with other youth teams. The activities provided young people with real-time situations that helped them learn how to demonstrate values related to positive relationships (connections) and character. Successes and failures experienced during competition served to form personal bonds between teammates and, with the positive support of trainers, coaches and program managers/providers,

147

helped them to develop strong moral character, competence, persistence and confidence. Trainers, coaches and young leaders played a uniquely important role in shaping the attitudes of young people towards competition. As such, young people demonstrated healthy competitive skills that could be acquired and perfected in the sporting setting, including coping with success, dealing with mistakes and failure, self-discipline, working under pressure, self- control, goal setting, time management, communication, and interpersonal skills.

The literature indicates that competition is much more celebrated in sport than in any other setting. Particularly, it occurs when young people get introduced to their first formal organised competition (Shields & Funk, 2011). Competitiveness in youth sport has two facets. Specifically, it can contribute to positive outcomes in young people or give rise to questionable behaviours that may provoke concern. It is the positive aspect of competitiveness that youth development programs emphasise. Although competition is not a key emphasis in youth development, it remains important for young people to understand what is entailed by the positive aspects of healthy competition in their lives. This is because life itself is full of competition. Young people may experience competition in contexts ranging from sport programs, classrooms, organised youth groups, the home, society and workplaces. Just as in team sports, workplaces require a demonstration of exceptional skills in high demand so that employers can rely on employees. While the debate continues as to which method is best for eliciting high effort and performance levels from individual members of a team, the literature suggests that healthy competitive skills, such as cooperative teamwork and mutuality of effort and respect, increase team performance (Croson, Fatas, & Neugebauer, 2009). In addition, positive competitive skills increase people’s desire to achieve their best, while encouraging innovation and critical thinking that improve processes and results, leading to improved quality of output in a group. Apart from being able to work effectively in a team, at times individuals may be required to work autonomously and manage own their time and workload. Katz (2001) demonstrates in his article that posits sports teams as a model for workplace teams, that, although in sports context individuals may be assigned to play different positions, they are still interdependent and must work together to defeat the opposing team.

148

Alfie Kohn (1992) stirred up a controversial debate about competition. Kohn criticises competition, arguing that it fosters competitiveness, reduces creativity, diminishes critical thinking, promotes hostility and conformity, and lowers self-esteem. He goes on to conclude that by introducing young people to competition we invariably create stress, tension, anxiety and anger in them. Despite the mountain of research in support of Kohn’s argument, this study revealed that these problems associated with competition come from a misunderstanding of what true competition is. As stated earlier, true competition does not lead to hostility, intimidation or cheating, but to teamwork that contributes to productivity (Shields & Funk, 2011). It is unhealthy competition that promotes ego-oriented goals and attitudes such as ‘winner-takes-all’ or ‘winning at all cost’ (ByoungJun, Williams, & Gill, 2003). An example of unhealthy competition is clearly demonstrated in the study that explored goal orientation among young athletes (ages 11-16) in the US and South Korea (ByoungJun et al., 2003). The study suggests that competing in an event or task for the purpose of gaining a higher rank or looking better than others promotes a strong social comparison, which ultimately heightens an ego orientation. Unhealthy competition is inappropriate as an educational tool since it promotes self-benefit and puts others in jeopardy. In this way it encourages fear, anger and hatred, and damages mutual respect and cooperation. This is why youth development programs need to inculcate young people with healthy competitive skills while discouraging negative competitive skills at an early stage, understanding that true competition is a source of enjoyment, giving young people a reason to remain engaged in a program (Shields & Funk, 2011).

I suggest that a strategy for developing healthy, positive competitive skills in young people is to recognise positive, individual performance and demonstrate this to other team members, noting the success the team will experience from others demonstrating that behaviour in similar situations. Another strategy is to encourage young people to strive to beat their own past performances—their personal best rather than trying to surpass the performance of teammates. A third strategy is to minimise individual rewards and focus more on rewarding all team members for team performance. Finally, adult leaders (staff and volunteers) must ensure that their competitive philosophy focuses on promoting both individual and team development and growth so that young people strive to improve the quality of their behaviour and general physical competence in appropriate ways. In this way, youth sport should be able to teach

149

young people to be competitive in a framework of fairness and honesty.

Sportsmanship

As encapsulated by Mandela (2011), sports and games are highly motivating pastimes for young people; they speak to young people in the language they understand and thus are ideal contexts for teaching sportsmanship. The philosophy of the selected SOYDPs, the structure of the programs, the goals for the teams, and the teaching and modelling behaviours of adults influence the sportsmanlike behaviours of young people. This is a primary goal and central focus of almost all sports. Sportsmanship is associated with principles such as commitment to your team, respect for the rules and the rights and feelings of others, being helpful and not harmful, and full and responsible participation (Fullinwider, 2006). Sportsmanship not only encapsulates sports values, but also provides an example of a human value that guides us in our treatment of others.

While participating in sporting events, young people stated that they are introduced to various rules of the game. They must respect these rules throughout the game; any breach generates a consequence. Young people commented that they could apply good sportsmanship values acquired on the field — such as respect for the rules, teamwork and respect for others — to other life domains. At work, for example, a young person employed as a broadcaster in a local radio station described how he enjoyed working collaboratively with his co-workers (news editors, writers and sound technicians) while showing respect for both his co-workers and customers (listeners). Another young person described having learnt how to appreciate the contributions made by her classmates while working as a part of a group in accomplishing a school project.

While success and winning can be fun, and may be described as reward for hard work, studies indicate that the real value of sportsmanship lies in inspiring young people to learn how to work hard as a team for the success of their group (Hartmann & Kwauk, 2011), rather than for only

150

self-fulfilment. In light of the saying, ‘winning means everything’, it was a revelation to young people that this attitude could be debilitating. Although young people from the selected SOYDPs still demonstrated a strong commitment to the success of their teams, it was the inclusive elements of fun, exercise, developing relationships, and improving physical skills that were essential components of great value and importance. The results generated by the survey and testimonies from focus groups indicate that young people who demonstrate sportsmanship values have a better chance of maturing and evolving to become good citizens and hard workers during adulthood. Winning did not distance them from human values, and, while they celebrated victories, they still humbly treated their losing opponents with respect. They learnt not to taunt or make derogatory remarks to opposing teams during the game. On the occasions where they sustained a loss, they took responsibility for that loss and acknowledged the winner. In general, sportsmanship values of integrity, fairness and respect are lifetime qualities.

Leadership abilities

While there is strong debate about whether leadership can be taught, Theokas et al. (2008, p. 79) demonstrate that, through sport, young people acquire leadership skills by active learning, that is, ‘learn by doing rather than talking’. Referring to the results chapter, SOYDPs consciously designed and integrated leadership education into their activities. This is revealed in young peoples’ assertions that leadership was part of their experience in the programs. Both in the survey and focus groups, young people commented that, regardless of their different physical abilities, the programs provided them with practical skills and leadership experience in directing safe, fun and enjoyable activities. In turn, young people assumed various leadership roles such as team captains, referees, event organisers and volunteering. They learnt how to work collaboratively with a team and within a system; an important learning experience for young people who are to become future leaders. Teamwork taught them that unity is power; they learnt what it requires to build a team.

Within the match breaks and after each event or activity, young people (both as individuals and as a team) had opportunities to reflect on their actions. At the end of each match and event they

151

evaluated the outcome: where they did or did not do well, their strengths and weaknesses, and where there was room to improve, and then determined strategies for the next event. As Roberts and Westville (2008) argue, reflection is one of the central skills in the development of an effective leader. Team effectiveness results from positive team leadership in which collective effort matters more than the sum of individual abilities (Zaccaro et al., 2009). A leader who has been a part of a good team with positive examples will be in a better position to establish good teams when assigned to do so because of the experience and understanding they have gained.

Besides teamwork and reflection, young people learnt other leadership skills, such as self- advocacy. They participated in campaigns against marginalisation and discrimination, particularly for people infected with HIV and women subjected to discriminatory behaviour. According to Lieberman, Arndt, and Daggett (2007), development of self-advocacy in young people also fosters advocacy for the needs of others. This is related to leadership experience which, according to Wehmeyer, Agran, and Hughes (1998), enables a young person to lead others in a course of action, influence the attitudes, beliefs, views and behaviours of others, and stand as a role model. Importantly, effective leadership skills in an individual do not develop instantly; rather they are developed over time and with practice. In an article that discussed a model of leadership education among first-year students as part of a learning community, Nahavandi (2006) suggests that young people need to be introduced to leadership experiences as early as possible, repeatedly, and in practical situations to ensure meaningful learning takes place. This will help young people with their ability to identify and mobilise community resources, work and establish positive relationships with others, and effect positive social change.

Conclusion

To conclude this chapter, this study has shown that young people participating in the selected SOYDPs experienced positive outcomes in almost all the elements of the two overarching values of the GYDF: valuing young people and doing things of value that caused them to remain engaged with the programs. There is however, a need for the programs to revisit their

152

strategies for valuing young people. In particular, the programs need to improve the way they recognise strengths and improve practices that emphasise young peoples’ caring for their own bodies and looking out for each other. Throughout this chapter, discussion supports the literature that argues young people may develop life skills through participation in youth sport programs, especially when sport is integrated with life skills education. As demonstrated in the discussion, young people acquired a range of life skills through experiential learning. These skills included social skills, healthy competitive skills, leadership skills, and sportsmanship. The study could not ascertain however whether the acquired skills could be transferred into other domains. Generally, the selected SOYDPs adhered to the fundamentals of modern youth development frameworks which include youth-centeredness, strengths-based practice and inclusion. As a result, young people benefited from positive outcomes through provision of a safe environment, age-related activities, caring, positive relationships with adult mentors, and sufficient time and practice to learn life skills.

153

Chapter Seven: CONCLUSION, LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Driven by the limited studies on youth and life skills development through sports in developing countries, this study has the broad aims of both contributing to our knowledge of youth and life skills development, and of advancing our understanding of SOYDPs in Tanzania. This chapter concludes the current study which explored youth development in Tanzania by focusing on the quality of practice and the nature of the life skills that young people gain by participating in the selected SOYDPs. Finally, the chapter scopes the study’s limitations and offers recommendations for improved operation and sustainability of the programs and recommendations for further research in youth development in Tanzania.

Conclusion

This study was guided by the GYDF which articulates standards that can be applied in any generic, world class youth development program. The study focused on investigating the quality of practice and nature of life skills that young people gain by participating in SOYDPs. The selected programs are in two different metropolitan cities in Tanzania: Arusha and Dar Es Salaam. Triangulation of data from survey and focus groups provided the study with systematic evidence and a comprehensive account of the quality of practice and nature of life skills acquisition in young people participating in the programs. Drawing on the GYDF and principles of youth development, the study demonstrated how the selected SOYDPs value and do things of value for young people on a wide range of principles through the indicators of good practice elucidated by the framework. The programs demonstrated success against some indicators: being competent in supporting young people to learn and grow from experience and reflection, to engage in the real worldand to become active citizens. This is based on evidence that they employed a strength-based conception of young people and capitalised on those strengths while building competencies in young people that affirmed them as contributors to their communities and as shapers of their own lives. They provided young people with positive experiences that encouraged them to remain engaged in the program’s activities. Through experiential learning and reflection, young people were engaged in hands-on experience (both in sporting and civic activities), had opportunities to reflect on their

154

experience or actions, could develop new ideas/skills or improve their effectiveness following that reflection, and could apply the new ideas/skills in the real world. The positive experiences inherent in these activities explains how and why young people continue to participate and remain engaged in the program, and how the programs support them to grow and become active citizens, as well as reflective and resilient learners. The caring environment, in addition to the focus on building young peoples’ strengths and competencies, was demonstrated by the programs supported young people who already had life skills to improve those skills.

Considering the importance of life skills to young people, this study revealed that young people can learn life skills best when they actively participate and engage in real life experiences, particularly when any knowledge gained in this way brings meaning to their lives. Positive outcomes are evident in the areas of personal and social skills such as healthy competitive skills, teamwork, sportsmanship and leadership, and in personal development: cooperation, self-esteem and confidence. Among the life skills learned through young people’s program experiences, teamwork and leadership skills were the two that they claimed were transferable to other life domains. It is clear that it is not until a young person demonstrates a positive outcome that adults can recognise that learning of life skills has taken place (Jones & Lavallee, 2009). Other than self-reports, this study, due to time constraints, could not find evidence that the young people were able to transfer their acquired life skills to real life settings. Rather, the study observed that their structure, and how the programs were designed, provided opportunities for young people to demonstrate new skills. Of most importance were the positive social relationships between young people and caring adult leaders that was apparent in the programs.

Alongside the positive outcomes that young people experienced through participation in SOYDPs, this study also highlighted various areas in which the current practice of the selected sport-oriented youth development could improve. The growth areas were evident in the activities that were perceived to be important by the participants but were not given enough emphasis in the programs. The programs need to improve in areas that foster team building and strength recognition. Particularly, they need to work on how they celebrate young peoples’

155

achievements; how they involve young people in risk assessment and planning of safe activities; how they give feedback on strengths and growth areas to members of staff and volunteers; and how they identify and address the barriers that hinder young people and potential staff from participating in the programs. The programs were not doing well in some cases due to the lack of awareness and understanding among community members about the programs’ motives and objectives, such that, though young people participated in community activities, the nature of the relationship between the programs and community was highly variable—some programs operating independently of strong community connections. In addition, some community members had negative perceptions about young people and programs. These weaknesses signal to youth stakeholders (such as youth workers, researchers and policy-makers) the importance of addressing the variables for effectiveness and sustainability of youth development in Tanzania.

Limitations

There are several limitations associated with this study. First, the present study adapted youth questionnaire from the GYDF toolkit. The data generated through the questionnaires was largely a collection of young peoples’ perceptions of their personal experience of the programs rather than objective information. While their perceptions provided a direct ‘voice’ for participants about important aspects of SOYDPs, such perceptions may be directly influenced by other factors such as social desirability effects and biases arising from self-interest.

Second, this study is informed by the notion that transferability of life skills is a critical component of youth and life skills development through sports and therefore should be given diligent attention. However, due to time constraints and lack of appropriate tools that could measure this variable, the study was unable to offer evidence as to whether young people could transfer the acquired skills to real life settings. Thus, research is needed to measure how young people in Tanzania can effectively apply life skills to other life domains. Specifically, such research should explore how young people put their learning into practice and engage in behaviours that lead to positive outcomes and personal wellbeing beyond the youth sport setting.

156

Third, though young people worldwide get introduced to various sports at early ages, gender is a major limitation in youth sport. Sport is one of the, if not the most gendered institution, for example through its near-total gender segregation. As noted in the results section, there were fairly equal numbers of young men and women involved in youth sport programs. However, this study did not examine how each gender responds to the programs. Future research examining similar types of programs should explore the impact of the programs on each gender.

Fourth, young people may have demonstrated their life skills as an after effect of other youth development programs in which they may be participating; future research should ascertain how to control these potentially overlapping factors.

Despite the limitations associated with this study, its findings still offer a valuable contribution to the literature on positive youth development, particularly in the Tanzanian context where there is a significant dearth of literature related to youth and life skills development through sports and games. In the main, the findings have demonstrated that SOYDPs play an important role in the quality of life of young people and that youth development would benefit from an increase in quality research on this growing area in Tanzania.

Recommendations

To create and run SOYDPs that engage young people, develop desired life skills, and build a sense of ownership among young people, the following recommendations are offered by this study to program providers/managers and policy-makers for their consideration:

Program providers/managers

1. Establish positive program-community partnerships – Successfully meeting the expectations and goals of a youth program requires the community to take ownership of the program. This recommendation is well documented in existing literature particularly by Schulenkorf (2012). According to Schulenkorf (2012) disenfranchise creates a significant barrier between program leaders and local leaders, challenging 157

cohesion to the extent that local leaders cannot recognise, appreciate or even support the programs’ activities in their community. Establishing meaningful relationships between programs and communities serves to minimise separation by providing a shared understanding and agreement about program objectives and goals. Clarity about the community contribution that is needed creates a sense of community ownership; a powerful contributor to program success.

2. Employ qualified, well-trained staff committed to the philosophy of youth development – As a philosophy, youth development is holistic, preventative and positive. It focuses on the development of young peoples’ assets and competencies. Despite the scarcity of youth development experts, it remains important for SOYDPs to ensure that all program activities are delivered by people with sufficient training and experience to generate ideas, people with a passion for teaching and leading activities in meaningful ways, people who understand that young people in Tanzania have agency and are not inferior to adults because of their youth or lack of experience, but are an asset to be developed (Coakley, 2011; Holt, 2016; Miller et al., 2002).

3. Raise public awareness – Creating a specific messaging campaign can serve both to inform the community and to change knowledge and attitudes about the importance of youth and life skills development through sports, among all involved. Awareness campaigns may include various media as well as other creative and innovative mechanisms that focus on a specific community (or target audience) and a specific issue, teamwork or leadership for instance.

4. Provide a framework – As a nation, Tanzania needs to develop her own youth development framework that can be used for policy development and as a tool for continuous improvement. The framework can also be used to organise current knowledge—from research and practical experience—and provide a common language for youth development program providers, investors, staff and volunteers, and for young people themselves to use in their dialogue about what they are implementing together and what they are trying to achieve. A realistic and well thought out framework helps to consolidate good practice learning, and allows for flexible reflection to fine tune a program and make quick adjustments in processes and approaches.

158

5. Give young people a voice – True inclusion and empowerment of young people comes when young people are provided with the opportunity to voice their ideas, participate in decision-making processes, and contribute to and participate in the social, economic, and cultural life of their community. Therefore, a framework such as GYDF is needed in order to ensure that young peoples’ diverse views, experiences and needs are recognised, valued and incorporated into program and community strategic planning. It will ensure that young people are placed at the centre of the strategies, policies, activities and services that are created for them.

Policy-makers

In order to advance the field of youth development in Tanzania, the country needs to:

1. Develop integrated youth policies – A supportive infrastructure of policies and practices will involve young people and integrate them into mainstream development processes, ascribing importance to both their individual and community identities. This can be done by developing a positive framework that will help young people to develop and improve their capabilities in order to access more rewarding opportunities. While this study places specific emphasis on integrating youth development into all youth sport programs in Tanzania, these new policies can be applied to various other initiatives in Tanzanian society.

2. Develop high quality, reliable data – A systematic investigation that is youth-centred will establish facts, expose current conditions and provide a roadmap for investment and proper planning for change in the arena of youth and life skills. Having high quality and reliable data allows for wise decision-making in relation to program investment, delivery and sustainability.

3. Conduct needs assessments – Determining the nature of the gap between current conditions and preferred or desired conditions allows decision-makers to create effective plans for change. It is not until the needs are determined that the process of change can begin.

159

4. Consistently monitor policies – Continuous monitoring of policy implementation is required to observe and check progress and to determine each policy’s impact on youth development. Monitoring should be extended to availability, accessibility and quality of operations and practice of all youth development programs in the country.

To conclude, it is advantageous for all youth development stakeholders in Tanzania—that is, program providers/managers, youth researchers and policy-makers—to view and engage with young people as complete people with agency, and as possessing resources to be developed; rather than as adolescent delinquents with problems to be solved. It is also important that they work to engage young people, strive for positive outcomes, commence when young people are in the early stages of development, and ensure that programs operate within youth development principles such as those proposed by the GYDF. In addition, adults need to lead by example. Where leading is done well, and where adults demonstrate good qualities such as respect for others, they become adults that young people genuinely want to be in the company of, and indeed, emulate.

160

REFERENCES

Abdullah, I. (1998). Bush path to destruction: the origin and character of the Revolutionary United Front/Sierra Leone. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 36(02), 203-235.

Agwanda, A., & Amani, H. (2014). Population Growth, Structure and Momentum in Tanzania. THDR 2014: Background Paper No. 7, ESRF Discussion Paper 61. The Economic and Social Research Foundation (ESRF). Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania.

Allen, D. R. (2000). Learning the Facts of Life: Past and Present Experiences in a Rural Tanzanian Community. Africa Today, 47(3/4), 2.

Amnå, E. (2012). How is civic engagement developed over time? Emerging answers from a multidisciplinary field. Journal of adolescence, 35(3), 611-627.

Anderson, J. C., & Kim, E. (2009). Youth leadership development: Perceptions and preferences of urban students enrolled in a comprehensive agriculture program. Journal of Agricultural Education, 50(1), 8-20.

Apsler, R. (2009). After-school programs for adolescents: A review of evaluation research. Adolescence, 44(173), 1-19.

Arnold, M. E., & Cater, M. (2011). From then to now: Emerging directions for youth program evaluation. Journal of Youth Development, 6(3), 82-94.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Sorensen, C. K., & Walker, D. A. (2010). Introduction to research in education (9 ed.). Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.

Atherley, K. M. (2006). Sport, localism and social capital in rural Western Australia. Geographical Research, 44(4), 348-360.

Atkinson, J., McCurdy, S., Williams, M., Mbwambo, J., & Kilonzo, G. (2011). HIV risk behaviours, perceived severity of drug use problems, and prior treatment experience in a sample of young heroin injectors in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. African Journal of Drug and Alcohol Studies, 10(1), 1-9. 161

AU. (2006). African youth charter. Banjul, Gambia: African Union.

Bailey, R. (2006). Physical education and sport in schools: A review of benefits and outcomes. Journal of school health, 76(8), 397-401.

Balsano, A. B. (2005). Youth civic engagement in the United States: Understanding and addressing the impact of social impediments on positive youth and community development. Applied developmental science, 9(4), 188-201.

Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares, T. Urdan, & C. Timothy (Eds.), Adolescence and education: self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (Vol. V, pp. 307-337). Greenwhich: Information Age Publishing.

Bandy, T., & Moore, K. (2011). What works for promoting and enhancing positive social skills: Lessons from experimental evaluations of programs and interventions. Child Trends fact sheet. Washington, DC: Child Trends. Retrieved December, 18, 2012.

Barker, C. (2012). Cultural studies: Theory and practice (4 ed.): Sage.

Bennett, A. (2007). As young as you feel: Youth as a discursive construct. In P. Hodkinson & W. Deicke (Eds.), Youth cultures: scenes, subcultures and tribes (pp. 23-36). New York: Routledge.

Benson, P. L., Scales, P. C., & Syvertsen, A. K. (2010). The contribution of the developmental assets framework to positive youth development theory and practice. Advances in child development and behavior, 41, 197-230.

Berlin, R. A., Dworkin, A., Eames, N., Menconi, A., & Perkins, D. F. (2007). Examples of sports‐based youth development programs. New Directions for Youth Development, 2007(115), 85-106.

Beutler, I. (2008). Sport serving development and peace: Achieving the goals of the United Nations through sport. Sport in society, 11(4), 359-369.

162

Birditt, K. S., Fingerman, K. L., Lefkowitz, E. S., & Kamp Dush, C. M. (2008). Parents perceived as peers: Filial maturity in adulthood. Journal of Adult Development, 15(1), 1-12.

Blomfield, C., & Barber, B. (2010). Australian adolescents’ extracurricular activity participation and positive development: Is the relationship mediated by peer attributes? Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, 10, 108-122.

Bohnert, A., Fredricks, J., & Randall, E. (2010). Capturing unique dimensions of youth organized activity involvement theoretical and methodological considerations. Review of Educational Research, 80(4), 576-610.

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital 1986. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241-258). New York: Greenwood Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1993). Sociology in question. London: Sage.

Bowring, A., van Gemert, C., Toufik, A., Dietze, P., & Stoove, M. (2011). Assessment of risk practices and infectious disease among drug users in Temeke district, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: Centre for Population Health, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.

Brendtro, L. K., Brokenleg, M., & Van Bockern, S. (1990). Reclaiming youth at risk: Our hope for the future: National Educational Service.

Bulamile, N. M. (2008). Evaluation report on “Education through Sports Project” in Mtwara – Tanzania. Retrieved from Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania:

ByoungJun, K., Williams, L., & Gill, D. L. (2003). A cross-cultural study of achievement orientation and intrinsic motivation in young USA and Korean athletes. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 34(2), 168-184.

163

Camino, L., & Zeldin, S. (2002). From periphery to center: Pathways for youth civic engagement in the day-to-day life of communities. Applied developmental science, 6(4), 213-220.

Campbell, D., & Erbstein, N. (2012). Engaging youth in community change: Three key implementation principles. Community Development, 43(1), 63-79.

Campbell, D., Lamming, J., Lemp, C., Brosnahan, A., Paterson, C., & Pusey, J. (2008). Engaging youth as active citizens: Lessons from youth workforce development programs. Journal of Extension, 46(2).

Catalano, R. F., Berglund, M. L., Ryan, J. A., Lonczak, H. S., & Hawkins, J. D. (2004). 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, 591(1), 98-124.

Chachage, C. (2008). Does The ‘New’National Youth Development Policy Reflect Youth Demands? Department of Sociology, UDSM.

Chau, J. (2007). Physical activity and building stronger communities. Prepared for Premier’s Council for Active Living. Report No. CPAH07-001. (CPAH07-001). Retrieved 01.02.2016, from Centre for Physical Activity and Health http://www.pcal.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/file/0004/27679/Physical_Activity_Buildin g_Stronger_Communities.pdf

Chigunta, F. (2002). The socio-economic situation of youth in Africa: Problems, prospects and options. A Paper Presented at the Youth Employment Summit, Alexandria, Egypt, 1-13.

Coakley, J. J. (2007). Sports in society: Issues and controversies (9 ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

Coakley, J. J. (2011). Youth sports : What counts as ''Positive Development?''. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 35(3), 306-324.

164

Coalter, F. (2007). Sports clubs, social capital and social regeneration:‘Ill-defined interventions with hard to follow outcomes’? Sport in society, 10(4), 537-559.

Coalter, F. (2010). The politics of sport-for-development: Limited focus programmes and broad gauge problems? International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 45(3), 295- 314.

Coalter, F. (2013). Sport for development: What game are we playing? : Routledge.

Coatsworth, J. D., & Conroy, D. E. (2007). Youth sport as a component of organized afterschool programs. New Directions for Youth Development, 2007(115), 57-74.

Coe, D. P., Pivarnik, J. M., Womack, C. J., Reeves, M. J., & Malina, R. M. (2006). Effect of physical education and activity levels on academic achievement in children. Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 38(8), 1515.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2013). Research methods in education (7 ed.). New York: Routledge.

Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American journal of sociology, S95-S120.

Collins, M. (2014). Sport and social exclusion: Routledge.

Connell, R. (2014). Using southern theory: Decolonizing social thought in theory, research and application. Planning Theory, 13(2), 210-223.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Crabbe, T., & Brown, A. (2004). You’re not welcome anymore: The football crowd, class and social exclusion. British football and social exclusion, 109-124.

Crane, P., Buckley, J., & Francis, C. (2012). A framework for youth alcohol and other drug practice: Youth alcohol and drug good practice guide. Brisbane, Queensland: Dovetail. 165

Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.

Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

Crosby, B. (2009). Three year project between LiiKe ry and Butimba Teachers Training College Tanzania. Helsink, Finland: LiiKe ry/Sport Development Aid. Retrieved from http://www.liike.fi/wp-content/uploads/butimba_teachers_college.pdf.

Croson, R., Fatas, E., & Neugebauer, T. (2009). Competition as a Team Incentive: Comparing Within-and Between-Team Competition (Working Paper). Retrieved 06.06.2016 http://www.fep.up.pt/conferences/earie2005/cd_rom/Session%20VI/VI.K/Fatas%20- %20BTC%20-%20EARIE%202005.pdf

Cuervo, H., & Wyn, J. (2012). Young people making it work: Continuity and change in rural places: Melbourne Univ. Publishing.

Danish, S., Forneris, T., Hodge, K., & Heke, I. (2004). Enhancing youth development through sport. World Leisure Journal, 46(3), 38-49.

DCC. (n.d). Drug Control Master Plan 2001-2006. Retrieved from Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania:

Delgado, M., & Staples, L. (2007). Youth-led community organizing: Theory and action: Oxford University Press.

Department of Youth Development. (1996). National Youth Development Policy. Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania: Ministry of Labour, Employment and Youth Development.

Department of Youth Development. (2007). National Youth Development Policy. Dar Es Salaam: Ministry of Information, Culture, Youth and Sports.

Dewey, J. (1986). Experience and education. The Educational Forum, 50(3), 241-252.

166

Division for Social Policy and Development. (n.d). Youth (Report). Retrieved 08.12.2015, from Division for Social Policy and Development (DSPD) - United Nations http://undesadspd.org/Youth/FAQs.aspx

Donnelly, P., & Coakley, J. (2007). The use of sport to foster child and youth development and education. Literature Reviews on Sport for Development and Peace, 7.

Drug Control Commission. (2012). The drug and prevention of illicit trafficking report [Press release]

Eccles, J. S., Barber, B. L., Stone, M., & Hunt, J. (2003). Extracurricular activities and adolescent development. Journal of social issues, 59(4), 865-889.

Englert, B. (2008). Ambiguous relationships: youth, popular music and politics in contemporary Tanzania. Wiener Zeitschrift fur kritische Afrikastudien, 14(8), 71-96.

Evans, R. M. C. (2004). Tanzanian Childhoods: Street Children's Narratives of ‘Home’. Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 22(1), 69-92.

Evans, R. M. C. (2012). Sibling caringscapes: Time–space practices of caring within youth- headed households in Tanzania and Uganda. Geoforum, 43(4), 824-835.

Fraser-Thomas, J., & Côté, J. (2009). Understanding adolescents’ positive and negative developmental experiences in sport. The Sport Psychologist, 23(1), 3-23.

Fraser-Thomas, J., Côté, J., & Deakin, J. (2005). Youth sport programs: an avenue to foster positive youth development. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 10(1), 19-40.

Fredricks, J. A. (2012). Extracurricular participation and academic outcomes: Testing the over- scheduling hypothesis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41(3), 295-306.

Fullinwider, R. K. (2006). Sports, Youth and Character: A Critical Survey. CIRCLE Working Paper 44. Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE), University of Maryland.

167

Futch, V. A. (2013). Utilizing the theoretical framework of collective identity to understand processes in youth programs. Youth & Society, 48, (5), 673 - 694.

Garcia, M. H., & Fares, J. (2008). Youth in Africa's labor market: World Bank Publications.

Gasser, P. K., & Levinsen, A. (2004). Breaking post-war ice: Open fun football schools in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Sport in society, 7(3), 457-472.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2009). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New Jersey, USA: Transaction Publishers.

Goody, J. (2001). Competencies and education: Contextual diversity. Defining and selecting key competencies, 175-190.

Gorard, S., & Taylor, C. (2004). Combining methods in educational and social research: McGraw-Hill Education (UK).

Goudas, M., & Giannoudis, G. (2010). A qualitative evaluation of a life-skills program in a physical education context. Hellenic Journal of Psychology, 7, 298-314.

Gould, D., & Carson, S. (2008). Life skills development through sport: Current status and future directions. International review of sport and exercise psychology, 1(1), 58-78.

Green, C. (2001). Manufacturing powerlessness in the Black Diaspora: Inner-city youth and the new global frontier: Rowman & Littlefield.

Green, K. (2010). Key themes in youth sport: Routledge.

Gyimah-Brempong, K., & Kimenyi, M. S. (2013). Youth policy and the future of African development Retrieved from Washington, D.C:

Gyimah-Brempong, K., & Mwangi, K. S. (2013). Youth policy and the future of African development. African Growth Initiative, Working Paper, 9, 113-128.

168

Haji, S. H. H. (2007). Youth Employment in East Africa: An Integrated Labour Market Perspective. African integration review, 1(2), 1-24.

Hall, N. (2007). Finding touch: Young males, sport and civic engagement in Australia. Scottish Youth Issues, Spring(9), 23-40.

Hall, N., & Banno, J. (2001). Safety in Numbers: The Final Report of the St Clair and Erskine Park Youth and Community Survey (SCEPtiCS) Research Project: University of Western Sydney.

Hanbury, C., & Malti, T. (2011). Monitoring and evaluating life skilla for youth development: The guidelines (Vol. 1). Zurich: Jacobs Foundation.

Hartmann, D. (2001). Notes on midnight basketball and the cultural politics of race and at-risk urban youth. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 25, 339-371.

Hartmann, D. (2008). High school sports participation and educational attainment: Recognizing, assessing, and utilizing the relationship, Report to the LA84 Foundation. Retrieved 27.04.2015, from Department of Sociology, University of Minnesota http://www.la84foundation.org/3ce/HighSchoolSportsParticipation.pdf

Hartmann, D., & Depro, B. (2001). Rethinking sports-based community crime prevention: A reliminary analysis of the relationship between midnight basketball and urban crime rates. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 30(2), 180–196.

Hartmann, D., & Kwauk, C. (2011). Sport and development: An overview, critique, and reconstruction. Journal of sport & social issues, 35(3), 284-305.

Haudenhuyse, R. (2012). The potential of sports for socially vulnerable youth. ( Doctoral dissertation submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor in Physical Education and Movement Sciences ), VUB Press, Brussels.

Heck, K. E., & Subramaniam, A. (2009). Youth Development Frameworks. Monograph. 4-H Center for Youth Development, University of California.

169

Hendricks, P. A. (1996). Targeting life skills model. Iowa State University Extension.

Hennink, M., Hutter, I., & Bailey, A. (2010). Qualitative research methods: Sage.

Hilker, L., & Fraser, E. (2009). Youth exclusion, violence, conflict and fragile states. Report prepared for DFID by Social Development Direct, London.

Hodge, K., Danish, S., & Martin, J. (2013). Developing a conceptual framework for life skills interventions. The Counseling Psychologist, 41(8), 1125-1152.

Hofmeyr, J. (2012). The Youth Dividend: Unlocking the potential of young South Africans. Cape Town, RSA: African Minds.

Holt, N. L. (2016). Positive youth development through sport. New York: Routledge.

Holt, N. L., & Jones, M. I. (2016). Future directions for positive youth development and sport research. In N. L. Holt (Ed.), Positive youth development through sport (pp. 122-132). New York: Routledge.

Holt, N. L., Tink, L. N., Mandigo, J. L., & Fox, K. R. (2008). Do youth learn life skills through their involvement in high school sport? A case study. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne de l'éducation, 281-304.

Howson, A. (2015). Social Networks: Social Capital: Salem Press.

Innovations in Civic Participation. (2010). Youth civic participation in action: Meeting community and youth needs worldwide. Retrieved from Washington, DC:

Jensen, C. D. (2010). Young People’s possibilities for influence in Tanzania. Final report for the Danish Youth Council. Retrieved 08.12.2014, from Konsulentnetværket http://duf.dk/uploads/tx_tcshop/Young_People_s_possibilities_for_influence_in_Tanz ania.pdf.

Jones, G. (2009). Youth. Cambridge: Polity.

170

Jones, K. R. (2009). Influences of youth leadership within a community-based context. Journal of Leadership Education, 7(3), 246-264.

Jones, M. I., & Lavallee, D. (2009). Exploring perceived life skills development and participation in sport. Qualitative research in sport and exercise, 1(1), 36-50.

Kahn, L., Hewes, S., & Ali, R. (2009). Taking the lead: Youth leadership in theory and practice. Retrieved 27.04.2016, from The Young Foundation website

http://youngfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Taking-the-Lead-October-2009.pdf

Kallio, K. P., & Häkli, J. (2010). Political geography in childhood. Political Geography, 29(7), 357-358.

Kaplan, R. D. (1996). The Ends of the Earth: From Togo to Turkmenistan, from Iran to Cambodia: A Journey to the Frontiers of Anarchy. New York, NY: Random House.

Katz, N. (2001). Sports teams as a model for workplace teams: Lessons and liabilities. The Academy of Management Executive, 15(3), 56-67.

Kay, T. (2009). Developing through sport: evidencing sport impacts on young people. Sport in society, 12(9), 1177-1191.

Keeter, S., Zukin, C., Andolina, M., & Jenkins, K. (2002). The civic and political health of the nation: A generational portrait. Retrieved 26.07.2015, from Center for information and research on civic learning and engagement (CIRCLE) http://www.ehrenamtsbibliothek.de/literatur/pdf_1066.pdf

Kehily, M. J. (2007). Understanding youth : perspectives, identities and practices. London: SAGE in association with the Open University.

Keim, M. (2006). Sport as opportunity for community development and peace building in South Africa. Sport and development, 97-106.

171

Kervin, L., Valle, W., Herrington, J., & Okely, T. (2006). Research for educators. South Melbourne, Australia: Thomson Social Sicence Press.

Kervin, L., Vialle, W., Herrington, J., & Okely, T. (2006). Research for educators. Melbourne, Australia: Thomson Social Science Press.

Khan, M. Y., Jamil, A., Khan, U. A., & Kareem, U. (2012). Association between participation in sports and academic achievement of college students. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 2(8), 419-431.

Kidd, B. (2008). A new social movement: Sport for development and peace. Sport in society, 11(4), 370-380.

Kimando, L. N., Njogu, G. W., & Kihoro, J. M. (2012). Factors affecting the success of youth enterprise development funded projects in Kenya; A survey of Kigumo District Muranga County. International Journal of Business and Commerce, 1(10), 61-81.

Klau, M., Boyd, S., & Luckow, L. (2006). Youth leadership: New directions for youth development. USA: Jossey-Bass.

Kohn, A. (1992). No contest: The case against competition: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology, methods and techniques. New Delhi: New Age International (P) Ltd, Publishers.

Lakin, R., & Mahoney, A. (2006). Empowering youth to change their world: Identifying key components of a community service program to promote positive development. Journal of School Psychology, 44(6), 513-531.

Lansdown, G. (2004). Youth participation in decision-making. In United Nations Dept. of Economic and Social Affairs (Ed.), World Youth Report, 2003: The Global Situation of Young People (pp. 271-288): UN.

172

Lawford, H. L., Ramey, H. L., Rose-Krasnor, L., & Proctor, A. S. (2012). Predictors of adolescent successful development after an exchange: The importance of activity qualities and youth input. Journal of adolescence, 35(5), 1381-1391.

Lerner, J. V., Phelps, E., Forman, Y. E., & Bowers, E. P. (2009). Positive youth development: Wiley Online Library.

Lerner, R. M., Almerigi, J. B., Theokas, C., & Lerner, J. V. (2005). Positive youth development. Journal of early adolescence, 25(1), 10-16.

Lerner, R. M., Fisher, C. B., & Weinberg, R. A. (2000). Toward a science for and of the people: Promoting civil society through the application of developmental science. Child Development, 71(1), 11-20.

Leseth, A. (2010). Michezo: Dance, Sports and Politics in Tanzania. Anthropological Notebooks, 16(3), 61-75.

Lesko, N. (2012). Act your age! A cultural construction of adolescence. In N. Lesko & S. Talburt (Eds.), Keywords in youth studies: Tracing affects, movements, knowledges (2 ed.). New York: Routledge.

Lesko, N., & Talburt, S. (2012). Keywords in youth studies: Tracing affects, movements, knowledges: Routledge.

Levesque, R. J. (2011). Encyclopedia of adolescence: Springer Science & Business Media.

Libbey, H. P. (2004). Measuring student relationships to school: Attachment, bonding, connectedness, and engagement. The Journal of school health, 74(7), 274.

Lieberman, L. J., Arndt, K., & Daggett, S. (2007). Promoting leadership in physical education and recreation. Journal of physical education, recreation & dance, 78(3), 46-46-50.

Lindsey, I., Kay, T., Jeanes, R., & Banda, D. (2017). Localizing global sport for development: Oxford University Press.

173

Linville, D. C., & Huebner, A. J. (2005). The analysis of extracurricular activities and their relationship to youth violence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34(5), 483-492.

Lopez, M. H., & Moore, K. (2006). Participation in Sports and Civic Engagement. Fact Sheet. Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE), University of Maryland.

Lugalla, J. L., & Mbwambo, J. K. (1999). Street children and street life in urban Tanzania: The culture of surviving and its implications for children’s health. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 23(2), 329-344.

Lune, H., Pumar, E. S., & Koppel, R. (2010). Perspectives in social research methods and analysis: a reader for sociology. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Mafumiko, F. M., & Pangani, I. N. (2008). Physical Education in Tanzanian Secondary Schools: Perceptions towards Physical Education as an academic discipline. NUE Journal of International Educational Cooperation, 3, 51-61.

Magesa, R., Shimba, C., & Magombola, D. (2011). The Root Causes of the Girl Prostitution in Tanzania. A Case of Arusha Municipality. Developing Country Studies, 3(9), 160-167.

Mandela, N. (2011). Nelson Mandela by himself: The authorised book of quotations. UK / South Africa / Australia / New Zealand: Pan Macmillan.

Markham, T. (2011). Project based learning A bridge just far enough. Teacher Librarian, 39(2), 38 - 42.

Martin, K. (2010). Brain boost: sport and physical activity enhance children’s learning. Retrieved 28.09.2013, from Department of Sport and Recreation, The Government of Western Australia http://www.dsr.wa.gov.au/support-and-advice/research-and- policies/brain-boost-new/brain-boost

174

Mashindano, O., Kayunze, K., Corta, L. d., & Maro, F. (2011). Agricultural growth and poverty reduction in Tanzania 2000-2010: where has agriculture worked for the poor and what can we learn from this? Retrieved from Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania:

Massao, P., & Fasting, K. (2003). Women and sport in Tanzania. In G. Pfister & I. Hartmann- Tews (Eds.), Sport and women: Social issues in international perspective (pp. 118- 129). London: Routledge.

McCurdy, S., Williams, M., Kilonzo, G., Ross, M., & Leshabari, M. (2005). Heroin and HIV risk in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: youth hangouts, mageto and injecting practices. AIDS care, 17(S1), 65-76.

McDonough, M. H., Ullrich-French, S., Anderson-Butcher, D., Amorose, A. J., & Riley, A. (2013). Social Responsibility among Low-Income Youth in Physical Activity-Based Positive Youth Development Programs: Scale Development and Associations with Social Relationships. Journal of applied sport psychology, 25(4), 431-447.

Merkel, D. L. (2013). Youth sport: positive and negative impact on young athletes. Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine, 4, 151-160.

Miller, K. E., Barnes, G. M., Melnick, M. J., Sabo, D. F., & Farrell, M. P. (2002). Gender and racial/ethnic differences in predicting adolescent sexual risk: athletic participation versus exercise. Journal of health and social behavior, 436-450.

Mjema, G. (1999). Youth Unemployment in Tanzania: Nature and Magnitude and Proposals for Possible Solutions. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the National Round Table Meeting on Employment Policy (Dar Es Salaam, 17 19 May 1999), ILO and the Ministry of Labour and Youth Department: Economic and Social Research Foundation.

MoEVT. (2005). Physical education syllabus for secondary schools, form I-IV. Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania: Ministry of Education and Vocational Training (MoEVT).

175

Morgan, S. J., & Symon, G. (2004). Electronic interviews in organizational research. In C. Cassell & G. Symon (Eds.), Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research (pp. 23-33). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Msami, A. (2004). HIV infection among injecting drug users in Kinondoni Municipality, Dar es Salaam. Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences.

Msigwa, R., & Kipesha, E. F. (2013). Determinants of youth unemployment in developing countries: Evidences from Tanzania. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 4(14), 67-76.

Mwaanga, O., & Mwansa, K. (2013). Indigenous discourses in sport for development and peace. A Case Study of the Ubuntu Cultural Philosophy in EduSport Foundation, Zambia. In N. Schulenkorf (Ed.), Global sport for development: Critical perspectives. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Nahavandi, A. (2006). Teaching leadership to first-year students in a learning community. Journal of Leadership Education, 5(2), 14-27.

Nandigiri, R. (2012). Standpoint:The politics of being “young”: is a “youth” category really necessary for “development”? Feminist Africa(17), 114-121.

National Elections Act, Cap 343, Tanzania National Electoral Committee (2010).

NBS. (2013). Tanzania in figures 2012. Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania: National Bureau of Statistics (NBS).

NBS, OCGS, & MoHSW. (2010). Youth in Tanzania: The 2010 Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS). Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania: National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), the Office of the Chief Government Statistician -Zanzibar () and the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MoHSW).

176

NBS and OCGS. (2013). 2012 Population and housing census: Population distribution by administrative units; key findings. Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania: National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) and Office of Chief Government Statistician (OCGS), Zanzibar.

Nchimbu, J. V. (2005). The evaluation of the magnitude of drug abuse, trafficking and related issues in selected primary schools in Kinondoni Municipality, Dar es Salaam region. Southern New Hampshire University.

NSC. (2009). Sports Strategic Plan 2009-2014. Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania: The National Sports Council of Tanzania (NSC).

NSGRP. (2009). Brief 1: The status of economic growth and poverty reduction in Tanzania. Poverty and Human Development Report (PHDR) 2009. Retrieved 20.05.2015, from National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (NSGRP-MKUKUTA) Monitoring System, Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs http://www.repoa.or.tz/documents_storage/Publications/brief%201%20lr.pdf

Nudzor, H. P. (2009). A critical commentary on combined methods approach to researching educational and social issues. Issues in Educational Research, 19(2), 114-127.

Ogundare, O. A. (2002). “The role of Physical Education in the total development of a child”. Paper of Education and Development, 22, 74-81.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Teddlie, C. (2003). A framework for analyzing data in mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 351-383). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Orasmaa, T., Ndee, H., Frantsi, P., & Frantsi, T. (2015). Physical and Health Education Development in Tanzania 2004–2014. Evaluation report By LiiKe and Sport Development Aid 2004–2014. Retrieved 08.09.2016, from LiiKe and Sport Development Aid https://liike.fi/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/LiiKe_SDA_2004- 2014_Report.pdf

177

Ouane, A. (2002). Key competencies for lifelong learning. Institutionalising lifelong learning: Creating Conducive Environments for Adult Learning in the Asian Context, 311-325.

Overton, W. F. (2010). Life-span development: Concepts and issues. Cognition, biology, and methods across the lifespan, 1, 1-29.

Panelli, R., Punch, S., & Robson, E. (2007). Global perspectives on rural childhood and youth: young rural lives: Routledge.

Paolini, G. (2013). Youth social exclusion and lessons from youth work: Evidence from literature and surveys. EU: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA).

Papacharisis, V., Goudas, M., Danish, S. J., & Theodorakis, Y. (2005). The effectiveness of teaching a life skills program in a sport context. Journal of applied sport psychology, 17(3), 247-254.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif. ; London: Sage.

Perkins, D. F. (2000). Coaches: Making youth sports a positive experience. Retrieved from

Perkins, D. F., & Borden, L. M. (2003). Key elements of community youth development. In F. A. Villarruel, D. F. Perkins, L. M. Borden, & J. G. Keith (Eds.), Community youth development: Programs, Policies, and Practices (pp. 327-341). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Perkins, D. F., & Noam, G. G. (2007). Characteristics of sports‐based youth development programs. New Directions for Youth Development, 2007(115), 75-84.

Perullo, A. (2005). Hooligans and heroes: youth identity and hip-hop in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Africa Today, 51(4), 75-101.

178

Perullo, A. (2011). Live from Dar es Salaam: popular music and Tanzania's music economy. Bloomington and IndianapolisLive from Dar Es Salaam: Popular Music and Tanzania's Music Economy: Indiana University Press.

Peter, S. (2013). Nature of urban youth unemployment in Tanzania: Challenges and consequences. Paper presented at the 19th Annual Research Workshop, Ledger Plaza Bahari Beach Hotel, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

Petitpas, A. J., Cornelius, A. E., Van Raalte, J. L., & Jones, T. (2005). A framework for planning youth sport programs that foster psychosocial development. The Sport Psychologist, 19(1), 63-80.

Pittman, K., Irby, M., Tolman, J., Yohalem, N., & Ferber, T. (2011). Preventing problems, promoting development, encouraging engagement. Paper presented at the Washington, DC: Forum for Youth Investment.

Ponthieux, S. (2004). The concept of social capital: a critical review. Paper presented at the 10 th CAN Conference–Paris.

Punch, K. F., & Oancea, A. (2014). Introduction to research methods in education. London: Sage.

Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America's declining social capital. Journal of democracy, 6(1), 65-78.

Putnam, R. D. (2001). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community: Simon and Schuster.

Rasberry, C. N., Lee, S. M., Robin, L., Laris, B. A., Russell, L. A., Coyle, K. K., & Nihiser, A. J. (2011). The association between school-based physical activity, including physical education, and academic performance: A systematic review of the literature. Preventive Medicine, 52, Supplement(0), S10-S20.

179

Ratey, J., & Sattelmair, J. (2009). Physically active play and cognition: An academic matter. American Journal of Play, Winter, 364-374.

Ratliff, E. A., McCurdy, S. A., Mbwambo, J. K. K., Lambdin, B. H., Voets, A., Pont, S., . . . Kilonzo, G. P. (2013). An Overview of HIV Prevention Interventions for People Who Inject Drugs in Tanzania. Advances in Preventive Medicine, 2013, 6. doi:10.1155/2013/183187

Renson, R. (2008). Fair play: Its origins and meanings in sport and society. Lectures for the xxist century, 63.

Richards, P. (1997). Soccer and violence in war-torn Africa: Soccer and social rehabilitation in Sierra Leone (pp. 141-158). Oxford: Berg Publisher Ltd.

Right To Play. (2013). Sport for children and youth: Fostering development and strengthening education. Right To Play Final reports - Chapter 3. Retrieved from http://www.righttoplay.com/International/our- impact/Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx

Roberts, C., & Westville, I. (2008). Developing future leaders: The role of reflection in the classroom. Journal of Leadership Education, 7(1), 116-130.

Rockenfeller, S. (2012). Life skills through games: A teacher´s guide (Stadi za maisha kupitia michezo: Mwongozo wa mwalimu). Cologne, Germany: Jambo Bukoba.

Rogge, J. (2004). IOC and UNAIDS join forces to engage sport community in fight against aids. IOC Press Release, 1(06), 04.

Rosso, E. G., & McGrath, R. (2013). Beyond recreation: Personal social networks and social capital in the transition of young players from recreational football to formal football clubs. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 48(4), 453-470.

Roth, J. L., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2003). What exactly is a youth development program? Answers from research and practice. Applied developmental science, 7(2), 94-111.

180

Rutten, E. A., Stams, G. J. J., Biesta, G. J., Schuengel, C., Dirks, E., & Hoeksma, J. B. (2007). The contribution of organized youth sport to antisocial and prosocial behavior in adolescent athletes. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36(3), 255-264.

Schulenkorf, N. (2012). Sustainable community development through sport and events: A conceptual framework for Sport-for-Development projects. Sport Management Review, 15(1), 1-12. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2011.06.001

Schulman, S., & Davies, T. (2007). Evidence of the impact of the youth development model on outcomes for young people - a literature review. Retrieved from Engalnd:

Search Institute. (1997, 2007). 40 Developmental Assets for Adolescents (ages 12-18). Minneapolis, MN: Search Institute.

Seymour, K. (2012). Good practice principles for youth development organisations (2 ed.). NSW, Australia: Griffith University.

Shaw, A., Brady, B., McGrath, B., Brennan, M. A., & Dolan, P. (2014). Understanding youth civic engagement: debates, discourses, and lessons from practice. Community Development, 45(4), 300-316. doi:10.1080/15575330.2014.931447

Shephard, R. J. (1997). Curricular physical activity and academic performance. Pediatric exercise science, 9, 113-126.

Shernoff, D. J. (2010). Engagement in after-school programs as a predictor of social competence and academic performance. American Journal of Community Psychology, 45(3-4), 325-337.

Shields, D. L., & Funk, C. (2011). Teach to compete. Strategies, 24(5), 8-11.

Shivji, I. (2007). Walalaheri na walalahoi. Retrieved from http://kifimbocheza.wordpress.com/2007/08/27/shivji-walalaheri-na-walalahoi/

Shoumatoff, A. (1988). African Madness. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

181

Siedentop, D., Hastie, P. A., & van der Mars, H. (2011). Complete guide to sport education. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Singh, A., Uijtdewilligen, L., Twisk, J. R., van Mechelen, W., & Chinapaw, M. M. (2012). Physical activity and performance at school: A systematic review of the literature including a methodological quality assessment. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 166(1), 49-55.

Siraj-Blatchford, I., Sammons, P., Taggart, B., Sylva, K., & Melhuish, E. (2006). Educational research and evidence-based policy: The mixed-method approach of the EPPE project. Evaluation & Research in Education, 19(2), 63-82.

Small, S., & Memmo, M. (2004). Contemporary models of youth development and problem prevention: Toward an integration of terms, concepts, and models. Family Relations, 53(1), 3-11.

Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. London: Zed books.

Spaaij, R. (2009). Sport as a vehicle for social mobility and regulation of disadvantaged urban youth: Lessons from Rotterdam. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 44(2- 3), 247-264.

Spaaij, R. (2012). Beyond the playing field: experiences of sport, social capital, and integration among Somalis in Australia. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 35(9), 1519-1538.

Spaaij, R., & Jeanes, R. (2013). Education for social change? A Freirean critique of sport for development and peace. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 18(4), 442-457.

Spence, J. (2005). Concepts of youth. In R. Harrison & C. Wise (Eds.), Working with young people (pp. 46-56). London: Thousand Oaks.

Stead, R., & Neville, M. (2010). The impact of physical education and sport on education outcomes: a review of literature. Loughborough: Institute of Youth Sport.

182

TACAIDS, ZAC, NBS, OCGS, & Macro International Inc. (2008). Tanzania HIV/AIDS and Malaria indicator survey, 2007-08. Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania: Tanzania Commission for AIDS, Zanzibar AIDS Commission, National Bureau of Statistics, Office of the Chief Government Statistician Zanzibar and Macro International Inc,USA.

TACAIDS, ZAC, NBS, OCGS Zanzibar, & ICF International. (2013). Tanzania HIV/AIDS and Malaria Indicator Survey 2011-2012: Key Findings. Dar es salaam, Tanzania: Tanzania Commission for AIDS (TACAIDS), Zanzibar AIDS Commission (ZAC), National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), Office of the Chief Government Statistician, Zanzibar (OCGS), ICF International.

Tarricone, P., & Luca, J. (2002). Successful teamwork: A case study in quality conversations. Paper presented at the 25th HERDSA Annual Conference, , 7-10 July, Perth, Western Australia. te Lintelo, D. (2012). Unspoken assumptions: Youth participation and the African policy process. Paper presented at the Youth, People, Farming and Food - March 19–21, Accra, Ghana. Conference paper retrieved from dialogue2012.fanrpan.org/sites/default/files/publications/te_Lintelo_Unspoken_assum ptions_revised.pdf

Theokas, C., Danish, S. J., Hodge, K., Heke, I., & Forneris, T. (2008). Enhancing life skills through sport for children and youth. In N. L. Holt (Ed.), Positive youth development through sport (pp. 71-81). New York: Routledge.

Timpson, S., McCurdy, S., Leshabari, M., Kilonzo, G., Atkinson, J., Msami, A., & Williams, M. L. (2006). Substance abuse, HIV risk and HIV/AIDS in Tanzania. African Journal of Drug & Alcohol Studies, 5(2), 157-168.

Trochim, W. M. (2005). Research methods: The concise knowledge base: Atomic Dog Publishing.

Trudeau, F., & Shephard, R. J. (2008). Physical education, school physical activity, school sports and academic performance. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act, 5, 10.

183

Turner, d. S. (2005). Youth, Hope & Cultural Creatives: Possible Conceptual Connections. Youth Studies Australia, 24(2), 17.

UNECA. (2013). Outcome document of the regional consultations on the Post-2015 Development Agenda: United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA).

UNESCO. (2010). Education For All: Global monitoring report 2010: Reaching the marginalized: UNESCO, Paris.

UNICEF. (2012). Cities and children: The challenge of urbanisation in Tanzania. Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania: United Nations Children’s Fund

UNICEF. (n.d). Life skills. United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF). Retrieved from http://www.unicef.org/lifeskills/index_7308.html

United Nations. (2007). The World Youth Report 2007: Young people’s transition to adulthood: progress and challenges (Report). Retrieved 25/05/2015, from United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs http://undesadspd.org/WorldYouthReport/2007.aspx

Urdal, H. (2006). A Clash of Generations? Youth Bulges and Political Violence. International Studies Quarterly, 50(3), 607-629.

URoT. (2013). Views of the people: Final draft. Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania: Poverty Monitoring, Ministry of Finance Retrieved from http://www.povertymonitoring.go.tz/.

Vamplew, W. (2007). Playing with the rules: Influences on the development of regulation in sport. The International Journal of the History of Sport, 24(7), 843-871. doi:10.1080/09523360701311745 van Eekeren, F. (2006). Sport and development: Challenges in a new arena. Sport and Development. Tielt: Lannoo.

VicSport. (2008). Youth leadership programs. Retrieved from Melbourne, AU:

184

Wagner, C. M., Lyimo, E. D., & Lwendo, S. (2012). Matches but no fire: street children in Dar Es salaam, Tanzania. In M. O. Ensor (Ed.), African Childhoods: Education, Development, Peacebuilding, and the Youngest Continent (pp. 33-46). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Wehmeyer, M. L., Agran, M., & Hughes, C. (1998). Teaching self-determination to students with disabilities: Basic skills for successful transition. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

White, A. (2012). BILD Tanzania evaluation report. Retrieved from London:

White, R. D., & Wyn, J. (2013). Youth and society (3 ed.). Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.

White, R. D., Wyn, J., & Albanese, P. (2008). Youth and society: Exploring the social dynamics of youth experience. South Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.

Whitlock, J. (2004). Understanding youth development principles and practices. Research facts and findings.

Wicks, A., Beedy, J. P., Spangler, K. J., & Perkins, D. F. (2007). Intermediaries supporting sports-based youth development programs. New Directions for Youth Development, 2007(115), 107-118.

Wierenga, A., & Wyn, J. (2011). Generic Youth Development Framework: A discussion document for Department of Defence. Youth Research Centre, The University of Melbourne and The Australian Government Department of Defense, Commonwealth of Australia, Melbourne and Canberra.

Wierenga, A., & Wyn, J. (2012). Cadet youth development framework - Document 1. Youth Research Centre, The University of Melbourne and The Australian Government Department of Defense, Commonwealth of Australia, Melbourne.

185

Wijeyesekera, D. (2011). The State of Youth Volunteering in Africa: a discussion paper for the 2011 IVCO conference. Paper presented at the International Forum on Development Service.

Wilson, W. J. (1999). Jobless Poverty: A new form of social dislocation in the Inner-City Ghetto. In P. Moen, D. Dempster-McClain, & H. A. Walker (Eds.), A nation divided: Diversity, inequality, and community in American Society (pp. 133-150). New York: Cornell University Press.

Wizara ya Elimu na Utamaduni. (1995). Sera ya Maendeleo ya Michezo. Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania.

Women's Refugee Commission. (2005). Dont forget us: the education and gender-based violence protection needs of adolescent girls from Darfur in Chad. Retrieved from New York:

Wood, J., Westwood, S., & Thompson, G. (2014). Youth Work: Preparation for Practice: Routledge.

World Health Organization. (1999). Partners in life skills education. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, Department of Mental Health.

Worthy, A. (2005). Supporting children and young people through transition. London: National Children’s Bureau.

Wright, D. E. (2015). Active Learning: Social Justice Education and Participatory Action Research: Routledge.

Wyn, J., & White, R. D. (1997). Rethinking youth. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods: Sage publications.

Youth Development Department. (2007). National Youth Development Policy. Dar Es Salaam: Youth Development Department, Ministry of Information, Culture, Youth and Sports.

186

Zaccaro, S. J., Heinen, B., Shuffler, M., Salas, E., Goodwin, G., & Burke, C. (2009). Team leadership and team effectiveness. Team effectiveness in complex organizations: Cross- disciplinary perspectives and approaches, 83-111.

Zakus, D. H. (1999). The Saskatchewan Roughriders and the construction of identity and regional resistance in Saskatchewan, Canada. Football Studies, 2(2), 57-76.

187

APPENDICES

Appendix 1

188

189

Appendix 2 A cross tabulation of youths’ responses to the questionnaire

Value: VALUING YOUNG PEOPLE

Principle: RECOGNISING STRENGTH

Good practice: Recognising achievement

Indicator: My achievements are recognized in the program FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 8 16 70 94 High % within IMPORTANCE 8.5% 17.0% 74.5% 100.0% % of Total 6.8% 13.6% 59.3% 79.7% Count 0 13 7 20 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 65.0% 35.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 11.0% 5.9% 16.9% Count 0 3 1 4 Low % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 75.0% 25.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 2.5% 0.8% 3.4% Count 8 32 78 118 Total % within IMPORTANCE 6.8% 27.1% 66.1% 100.0% % of Total 6.8% 27.1% 66.1% 100.0%

Indicator: Young people’s achievements are celebrated

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 10 13 71 94 High % within IMPORTANCE 10.6% 13.8% 75.5% 100.0% % of Total 8.5% 11.1% 60.7% 80.3% Count 1 17 1 19 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 5.3% 89.5% 5.3% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 14.5% 0.9% 16.2% Count 1 3 0 4 Low % within IMPORTANCE 25.0% 75.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 2.6% 0.0% 3.4% Count 12 33 72 117 Total % within IMPORTANCE 10.3% 28.2% 61.5% 100.0% % of Total 10.3% 28.2% 61.5% 100.0%

Indicator: I am able to achieve at the right level for me FREQUENCY Sometimes Often Total Never

Count 9 15 72 96 High % within IMPORTANCE 9.4% 15.6% 75.0% 100.0% % of Total 7.8% 12.9% 62.1% 82.8% Count 1 9 7 17 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 5.9% 52.9% 41.2% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 7.8% 6.0% 14.7% Count 1 2 0 3 Low % within IMPORTANCE 33.3% 66.7% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 1.7% 0.0% 2.6% Count 11 26 79 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 9.5% 22.4% 68.1% 100.0% % of Total 9.5% 22.4% 68.1% 100.0%

189

190

Good practice: Prioritising participation

Indicator: I have responsibility for my organisation’s achievements FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 7 21 74 102 High % within IMPORTANCE 6.9% 20.6% 72.5% 100.0% % of Total 6.1% 18.3% 64.3% 88.7% Count 1 11 0 12 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 8.3% 91.7% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 9.6% 0.0% 10.4% Count 0 1 0 1 Low % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 0.9% 0.0% 0.9% Count 8 33 74 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 7.0% 28.7% 64.3% 100.0% % of Total 7.0% 28.7% 64.3% 100.0%

Indicator: I am able to influence what we do in our program FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 7 23 63 93 High % within IMPORTANCE 7.5% 24.7% 67.7% 100.0% % of Total 6.0% 19.8% 54.3% 80.2% Count 1 14 4 19 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 5.3% 73.7% 21.1% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 12.1% 3.4% 16.4% Count 3 1 0 4 Low % within IMPORTANCE 75.0% 25.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 2.6% 0.9% 0.0% 3.4% Count 11 38 67 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 9.5% 32.8% 57.8% 100.0% % of Total 9.5% 32.8% 57.8% 100.0%

Indicator: I am able to give feedback on the quality of our program FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 9 12 51 72 High % within IMPORTANCE 12.5% 16.7% 70.8% 100.0% % of Total 7.9% 10.5% 44.7% 63.2% Count 1 24 7 32 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 3.1% 75.0% 21.9% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 21.1% 6.1% 28.1% Count 6 3 1 10 Low % within IMPORTANCE 60.0% 30.0% 10.0% 100.0% % of Total 5.3% 2.6% 0.9% 8.8% Count 16 39 59 114 Total % within IMPORTANCE 14.0% 34.2% 51.8% 100.0% % of Total 14.0% 34.2% 51.8% 100.0%

190

191

Principle: LOOKING OUT FOR EACH OTHER

Good practice: Allowing challenges and risks

Indicator: I feel safe to participate in activities that involve risks

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 7 17 66 90 High % within IMPORTANCE 7.8% 18.9% 73.3% 100.0% % of Total 6.2% 15.2% 58.9% 80.4% Count 1 12 6 19 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 5.3% 63.2% 31.6% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 10.7% 5.4% 17.0% Count 2 0 1 3 Low % within IMPORTANCE 66.7% 0.0% 33.3% 100.0% % of Total 1.8% 0.0% 0.9% 2.7% Count 10 29 73 112 Total % within IMPORTANCE 8.9% 25.9% 65.2% 100.0% % of Total 8.9% 25.9% 65.2% 100.0%

Indicator: I understand the risks and how to manage them FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 9 17 60 86 High % within IMPORTANCE 10.5% 19.8% 69.8% 100.0% % of Total 7.8% 14.8% 52.2% 74.8% Count 0 17 8 25 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 68.0% 32.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 14.8% 7.0% 21.7% Count 3 0 1 4 Low % within IMPORTANCE 75.0% 0.0% 25.0% 100.0% % of Total 2.6% 0.0% 0.9% 3.5% Count 12 34 69 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 10.4% 29.6% 60.0% 100.0% % of Total 10.4% 29.6% 60.0% 100.0%

Indicator: I am able to get some things wrong and learn from them

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 8 14 80 102 High % within IMPORTANCE 7.8% 13.7% 78.4% 100.0% % of Total 6.9% 12.1% 69.0% 87.9% Count 0 8 4 12 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 6.9% 3.4% 10.3% Count 2 0 0 2 Low % within IMPORTANCE 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.7% Count 10 22 84 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 8.6% 19.0% 72.4% 100.0% % of Total 8.6% 19.0% 72.4% 100.0%

191

192

Good practice: Protecting and supporting

Indicator: I feel I belong in my organisation FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 9 10 85 104 High % within IMPORTANCE 8.7% 9.6% 81.7% 100.0% % of Total 7.7% 8.5% 72.6% 88.9% Count 0 8 4 12 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 6.8% 3.4% 10.3% Count 1 0 0 1 Low % within IMPORTANCE 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% Count 10 18 89 117 Total % within IMPORTANCE 8.5% 15.4% 76.1% 100.0% % of Total 8.5% 15.4% 76.1% 100.0%

Indicator: I receive clear feedback on where I can strengthen my activities next time FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 8 13 63 84 High % within IMPORTANCE 9.5% 15.5% 75.0% 100.0% % of Total 7.0% 11.4% 55.3% 73.7% Count 1 20 3 24 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 4.2% 83.3% 12.5% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 17.5% 2.6% 21.1% Count 3 2 1 6 Low % within IMPORTANCE 50.0% 33.3% 16.7% 100.0% % of Total 2.6% 1.8% 0.9% 5.3% Count 12 35 67 114 Total % within IMPORTANCE 10.5% 30.7% 58.8% 100.0% % of Total 10.5% 30.7% 58.8% 100.0%

Indicator: I am actively engaged in risk assessment and planning for safe activities

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 9 14 44 67 High % within IMPORTANCE 13.4% 20.9% 65.7% 100.0% % of Total 7.8% 12.2% 38.3% 58.3% Count 2 26 7 35 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 5.7% 74.3% 20.0% 100.0% % of Total 1.7% 22.6% 6.1% 30.4% Count 12 1 0 13 Low % within IMPORTANCE 92.3% 7.7% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 10.4% 0.9% 0.0% 11.3% Count 23 41 51 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 20.0% 35.7% 44.3% 100.0% % of Total 20.0% 35.7% 44.3% 100.0%

192

193

Principle: BUILDING THE TEAM

Good practice: Communicating

Indicator: I understand what is expected of me by my leaders FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 8 25 66 99 High % within IMPORTANCE 8.1% 25.3% 66.7% 100.0% % of Total 6.9% 21.6% 56.9% 85.3% Count 1 8 5 14 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 7.1% 57.1% 35.7% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 6.9% 4.3% 12.1% Count 0 3 0 3 Low % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 2.6% Count 9 36 71 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 7.8% 31.0% 61.2% 100.0% % of Total 7.8% 31.0% 61.2% 100.0%

Indicator: When I give feedback to my leaders I find it is taken seriously FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 4 23 45 72 High % within IMPORTANCE 5.6% 31.9% 62.5% 100.0% % of Total 3.4% 19.7% 38.5% 61.5% Count 1 23 9 33 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 3.0% 69.7% 27.3% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 19.7% 7.7% 28.2% Count 9 2 1 12 Low % within IMPORTANCE 75.0% 16.7% 8.3% 100.0% % of Total 7.7% 1.7% 0.9% 10.3% Count 14 48 55 117 Total % within IMPORTANCE 12.0% 41.0% 47.0% 100.0% % of Total 12.0% 41.0% 47.0% 100.0%

Indicator: I interact with people in the community as part of my program activities FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 7 16 70 93 High % within IMPORTANCE 7.5% 17.2% 75.3% 100.0% % of Total 6.0% 13.8% 60.3% 80.2% Count 0 13 5 18 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 72.2% 27.8% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 11.2% 4.3% 15.5% Count 2 2 1 5 Low % within IMPORTANCE 40.0% 40.0% 20.0% 100.0% % of Total 1.7% 1.7% 0.9% 4.3% Count 9 31 76 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 7.8% 26.7% 65.5% 100.0% % of Total 7.8% 26.7% 65.5% 100.0%

193

194

Principle: BUILDING THE TEAM

Good practice: Fostering teamwork

Indicator: Team work is part of my organisation experience FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 5 12 85 102 High % within IMPORTANCE 4.9% 11.8% 83.3% 100.0% % of Total 4.3% 10.3% 73.3% 87.9% Count 0 6 5 11 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 54.5% 45.5% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 5.2% 4.3% 9.5% Count 2 1 0 3 Low % within IMPORTANCE 66.7% 33.3% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 1.7% 0.9% 0.0% 2.6% Count 7 19 90 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 6.0% 16.4% 77.6% 100.0% % of Total 6.0% 16.4% 77.6% 100.0%

Indicator: I develop team work skills as a participant FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 6 21 76 103 High % within IMPORTANCE 5.8% 20.4% 73.8% 100.0% % of Total 5.2% 18.1% 65.5% 88.8% Count 1 8 3 12 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 8.3% 66.7% 25.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 6.9% 2.6% 10.3% Count 0 1 0 1 Low % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 0.9% 0.0% 0.9% Count 7 30 79 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 6.0% 25.9% 68.1% 100.0% % of Total 6.0% 25.9% 68.1% 100.0%

Indicator: I work in a team with adults in program activities FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 7 22 54 83 High % within IMPORTANCE 8.4% 26.5% 65.1% 100.0% % of Total 6.0% 19.0% 46.6% 71.6% Count 5 19 2 26 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 19.2% 73.1% 7.7% 100.0% % of Total 4.3% 16.4% 1.7% 22.4% Count 6 1 0 7 Low % within IMPORTANCE 85.7% 14.3% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 5.2% 0.9% 0.0% 6.0% Count 18 42 56 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 15.5% 36.2% 48.3% 100.0% % of Total 15.5% 36.2% 48.3% 100.0%

194

195

Good practice: Supporting potential (to grow and lead)

Indicator: I feel supported to develop my talents and skills FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 5 15 78 98 High % within IMPORTANCE 5.1% 15.3% 79.6% 100.0% % of Total 4.3% 12.9% 67.2% 84.5% Count 1 13 2 16 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 6.2% 81.2% 12.5% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 11.2% 1.7% 13.8% Count 1 1 0 2 Low % within IMPORTANCE 50.0% 50.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 0.9% 0.0% 1.7% Count 7 29 80 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 6.0% 25.0% 69.0% 100.0% % of Total 6.0% 25.0% 69.0% 100.0%

Indicator: I am mentored in my youth organisation

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 7 11 66 84 High % within IMPORTANCE 8.3% 13.1% 78.6% 100.0% % of Total 6.1% 9.6% 57.4% 73.0% Count 0 19 7 26 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 73.1% 26.9% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 16.5% 6.1% 22.6% Count 4 1 0 5 Low % within IMPORTANCE 80.0% 20.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 3.5% 0.9% 0.0% 4.3% Count 11 31 73 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 9.6% 27.0% 63.5% 100.0% % of Total 9.6% 27.0% 63.5% 100.0%

Indicator: I work in a team with adults in program activities

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 7 17 66 90 High % within IMPORTANCE 7.8% 18.9% 73.3% 100.0% % of Total 6.2% 15.2% 58.9% 80.4% Count 3 11 3 17 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 17.6% 64.7% 17.6% 100.0% % of Total 2.7% 9.8% 2.7% 15.2% Count 4 1 0 5 Low % within IMPORTANCE 80.0% 20.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 3.6% 0.9% 0.0% 4.5% Count 14 29 69 112 Total % within IMPORTANCE 12.5% 25.9% 61.6% 100.0% % of Total 12.5% 25.9% 61.6% 100.0%

195

196

Good practice: Welcoming diversity

Indicator: I feel welcome to participate in any activities in my organisation FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 5 13 85 103 High % within IMPORTANCE 4.9% 12.6% 82.5% 100.0% % of Total 4.3% 11.2% 73.3% 88.8% Count 1 10 0 11 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 9.1% 90.9% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 8.6% 0.0% 9.5% Count 1 1 0 2 Low % within IMPORTANCE 50.0% 50.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 0.9% 0.0% 1.7% Count 7 24 85 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 6.0% 20.7% 73.3% 100.0% % of Total 6.0% 20.7% 73.3% 100.0%

Indicator: I can take part in activities that are at my level

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 7 12 83 102 High % within IMPORTANCE 6.9% 11.8% 81.4% 100.0% % of Total 6.0% 10.3% 70.9% 87.2% Count 0 8 3 11 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 72.7% 27.3% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 6.8% 2.6% 9.4% Count 3 1 0 4 Low % within IMPORTANCE 75.0% 25.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 2.6% 0.9% 0.0% 3.4% Count 10 21 86 117 Total % within IMPORTANCE 8.5% 17.9% 73.5% 100.0% % of Total 8.5% 17.9% 73.5% 100.0%

Indicator: I have opportunities to meet people outside my usual social circle FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 8 14 65 87 High % within IMPORTANCE 9.2% 16.1% 74.7% 100.0% % of Total 7.0% 12.2% 56.5% 75.7% Count 1 15 6 22 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 4.5% 68.2% 27.3% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 13.0% 5.2% 19.1% Count 4 2 0 6 Low % within IMPORTANCE 66.7% 33.3% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 3.5% 1.7% 0.0% 5.2% Count 13 31 71 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 11.3% 27.0% 61.7% 100.0% % of Total 11.3% 27.0% 61.7% 100.0%

196

197

Principle: LEARNING AND GROWING FROM EXPERIENCE AND REFLECTION

Good practice: Developing skills in life and careers

Indicator: I learn practical life skills FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 3 22 73 98 High % within IMPORTANCE 3.1% 22.4% 74.5% 100.0% % of Total 2.6% 19.1% 63.5% 85.2% IMPORTANCE Count 0 12 5 17 Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 70.6% 29.4% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 10.4% 4.3% 14.8% Count 3 34 78 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 2.6% 29.6% 67.8% 100.0% % of Total 2.6% 29.6% 67.8% 100.0%

Indicator: I learn work and career-related skills FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 8 21 66 95 High % within IMPORTANCE 8.4% 22.1% 69.5% 100.0% % of Total 7.0% 18.3% 57.4% 82.6% Count 2 14 3 19 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 10.5% 73.7% 15.8% 100.0% % of Total 1.7% 12.2% 2.6% 16.5% Count 1 0 0 1 Low % within IMPORTANCE 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% Count 11 35 69 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 9.6% 30.4% 60.0% 100.0% % of Total 9.6% 30.4% 60.0% 100.0%

Indicator: I engage in activities that enable me to combine the theory I have learned with practice

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 3 22 65 90 High % within IMPORTANCE 3.3% 24.4% 72.2% 100.0% % of Total 2.6% 19.1% 56.5% 78.3% Count 4 15 2 21 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 19.0% 71.4% 9.5% 100.0% % of Total 3.5% 13.0% 1.7% 18.3% Count 2 1 0 3 Low % within IMPORTANCE 66.7% 33.3% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 1.7% 0.9% 0.0% 2.6% Count 9 39 67 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 7.8% 33.9% 58.3% 100.0% % of Total 7.8% 33.9% 58.3% 100.0%

197

198

Good practice: Gaining attitude and building character

Indicator: I learn how to solve problems

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 5 23 72 100 High % within IMPORTANCE 5.0% 23.0% 72.0% 100.0% % of Total 4.3% 20.0% 62.6% 87.0% IMPORTANCE Count 0 13 2 15 Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 86.7% 13.3% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 11.3% 1.7% 13.0% Count 5 36 74 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 4.3% 31.3% 64.3% 100.0% % of Total 4.3% 31.3% 64.3% 100.0%

Indicator: I learn how to reflect on actions and communications with others

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 7 16 75 98 High % within IMPORTANCE 7.1% 16.3% 76.5% 100.0% % of Total 6.0% 13.8% 64.7% 84.5% Count 1 10 3 14 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 7.1% 71.4% 21.4% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 8.6% 2.6% 12.1% Count 2 0 2 4 Low % within IMPORTANCE 50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0% % of Total 1.7% 0.0% 1.7% 3.4% Count 10 26 80 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 8.6% 22.4% 69.0% 100.0% % of Total 8.6% 22.4% 69.0% 100.0%

Indicator: I learn how to show respect to others FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 5 15 87 107 High % within IMPORTANCE 4.7% 14.0% 81.3% 100.0% % of Total 4.3% 12.9% 75.0% 92.2% IMPORTANCE Count 2 3 4 9 Medium % within IMPORTANCE 22.2% 33.3% 44.4% 100.0% % of Total 1.7% 2.6% 3.4% 7.8% Count 7 18 91 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 6.0% 15.5% 78.4% 100.0% % of Total 6.0% 15.5% 78.4% 100.0%

198

199

Good practice: Building resilience and capacity

Indicator: I learn how to cope and face problems FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 5 14 78 97 High % within IMPORTANCE 5.2% 14.4% 80.4% 100.0% % of Total 4.3% 12.2% 67.8% 84.3% Count 1 13 2 16 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 6.2% 81.2% 12.5% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 11.3% 1.7% 13.9% Count 1 0 1 2 Low % within IMPORTANCE 50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 0.0% 0.9% 1.7% Count 7 27 81 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 6.1% 23.5% 70.4% 100.0% % of Total 6.1% 23.5% 70.4% 100.0%

Indicator: I learn how to work with other people FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 7 18 75 100 High % within IMPORTANCE 7.0% 18.0% 75.0% 100.0% % of Total 6.1% 15.7% 65.2% 87.0% Count 1 7 5 13 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 7.7% 53.8% 38.5% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 6.1% 4.3% 11.3% Count 0 1 1 2 Low % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 0.9% 0.9% 1.7% Count 8 26 81 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 7.0% 22.6% 70.4% 100.0% % of Total 7.0% 22.6% 70.4% 100.0%

Indicator: I am supported to reflect on my capacities

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 7 17 77 101 High % within IMPORTANCE 6.9% 16.8% 76.2% 100.0% % of Total 6.0% 14.7% 66.4% 87.1% Count 1 11 2 14 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 7.1% 78.6% 14.3% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 9.5% 1.7% 12.1% Count 1 0 0 1 Low % within IMPORTANCE 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% Count 9 28 79 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 7.8% 24.1% 68.1% 100.0% % of Total 7.8% 24.1% 68.1% 100.0%

199

200

Value: DOING THINGS OF VALUE

Principle: ENGAGING IN THE REAL WORLD

Good practice: Embracing challenges

Indicator: I am exposed to new experiences FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 4 20 71 95 High % within IMPORTANCE 4.2% 21.1% 74.7% 100.0% % of Total 3.5% 17.4% 61.7% 82.6% Count 0 14 2 16 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 87.5% 12.5% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 12.2% 1.7% 13.9% Count 3 1 0 4 Low % within IMPORTANCE 75.0% 25.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 2.6% 0.9% 0.0% 3.5% Count 7 35 73 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 6.1% 30.4% 63.5% 100.0% % of Total 6.1% 30.4% 63.5% 100.0%

Indicator: I feel confident to take on new challenges FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 8 18 82 108 High % within IMPORTANCE 7.4% 16.7% 75.9% 100.0% % of Total 6.9% 15.5% 70.7% 93.1% IMPORTANCE Count 1 4 3 8 Medium % within IMPORTANCE 12.5% 50.0% 37.5% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 3.4% 2.6% 6.9% Count 9 22 85 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 7.8% 19.0% 73.3% 100.0% % of Total 7.8% 19.0% 73.3% 100.0%

Indicator: I feel challenged by the activities undertaken in the program FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 3 16 77 96 High % within IMPORTANCE 3.1% 16.7% 80.2% 100.0% % of Total 2.6% 13.9% 67.0% 83.5% Count 1 11 4 16 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 6.2% 68.8% 25.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 9.6% 3.5% 13.9% Count 1 1 1 3 Low % within IMPORTANCE 33.3% 33.3% 33.3% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 0.9% 0.9% 2.6% Count 5 28 82 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 4.3% 24.3% 71.3% 100.0% % of Total 4.3% 24.3% 71.3% 100.0%

200

201

Good practice: Hands-on experiences

Indicator: In the program I gain hands-on experience FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 3 20 76 99 High % within IMPORTANCE 3.0% 20.2% 76.8% 100.0% % of Total 2.6% 17.4% 66.1% 86.1% IMPORTANCE Count 0 12 4 16 Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 75.0% 25.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 10.4% 3.5% 13.9% Count 3 32 80 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 2.6% 27.8% 69.6% 100.0% % of Total 2.6% 27.8% 69.6% 100.0%

Indicator: In the program I am supported to learn by doing

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 8 19 74 101 High % within IMPORTANCE 7.9% 18.8% 73.3% 100.0% % of Total 7.0% 16.5% 64.3% 87.8% Count 1 8 3 12 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 8.3% 66.7% 25.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 7.0% 2.6% 10.4% Count 2 0 0 2 Low % within IMPORTANCE 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.7% Count 11 27 77 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 9.6% 23.5% 67.0% 100.0% % of Total 9.6% 23.5% 67.0% 100.0%

Indicator: In the program I learn from practical activities

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 6 15 76 97 High % within IMPORTANCE 6.2% 15.5% 78.4% 100.0% % of Total 5.3% 13.2% 66.7% 85.1% Count 0 11 4 15 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 73.3% 26.7% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 9.6% 3.5% 13.2% Count 2 0 0 2 Low % within IMPORTANCE 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 1.8% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8% Count 8 26 80 114 Total % within IMPORTANCE 7.0% 22.8% 70.2% 100.0% % of Total 7.0% 22.8% 70.2% 100.0%

201

202

Good practice: Contributing to the community

Indicator: In the program I engage with the wider community FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 8 22 61 91 High % within IMPORTANCE 8.8% 24.2% 67.0% 100.0% % of Total 7.0% 19.1% 53.0% 79.1% IMPORTANCE Count 1 20 3 24 Medium % within IMPORTANCE 4.2% 83.3% 12.5% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 17.4% 2.6% 20.9% Count 9 42 64 115 Total % within IMPORTANCE 7.8% 36.5% 55.7% 100.0% % of Total 7.8% 36.5% 55.7% 100.0%

Indicator: In the program I do activities that make a difference in my community

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 6 18 60 84 High % within IMPORTANCE 7.1% 21.4% 71.4% 100.0% % of Total 5.4% 16.1% 53.6% 75.0% Count 0 19 7 26 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 73.1% 26.9% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 17.0% 6.2% 23.2% Count 2 0 0 2 Low % within IMPORTANCE 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 1.8% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8% Count 8 37 67 112 Total % within IMPORTANCE 7.1% 33.0% 59.8% 100.0% % of Total 7.1% 33.0% 59.8% 100.0%

Indicator: I understand the value of serving my community FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total % of Total 6.9% 10.3% 75.0% 92.2% High % within IMPORTANCE 7.5% 11.2% 81.3% 100.0% Count 8 12 87 107 IMPORTANCE % of Total 0.0% 4.3% 3.4% 7.8% Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 55.6% 44.4% 100.0% Count 0 5 4 9 % of Total 6.9% 14.7% 78.4% 100.0% Total % within IMPORTANCE 6.9% 14.7% 78.4% 100.0% Count 8 17 91 116

202

203

Principle: BEING ACTIVE CITIZEN

Good practice: Building collective identity

Indicator: I understand the values of my organisation FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 5 10 82 97 High % within IMPORTANCE 5.2% 10.3% 84.5% 100.0% % of Total 4.3% 8.6% 70.7% 83.6% Count 0 14 4 18 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 77.8% 22.2% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 12.1% 3.4% 15.5% Count 0 1 0 1 Low % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 0.9% 0.0% 0.9% Count 5 25 86 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 4.3% 21.6% 74.1% 100.0% % of Total 4.3% 21.6% 74.1% 100.0%

Indicator: I feel confident to take on new challenges

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 6 9 88 103 High % within IMPORTANCE 5.8% 8.7% 85.4% 100.0% % of Total 5.3% 7.9% 77.2% 90.4% Count 0 5 4 9 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 0.0% 55.6% 44.4% 100.0% % of Total 0.0% 4.4% 3.5% 7.9% Count 2 0 0 2 Low % within IMPORTANCE 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 1.8% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8% Count 8 14 92 114 Total % within IMPORTANCE 7.0% 12.3% 80.7% 100.0% % of Total 7.0% 12.3% 80.7% 100.0%

Indicator: In the program I experience being part of something bigger than myself FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 6 9 87 102 High % within IMPORTANCE 5.9% 8.8% 85.3% 100.0% % of Total 5.2% 7.8% 75.0% 87.9% Count 1 5 7 13 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 7.7% 38.5% 53.8% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 4.3% 6.0% 11.2% Count 1 0 0 1 Low % within IMPORTANCE 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% Count 8 14 94 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 6.9% 12.1% 81.0% 100.0% % of Total 6.9% 12.1% 81.0% 100.0%

203

204

Principle: BEING ACTIVE CITIZENS

Good practice: Leading in communities

Indicator: I understand what is expected of me as a leader in the community FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 5 9 81 95 High % within IMPORTANCE 5.3% 9.5% 85.3% 100.0% % of Total 4.4% 8.0% 71.7% 84.1% Count 1 12 4 17 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 5.9% 70.6% 23.5% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 10.6% 3.5% 15.0% Count 1 0 0 1 Low % within IMPORTANCE 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 0.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% Count 7 21 85 113 Total % within IMPORTANCE 6.2% 18.6% 75.2% 100.0% % of Total 6.2% 18.6% 75.2% 100.0%

Indicator: In the program I engage with the community on a regular basis

FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 5 24 54 83 High % within IMPORTANCE 6.0% 28.9% 65.1% 100.0% % of Total 4.3% 20.7% 46.6% 71.6% Count 2 21 5 28 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 7.1% 75.0% 17.9% 100.0% % of Total 1.7% 18.1% 4.3% 24.1% Count 4 1 0 5 Low % within IMPORTANCE 80.0% 20.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 3.4% 0.9% 0.0% 4.3% Count 11 46 59 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 9.5% 39.7% 50.9% 100.0% % of Total 9.5% 39.7% 50.9% 100.0%

Indicator: In the program I lead activities that make a difference in the community FREQUENCY Never Sometimes Often Total Count 5 15 73 93 High % within IMPORTANCE 5.4% 16.1% 78.5% 100.0% % of Total 4.3% 12.9% 62.9% 80.2% Count 2 15 3 20 IMPORTANCE Medium % within IMPORTANCE 10.0% 75.0% 15.0% 100.0% % of Total 1.7% 12.9% 2.6% 17.2% Count 3 0 0 3 Low % within IMPORTANCE 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% % of Total 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% Count 10 30 76 116 Total % within IMPORTANCE 8.6% 25.9% 65.5% 100.0% % of Total 8.6% 25.9% 65.5% 100.0%

204

205

Appendix 3

Themes and subthemes as extracted from focus groups

SUMMARY OF PARTICIPANTS’ RESPONSES

Focus Focus Focus group 3 PARTICIPANTS Group 1 Group 2 STAFF, VOLUNTEERS FREQUENCY YOUNG YOUNG AND PROGRAM (%) THEMES PEOPLE PEOPLE MANAGERS

MAJOR THEME: What do you think young people Needs of young people need in order to thrive in life?

SUBTHEMES

Basic needs √ √ √ 100

Preparedness √ √ √ 100

Connectedness √ √ √ 100

Life skills √ √ 66.7

MAJOR THEME: What is your understanding of Meaning of life skills life skills ?

SUBTHEMES

Competencies √ √ √ 100

Knowledge √ √ 66.7

abilities √ √ 66.7

MAJOR THEME: What type of skills-building experiences does your sport-oriented youth Life skills building activities development program offer?

SUBTHEMES

Educational sports-related activities √ √ √ 100

Civic activities √ √ √ 100

Tournaments/Bonanza √ √ √ 100

MAJOR THEME: What do consider to the strengths of your youth sport program Strengths of the program compared to other organisations you know about?

SUBTHEMES

Transferability √ √ 66.7

205

206

Support √ √ 66.7

Hands-on-experience √ √ 66.7

Relevance of the program content √ 66.7

Social contribution √ √ 66.7

MAJOR THEME: What do you consider to be Missing gaps between program and community interests the weaknesses of your youth sport program?

SUBTHEMES

Lack of awareness √ √ √ 100

Perception √ √ √ 100

Communication as a barrier √ √ 66.7

Leadership issues √ √ 66.7

Lack of community engagement √ 33.3

Religious conflict √ 33.3

MAJOR THEME: How can your youth sport Essential components for effective and sustainable sport- program be strengthened to make it more oriented youth development program effective or successful?

SUBTHEMES

Infrastructure √ √ 66.7

Collaboration √ √ 66.7

Awareness √ √ 66.7

Investment √ 33.3

Cultural issues √ 33.3

206

Minerva Access is the Institutional Repository of The University of Melbourne

Author/s: John, Chalukulu Bilinzozi

Title: Sport and youth development: the practice of sport-oriented youth development programs in Tanzania

Date: 2017

Persistent Link: http://hdl.handle.net/11343/148432

File Description: Sport and Youth Development: The Practice of Sport-Oriented Youth Development Programs in Tanzania

Terms and Conditions: Terms and Conditions: Copyright in works deposited in Minerva Access is retained by the copyright owner. The work may not be altered without permission from the copyright owner. Readers may only download, print and save electronic copies of whole works for their own personal non-commercial use. Any use that exceeds these limits requires permission from the copyright owner. Attribution is essential when quoting or paraphrasing from these works.