Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship

Volume 1 | Issue 1 Article 7

September 2008 Participatory Research and Community Youth Development: VOICES in Sarasota County, Florida Moya L. Alfonso

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/jces

Recommended Citation Alfonso, Moya L. (2008) "Participatory Research and Community Youth Development: VOICES in Sarasota County, Florida," Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship: Vol. 1 : Iss. 1 , Article 7. Available at: https://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/jces/vol1/iss1/7

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship by an authorized editor of Nighthawks Open Institutional Repository. Alfonso: Participatory Research and Community Youth Development

By taking on the role of researcher or evaluator, youth experiment with new behaviors and possible identities — a key developmental task.

Participatory Research and Community Youth Development: VOICES in Sarasota County, Florida

Moya L. Alfonso, Karen Bogues, Meredith Russo, and Kelli McCormack Brown

Abstract participants, not solely beneficiaries, they tend This article reports a case study of communi- to experience optimal development”; and (3) ty-based participatory action research conducted “adults can overcome negative attitudes and mis- as a community youth development activity, information about youth if they join with youth demonstrating a trend toward engaging youth in to address community concerns” (Camino, 2000, youth development efforts. The project actively pp. 11-12). engaged middle school youth in their communi- Community-based participatory research ties and offered an avenue through which they offers numerous benefits to youth, communi- could contribute to matters of importance to ties, and universities (for a summary see Al- them. Youth are presented as stakeholders in the fonso, 2004), including positive developmental research process. Concrete strategies for collabo- outcomes for youth, healthier communities, rating with youth are described and evaluated. increased utilization of community programs and resources, and improved research processes Introduction and outcomes (Green and Mercer, 2001; Landis, ommunity-based participatory action re- Alfonso, Ziegler, Christy, Abrenica, and Brown, search offers an alternative to traditional 1999; Meucci and Schwab, 1997; Minkler and Cyouth development efforts that “assume Wallerstein, 1997). youth can be developed separate from their Involving youth in the research process communities and in organizations devoid of may result in more reliable results because of community members” (London, Zimmerman, decreased social distance, broader information and Erbstein, 2003, p. 34). Community-based scope, increased credibility with the target audi- participatory action research is an approach that ence, inclusion of key stakeholders, enhanced actively engages youth in their communities and intervention attractiveness, greater acceptance of offers them a voice in issues that affect them (for the research design and results, and more accu- a discussion of youth development programs rate assessments of the invasiveness of methods see Roth, 2004). This approach is based on the and questions (Alfonso, 2002). premises that: (1) “strong communities are built Our study took place in Sarasota County, on active participation and civic engagement of Florida. Over the past several years, commu- members, including youth”; (2) “if youth are nity-based participatory research has been used able to participate in civic and public affairs as here to address local public health concerns like

Published by Nighthawks34 Open Institutional Repository, 2008 JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SCHOLARSHIP–Vol. 1, No. 1 1 Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, Vol. 1, Iss. 1 [2008], Art. 7 tobacco and alcohol use among adolescents other than the object of study, youth first have (Landis et al., 1999; McCormack Brown, McDer- to be considered stakeholders in the research mott, Bryant, and Forthofer, 2003; McCormack process. Stakeholders include “the people whose Brown, Forthofer, Bryant, et al., 2001). The level lives are affected by the program under evalua- of involvement of youth in the research process tion and the people whose decisions will affect in Sarasota County has varied. For the alcohol the future of the program” (Bryk, 1983). [For a and tobacco prevention research, for example, historical discussion of stakeholder involvement youth were hired and trained to conduct research in research see Bryk (1983), Coleman (1976), and with the intent of decreasing the social distance Gold (1981).] Research studies designed without between the researcher and the researched; youth the input of key stakeholders are arguably more development was not the primary goal (Landis narrowly focused than they would have been et al., 1999). Youth researchers were involved at had stakeholders been involved in deciding what the level of research assistant and had little con- questions should be asked (Coleman, 1976) and trol over the direction of the research process result in information that is less likely to be used and use of results (Kirshner and O’Donoghue, in the decision-making process (Gold, 1981). 2001; Landis et al., 1999). In our study, however, Evidence supports youth capacity for func- youth were actively involved at every level of the tioning as stakeholders in the research process, research process and collaborated with adults to so long as developmental issues are considered determine the direction of the research. A case and respected (Finn and Checkoway, 1998; Hart, study of VOICES (Viewpoints of Interested 1997; Hart et al., 1997; Hartman, DeCicco, and Civically Engaged Students) is presented as a Griffin, 1994; Horsch, Little, Smith, Goodyear, community youth development activity. Youth and Harris, 2002; McCormack Brown et al., 2001; researchers’ thoughts on community-based par- Ozer et al., 2008). Within the realm of public ticipatory action research are shared, methods health, for example, youth have contributed to and results are detailed, and lessons learned are research in the areas of wellness (Schwab, 1997), discussed. Connections between research and community health (Torres, 1998), HIV/AIDS action are demonstrated. (Harper and Carver, 1999; Nastasi et al., 1998), sexual risk (Schensul, 1998), tobacco and alco- Guiding Research Objectives hol use (Landis et al., 1999; McCormack Brown In keeping with the Community Youth De- et al., 2001), and physical activity and nutrition velopment (CYD) Model, the project was or- (Alfonso, Jenkins, and Calkins, 2003). ganized and led by a youth-adult partnership Most youth have been involved at the level formed between the second and third authors. of research assistant, not as research partners The model is used to assess gaps in services and (Kirshner and O’Donoghue, 2001), underscoring barriers to participation and tries to identify how a tendency for adults to limit youths’ contribu- best to meet needs through creation of programs. tions to the research process. Project organizers created VOICES to identify gaps in out-of-school time activities, barriers Participatory Research as Youth Development to participation in existing programs, and spe- Youth involvement in research and evalua- cific needs of youth addressed through systemic tion is seen as a youth development opportunity changes. However, through the course of the when youth are provided with opportunities for project, youth researchers, who were considered making substantial contributions to the research partners in the research process, included foci on and evaluation process (Harper and Carver, other issues relevant to teens’ lives, such as trans- 1999). Participatory action research provides an portation, family relationships, and use of leisure avenue through which youth can make substan- time. Ultimately, five domains of middle school- tial contributions to the research process (Kir- ers’ lives were explored: family, peers, school, shner, Strobel, and Fernandez, 2003). Participa- neighborhood, and the future. tory action research is based on the notion that knowledge generated through action and contex- Youth as Stakeholders in Research tual experimentation and participatory democra- To be involved in research as something cy will inform methods and goals of the research https://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/jces/vol1/iss1/7JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SCHOLARSHIP–Vol. 1, No. 1 35 2 Alfonso: Participatory Research and Community Youth Development process (Greenwood and Levin, 2000). possible identities — a key developmental task Participatory action research is multi-method (Dworkin and Bremer, 2004). Effective youth and involves participants in each step, from de- development participatory research programs fining objectives to application of results (Green- encourage youth to perform beyond their cur- wood and Levin, 2000). Professional research- rent capacity and take on new roles (Horsch et ers serve as cogenerators of knowledge within al., 2002; Roth, 2004; Sabo, 2003). For example, the participatory action research framework. within the research and evaluation context, sup- Stakeholders’ local knowledge combined with portive adults teach youth evaluation or research professional researchers’ training and expertise terms, thus providing youth with access to a combine to create a more valid, credible, and re- script they can use when performing in their new liable understanding of the issue at hand (Green- role as researchers (Sabo, 2003). Adults perform wood and Levin, 2000). Professionally trained in facilitative, as opposed to instructional, roles researchers serve as important sources of support by guiding and assisting youth and document- for lay researchers, especially since stakeholders ing but not directing the process (Sabo, 2003; are, in general, “not sufficiently well organized Schwab, 1997; Vos, 2001). Adults nourish youth’s or not sufficiently affluent” to organize, fund, sense of authority by creating moments when and manage policy research (Coleman, 1976, p. youth are in challenging roles (e.g., teaching, re- 308). Participatory approaches to research do not search) and using these experiences to reflect on claim to solve power differentials between re- what the youth have learned (Kelly, 1993). searchers and the researched. Power is not given to participants, though circumstances that allow Community Youth Development for empowerment are created (Carrick, Mitchell, in Sarasota County and Lloyd, 2001; Kelly, 1993). The CYD of Sarasota County has been the Supportive and caring relationships with leader in youth civic engagement in Sarasota adults and peers are key to youths’ learning and County since 1995. It is a voluntary collabora- development (Vygotsky, 1978). Surrounded by tion of not-for-profit youth-serving agencies and caring and supportive adults, youth can partici- teens working to address the needs of middle and pate as researchers and evaluators and become high school youth. CYD’s core philosophy is to invested in the health and well-being of their engage young people as vital resources and ex- communities (Camino, 2000; Kirshner et al., perts in the process of addressing the needs of 2003). The development of ongoing relation- their peers. CYD strives to provide youth with an ships with adults and pairing of youth with ex- environment that is conducive to positive youth perts (i.e., adults or older youth) is an effective development. (See Larson, Eccles, and Goot- method for ensuring that youth understand proj- man, 2004, and Dworkin and Bremer, 2004, for ects in which they are involved and develop the descriptions of key features.) Youth serve as equal requisite skills for conducting research and evalu- decision makers in all aspects of the program ation (Harper and Carver, 1999; Hart et al., 1997; including hiring staff, setting budgets, writing Horsch et al., 2002; Johnson and Johnson, 1985; grants, establishing policy and procedures, creat- Vos, 2001; McCormack Brown et al., 2001). Prin- ing positive drug-free events, and evaluating the ciples associated with youth research and evalu- program. ation include respect, equality, empowerment, CYD has an annual budget of $500,000 and and collaborating with youth in all aspects of operates with three full-time and three part-time the project (Camino, 2000). Dialogue is an im- staff, including two teens. CYD serves as a role portant component of participatory research and model for Sarasota County in the practice of community youth development. Adults facili- youth-adult partnerships and engaging youth as tate youth development by actively encouraging resources. This is accomplished through training dialogue and allowing youth to answer questions youth and adults, developing youth-adult part- asked of the adult researcher, paraphrasing and nerships that focus on specific activities (e.g., soliciting comments from quiet youth (Hart et National Youth Service Day events) that provide al., 1997; Kelly, 1993). first-hand opportunities for community leaders By taking on the role of researcher or evalu- to work with teens, and advocating for oppor- ator, youth experiment with new behaviors and tunities for youth to be engaged in addressing

Published by Nighthawks36 Open Institutional Repository, 2008 JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SCHOLARSHIP–Vol. 1, No. 1 3 Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, Vol. 1, Iss. 1 [2008], Art. 7 issues that affect their lives (e.g., law enforce- recruited with the cooperation and assistance of ment, education). the Sarasota County School District, especially Because of CYD’s success, youth civic en- middle school coordinators and faculty and staff gagement initiatives have been able to gain cred- from four local middle schools. Middle school ibility and acceptance very quickly within the coordinators were hired to coordinate prevention community. Community leaders who collabo- activities in the school. One of their roles was rate with CYD are familiar with the CYD require- to engage youth in prevention activities. Youth ment that youth must be involved as partners in were targeted based on their interest in learning everything they do. new things and making a difference in their com- munity. In addition, adults were asked to identify The VOICES Project youth who had leadership potential not being The VOICES project represents an impor- cultivated in another way (e.g., student govern- tant component of CYD’s Youth Civic Engage- ment). Twenty students applied for the program, ment Initiative. The Coalition of Community 12 attended an orientation meeting, and eight Foundations for Youth and the Community completed the training program and worked on Foundation of Sarasota County funded the proj- the research project. All eight youth researchers ect. VOICES was created as a means of engaging were eighth-graders. Approximately half were ac- middle school youth in civic life through mean- tively involved in school or community activities ingful participation. Whereas CYD had an exten- (e.g., Boy Scouts, student government), while the sive civic engagement program in place for high others participated because they were looking to school youth designed to increase participation get more involved in their community. in civic activities such as voting, civic discourse, Training and support. Youth researchers re- and community leadership, leadership and civic ceived training in leadership, community assess- engagement programming for middle school ment, and communication skills from staff and youth was limited. VOICES was an effort to em- volunteers of CYD. Staff and the first author power and engage middle school youth in com- provided training and technical assistance on re- munity decision making by sharing their view- search skills. Training modules included ethics, points through the research project. VOICES question development, focus group guide de- varied from our regular approach by utilizing a velopment, focus group moderation, qualitative research model to gather and assess information data analysis, and survey development, delivered collected and engaging middle school youth. in that order. Youth researchers attended an orien- The third author, while in her junior year tation, one-day of mapping and consensus build- at a local high school, developed VOICES. A ing training, one day of focus group training, graduate of the Students Taking Active Roles one day of focus group re-training, and two days (STAR) leadership training offered by CYD, she of survey development. From January through developed VOICES after attending a presenta- March, youth researches received six days of tion on a similar initiative offered in California formal training. Surveys were administered in through the John Gardner Leadership Center at April, survey data entered over the summer, and Stanford University (http://gardnercenter.stan- the final report presented and delivered in Sep- ford.edu). The purpose of VOICES was to learn tember. about Sarasota County teens by going to the “ex- The general training approach involved: (1) perts” — teens. This is central to the philosophy presenting information through discussion, brief of CYD. By engaging youth in the process of lectures, modeling of skills, and participation; (2) identifying teens’ needs, community organiza- helping youth make the research their own; and tions learn the most effective ways of addressing (3) providing opportunities for practice and feed- teen needs through programming and can expect back (Alfonso, 2004). Sole reliance on lecture- better participation because teens are promoting based training strategies was avoided (see Takata the activities and behaviors to their peers. and Leiting, 1987). Opportunities for reinforce- ment were provided throughout the project. Spe- cific training strategies included youth-graduate Methods student partnerships, provision of feedback on Recruitment of youth researchers. Students were activities and products, group discussion, team https://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/jces/vol1/iss1/7JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SCHOLARSHIP–Vol. 1, No. 1 37 4 Alfonso: Participatory Research and Community Youth Development building exercises, experiential learning, and were synthesized around each key domain of role-playing (Alfonso, 2002). interest, and recommendations for action were In addition, research methods were incor- made specific to each. porated into the training process. Trainers used We used community mapping to identify re- environmental mapping and brainstorming to sources in Sarasota County and to help youth encourage youth to identify and think about discover domains of interest (e.g., family). Eight issues to address (Schwab, 1997). Focus group youth researchers completed a community map facilitation methods were used to encourage dia- of the resources available to support youth in logue among youth researchers, process training Sarasota County. This was done as part of youth activities, and model skills necessary for facilitat- development training to help them understand ing group conversations. how communities work and recognize the inter- The authors’ prior experience working with relation of various facets of a community. Youth youth allowed the training process to work were asked to use words, pictures, or symbols to smoothly. It is interesting to note that once the describe the positive people, places, or things research process was completed, youth research- available in Sarasota County to assist youth. ers and adults realized there were additional Results included organizations (CYD, Boys questions that they wanted to answer. The big- & Girls Clubs, YMCA), institutions (schools, gov- gest barrier to the process was the inability to dis- ernment, hospitals), businesses (movie theaters, tribute surveys in the schools. Finding alternative mall), and people (teachers, police). Community locations was a substantial challenge. mapping provided the framework for developing Our team trained graduate students who vol- the focus group guide. Youth researchers brain- unteered to assist with the training of youth re- stormed questions specific to each domain of searchers to minimize the challenges (e.g., power interest and, with the assistance of adults, devel- sharing), risks (e.g., adultism [adult bias against oped a focus group guide for use with their peers. children]), and frustration associated with youth- Sample questions included the following: adult collaboration (Alfonso, 2004; Harper and Carver, 1999; Horsch et al., 2002; Schwab, 1997). s7HATISITLIKETOBEATEENIN3ARASOTA As a part of the training, graduate students par- County? ticipated in a focus group discussion designed to s7HATKINDOFVOLUNTEERWORKDOYOUDO orient them to the developmental characteristics s4HINKBACKTOYOURLASTFAMILYDINNER4ELL of eighth graders (e.g., “What was it like to be me about it. an eighth grader?”). This discussion segued into what to expect when working with youth and Youth researchers conducted 24 focus groups sensitized them to behaviors to avoid, such as (n = 144) with sixth to eighth grade students at rigid, directive approaches (Lau, Netherland, and local middle schools. School officials selected in- Haywood, 2003). dividual students from each classroom based on Design and methodology. A sequential mixed- their grade and gender (e.g., sixth grade females). methods design was used to gather information Focus groups were audio-recorded, and youth re- from middle school youth in Sarasota County searchers took notes during the discussion. Youth (Tashakkori and Teddlie, 2003). Qualitative were provided with an introduction to qualita- methods, including mapping and focus groups, tive analysis and were guided through the analy- were used first, to gather thick descriptions (facts sis process (see Appendix A for worksheets used). in context) of life as a middle school-aged youth Youth researchers worked in teams made up of in Sarasota County. Mapping was used to iden- two youth and one graduate student. Focus group tify the domains of interest to be investigated — notes and tapes were distributed to the teams. family, peers, school, neighborhood, and future. The notes were used as the primary source of in- Youth researchers used focus groups to explore formation, with tapes used to fill in notes and these domains with other middle school students. identify illustrative quotes for inclusion in the Youth researchers developed a survey based on final report. Each team was provided with three the focus group findings and administered it worksheets to assist in the analysis process (Ap- to other middle school-aged youth in Sarasota pendix A). The first worksheet listed questions to County. Qualitative and quantitative findings be considered when reading the notes and dis-

Published by Nighthawks38 Open Institutional Repository, 2008 JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SCHOLARSHIP–Vol. 1, No. 1 5 Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, Vol. 1, Iss. 1 [2008], Art. 7 cussing responses. The second asked the team to s7HATIDEASDOYOUHAVEFORADDRESSINGTHE summarize key themes and suggest quotes spe- issues raised (e.g., transportation)? cific to each domain for each focus group. Once the teams analyzed each focus group, the larger Youth researchers discussed the data and group used the third worksheet to guide a discus- compared findings to what was discovered using sion of similarities and differences across focus mapping and focus groups. groups, key findings, and future research needs. Organizers questioned the youth research- Youth researchers’ responses to “What else ers’ assumptions, challenging them to think do we need to know?” generated survey items through their interpretations. After analyzing (Appendix A). A large group format was used to and interpreting the data, youth researchers and create the initial draft of the survey. Youth re- project organizers developed data-driven recom- searchers brainstormed the questions and adults mendations for action. Qualitative (focus group) helped youth researchers format the survey. A and quantitative (survey) findings and recom- laptop computer and ability to print question- mendations for action were summarized for each naires were key components of this process. domain (see Table 1 for sample findings and rec- Youth researchers pre-tested the survey to ensure ommendations). In Table 1, the second column it would be easy for other youth to complete displays mixed-method results, and the third and would provide desired information (Appen- column provides a summary of evidence-based dix B). They pre-tested the survey with middle recommendations. school-aged youth including family, friends, and With the support of the project organizers, alternative school students. Youth researchers youth researchers presented their results and rec- discussed the pretest findings in a large group, re- ommendations at a community meeting at the sulting in a modified survey. The final survey was School Board of Sarasota County. A variety of four pages in length and had approximately 22 community stakeholders attended, including items (closed and opened). Item types included local middle school guidance counselors, univer- demographics, activities done for fun, work expe- sity faculty, middle school coordinators, parents, riences, perceptions of treatment by adults, and community agency representatives, school staff, volunteer experiences. media, and public transportation representa- The final version was distributed at various tives. venues including a local shopping mall, movie The presentation focused on the five do- theaters, CYD events, the beach, and at local mains, with students presenting their results and camps and summer programs. Youth research- recommendations through oral presentation ers collected 578 surveys from sixth to eighth with slides and videotaped skits. For example, grade students (11 to 14 years of age) from both after showing a PowerPoint entitled “The Stat public and private schools in Sarasota County. Family,” youth researchers showed a videotaped Most survey respondents were Caucasian (86%), scenario of youth researchers sitting around attended public school (84%), had access to a a dinner table discussing their findings about computer every day (87%), and had access to families and middle school youth. Each youth the Internet every day (82%). African-Americans researcher played the role of a family member. and students from one area in the southern part Basic facts discovered during the project were of the county may have been underrepresented mentioned in the scenario and reinforced on because of lack of community organizations subsequent slides (e.g., 20% [of students] never through which to distribute the surveys. talk with their parents about important issues). A The first author created a spreadsheet that cal- final report, “Into the Minds of Middle School culated information for each survey item. Youth Students,” collaboratively developed with guid- researchers entered the data into the spreadsheet ance from the first author, was made available to and reviewed the results as a group. Project orga- community members in attendance. nizers guided the group discussion, asking youth to consider: Application of Results The success of the participatory action re- s7HATSTRIKESYOUASYOULOOKATTHERE- search process is judged by stakeholders’ ac- sults? ceptance and action based on research results https://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/jces/vol1/iss1/7JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SCHOLARSHIP–Vol. 1, No. 1 39 6 Alfonso: Participatory Research and Community Youth Development Table 1.92,&(63URMHFW6HOHFWHG0LGGOH6FKRRO)RFXV*URXSDQG6XUYH\5HVXOWVDQG5HFRPPHQGDWLRQV

Domain )RFXV*URXS7KHPHVDQG6XUYH\5HVXOWV Recommendations for Actions

Family Focus group participants reported “hardly ever” Any conversation is an important one. Teens and HDWLQJZLWKIDPLO\FLWLQJFRQÁLFWLQJVFKHGXOHV HJ DGXOWVGRQ·WDOZD\VDJUHHRQZKDWLVLPSRUWDQWEXW sports activities). we encourage adults to take every opportunity to Survey results: talk with their child. ‡RIVWXGHQWVKDYHGLQQHUZLWKWKHLUIDPLO\ every night. ‡WDONZLWKWKHLUSDUHQWVRQFHRUWZLFHD week.

Peers Focus group participants, particularly girls, reported Create more instances where teens cannot make bad cliques, self-image, and popularity were major decisions, like the programs offered by CYD. issues affecting them. Survey results: Continue the WEB program started in the middle ‡UHSRUWWKH\IHHOQRSUHVVXUHWRÀWLQDW VFKRROVLQWRDVVLVWZLWKSHHUSUHVVXUH school. VD\WKHLUIULHQGVKHOSWKHPPDNHJRRG decisions.

School Focus group participants reported having too much Offer a study hall as an elective class during the homework. school day or create after-school programs to assist Survey results: with large amounts of homework. ‡GUHDGVFKRROEHFDXVHWKH\·UHWLUHGIURP homework. ‡IHHOVWXG\KDOOZRXOGKHOS

Neighborhood When asked about their neighborhoods, focus group Continue the “ten cents” policy for youth under the participants agreed they were safe but boring. DJHRIWKURXJKRXWWKH\HDU Survey results ‡IHHOWKHUHLVOLWWOHRUQRWKLQJWRGRLQWKHLU 0LGGOHVFKRROVFRXOGDOVRLQVWLWXWH6&$7EXVÀHOG neighborhood. trips to familiarize youth with how to use the bus. ‡KDYHQHYHUXVHGWKH6&$7EXV ORFDO transportation).

Future Focus group participants reported feeling pressure Offer more education for middle school-aged about making the right academic decisions for students and parents on getting into college. For college and getting a good job. example, offer seminars focused on scholarships Survey results: and internships available, how the “Bright Futures” ‡VD\WKH\ZDQWWRJRWRFROOHJH scholarship program works, the SATs, and what ‡EHOLHYH6DUDVRWD&RXQW\KDVWKLQJVWRKHOS courses to take in high school. These should be them reach their goals. offered at the middle school age so that when those VWXGHQWVUHDFKKLJKVFKRROWKH\NQRZZKHUHWKH\·UH going and how to get there.

(Greenwood and Levin, 2000). For the most make decisions and pursue changes in the local part, VOICES researchers were not in positions community and schools. To date, the research of power necessary for implementing their rec- team has collected the following evidence that ommendations. However, anecdotal evidence project recommendations are being applied: suggested some individuals who attended the community presentation accepted the results as 1. A local middle school guidance coun- a valid and reliable evidence-base on which to selor used VOICES data to support the

Published by Nighthawks40 Open Institutional Repository, 2008 JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SCHOLARSHIP–Vol. 1, No. 1 7 Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, Vol. 1, Iss. 1 [2008], Art. 7

Table 2.$

HDGLQJ92,&(6ZDVIXQEHFDXVH,JRWWRHQMR\WKHFRPSDQ\RIHQHUJHWLF /\RXWKDVZHOODVKDYHWKHRSSRUWXQLW\WRWHDFKDQGOHDUQQHZWKLQJV 7KURXJK 92,&(6 , OHDUQHG DERXW UHVHDUFK PHWKRGV DQG KRZ WR FRQGXFW UHVHDUFK,OHDUQHGWKHLPSRUWDQFHRIHDFK\RXWK¶VRSLQLRQEHLQJKHDUGE\ WKHFRPPXQLW\,OHDUQHGWKDWHYHQRQHYRLFHFDQDIIHFWWKHFRPPXQLW\)RU H[DPSOHRQH\RXWKUHVHDUFKHUXVHGWKHGDWDWRDUJXHIRUPDNLQJSXEOLF WUDQVSRUWDWLRQPRUHDIIRUGDEOHIRU\RXWK\HDUURXQG We invited the director of the local public bus system to be at the 92,&(6SUHVHQWDWLRQ$IWHUKHKHDUGWKHUHVXOWVRIRXUUHVHDUFKDUHODWLRQ- VKLSZDVGHYHORSHGEHWZHHQ92,&(6\RXWKUHVHDUFKHUVDQGDQLPSRUWDQW SDUWRIWKHSXEOLFWUDQVSRUWDWLRQV\VWHPLQWKHFRXQW\/HDGLQJ92,&(6ZDV UHZDUGLQJEHFDXVH,JRWWRVHHWKHEHQH¿WVRIRXUKDUGZRUNOLNHZKHQD ORFDOPLGGOHVFKRROJXLGDQFHFRXQVHORUZKRDWWHQGHGWKH92,&(6SUHVHQ- WDWLRQWRWKH6FKRRO%RDUGRI6DUDVRWD&RXQW\XVHGRXUUHVHDUFK¿QGLQJV WRFRQYLQFHKLVPLGGOHVFKRROWRDGGDVWXG\KDOO

creation of a study hall at the middle Middle school youth are able to meet high expecta- school where he worked. The counselor tions. CYD staff set high expectations for youth said his job was to “do data-driven guid- participating in its programs. However, Univer- ance,” and the VOICES report provided sity of South Florida project organizers and staff him with a “list of concrete, data-based” had not worked with middle school-aged youth recommendations for action, which he in such an intense project in the past and were kept on his desk. uncertain about their ability to stay focused and 2. A local community college and major engaged to completion. Through their persever- university agreed to include eighth-grad- ance and commitment to completing the project ers in college-bound awareness informa- (eight months from start to finish), VOICES stu- tion previously directed only to high dents met these high expectations. Feeling they school students. were treated as equals and respected for their 3. Local public transportation (SCAT bus) abilities and ideas, youth investment in the proj- added stops in rural areas, as well as ad- ect grew. ditional routes that youth researchers rec- Middle school youth develop at different rates. ommended, for example, the beach and Youth researchers were expected to develop the mall. self-confidence and responsibility skills in ad- dition to knowledge of research methods from Lessons Learned participation in VOICES. The timing in which Table 2 provides insight into what the youth the impact of involvement on youth researchers project leader gained from her experiences with became evident varied across individuals. Some VOICES. But VOICES was a learning experi- adapted to the expectations and skills quickly, ence for all involved, not just those in leadership making significant impacts throughout the proj- roles. For example, we learned that: ect. Others took longer to gain the confidence https://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/jces/vol1/iss1/7JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SCHOLARSHIP–Vol. 1, No. 1 41 8 Alfonso: Participatory Research and Community Youth Development or trust in their skills, resulting in what appeared to be a large jump in ability in a short period s.OWWEAREGOINGTOTALKABOUTYOUR of time. In general, youth development occurred family. Tell me about your family. Think back in direct proportion to development of the right to your last family dinner. Tell me about it. atmosphere in the experience. Once youth de- s(OWMANYTIMESAWEEKDOYOUTALKTO veloped trust with each other and the adults with your parents about things that are important to whom they were collaborating, developmental you? changes were easily detected. s(OWMANYTIMESAWEEKDOYOUTALKTO Consider in advance who can and will determine other family members about things that are im- what should be known. Epistemological and ethical portant to you? issues arise when conducting community-based s(OWMANYTIMESAWEEKDOYOUEAT participatory action research (Clark and Moss, dinner with your household family? 1996). Ideally, youth help determine research ob- s7HEREAREYOUWHENYOUFEELLIKEYOUR jectives and retain the power to modify and ex- parents listen to you the most? clude research questions (Kelly, 1993). Failing to include youth in the determination of research Ultimately, this discomfort precluded the objectives can result in time delays and decreased ability to administer the survey in the schools youth investment and ability to perform research during noninstructional time, forcing the tasks (Landis et al., 1999). VOICES team to identify other methods for ob- However, funding requirements often place taining a diverse sample. constraints on the level of youth control over the Middle school youth are capable of critical analy- research process that is possible (see Green and sis. During the survey analysis and interpretation Mercer, 2001). When VOICES youth researchers phase, VOICES participants learned first-hand changed the research focus from identifying gaps the need to critically analyze data or information. in services, barriers to participation in existing Youth researchers critically questioned the results programs, and specific needs of youth to topics of their own survey, especially those findings that they viewed as more relevant (transportation, contradicted their experience. For example, re- family relationships, use of leisure time), project sults indicated 44% of survey participants agreed organizers were forced to consider the following “not at all” with the statement, “I feel pressured questions: to fit in at school.” After much discussion, youth researchers decided to present this finding along s7HODECIDESWHATSHOULDBEASKEDOR with a caveat that it did not match their experi- what is worth knowing? ences. Youth researchers addressed this discon- s(OWDOADULTSANDUNIVERSITYPROFESSION- nect in the final report. als, who bring with them funding-related agen- We believe that youth may have been influ- das, collaborate with youth and accommodate enced to answer questions in a manner that was recommended changes? more socially desirable. While the surveys were s7HATHAPPENSWHENYOUTHRESEARCHER anonymous, we believe respondents knew that interests or priorities do not match funder or youth were actually the ones reading these sur- agency requirements? veys, and they wanted to avoid appearing weak or inadequate in the eyes of the researchers, their Ensure good, clear communication with commu- peers, or even themselves. nity and school partners. When community-based agencies work in collaboration with school dis- Conclusions tricts, extra care should be taken to ensure good, This article presented a case study of commu- clear communication. A lack of clear understand- nity-based participatory action research as a com- ing about the project led to discomfort among munity youth development activity. VOICES school district officials regarding the questions demonstrates a trend toward including youths in used for focus groups and the survey. School dis- key roles in prevention programming and youth trict officials were uncomfortable with the seg- development. ment of the focus group script that focused on The project: (1) triangulated qualitative and family, as follows: quantitative evidence to support out-of-school

Published by Nighthawks42 Open Institutional Repository, 2008 JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SCHOLARSHIP–Vol. 1, No. 1 9 Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, Vol. 1, Iss. 1 [2008], Art. 7 time programs throughout Sarasota County tools for collaborating with youth researchers as and shed light on key contexts in which middle valued stakeholders. school youth develop (e.g., school); (2) engaged youth in identifying and addressing the needs of References teens in Sarasota County; (3) empowered youth Alfonso, M.L. (2004). Involving youth in the as vital resources in the development of a healthy formative research process. The Health Education community; and (4) provided a middle school Monograph Series, 21(1), 52-58. option for the civic engagement initiative cur- Alfonso, M.L. (2002). Youth researchers in public rently operating at the high school level. Youth health: Are they appropriate? Paper presented at the were presented as stakeholders in the research 2002 14th University of South Florida College of process, and participatory action research was Education Educational Evaluation Mini Confer- discussed as an approach that allows for youth to ence, Tampa, FL. be actively involved in each phase of the research Alfonso, M.L., Jenkins, D., & Calkins, S. process and to have a voice in decision making. (2003). Training and working with youth research- Youths’ thoughts on community-based partici- ers. Social Marketing Quarterly, IX(1), 44-46. patory action research were shared and lessons Bryk, A.S. (1983). Editor’s notes. New Direc- learned were discussed. tions for Program Evaluation, 17, 1-2. In summary, VOICES was a successful youth Camino, L.A. (2000). Youth-adult partner- development project in which committed adults ships: Entering new territory in community work and youth worked closely with youth research- and research. Applied Developmental Science, 4(1), ers. In addition, high expectations were held for 11-20. youth, they were made to feel that their work was Carrick, R., Mitchell, A., & Lloyd, K. (2001). meaningful and significant, and they were set User involvement in research: Power and com- up for success through opportunities to take on promise. Journal of Community & Applied Social challenging roles (Gambone and Connell, 2004; Psychology, 11, 217-225. Larson et al., 2004; Lee, Murdock, and Paterson, Clark, C.T. & Moss, P.A. (1996). Researching 1996; Roth, 2004; Sabo, 2003). with: Ethical and epistemological implications Here are two representative comments from of doing collaborative, change-oriented research VOICES researchers: with teachers and students. Teachers College Record, 97(4), 518-548. “[It is] nice that people listen. [We are] not Coleman, J.S. (1976). Policy decisions, social always taken seriously, and we have science information, and education. Sociology of a lot of good ideas. It’s good to have Education, 49(4), 304-312. people listen.” Dworkin, J., & Bremer, K.L. (2004). If you “[I am a] better person and feel good for want to win, you have to learn to get along: having helped the community.” Youth talk about their participation in extracur- ricular activities. The Prevention Researcher, 11(2), VOICES in Sarasota County represents one 14-16. community-based participatory action research Finn, J.L. & Checkoway, B. (1998). Young project that involved a small number of youth people as competent community builders: A researchers and adults and only one round of challenge to social work. Social Work, 43(4), 335- research. One reviewer cautioned against broad 346. conclusions on the experience of so few students Gambone, M.A., & Connell, J.P. (2004). The and one research round. We agree, and the reader community action framework for youth develop- should keep these limitations in mind. What ment. The Prevention Researcher,11(2), 17-20. worked in Sarasota County may not be the best Gold, N. (1981). The stakeholder process in edu- approach for others considering participatory cational program evaluation. Washington, DC: Na- action research in their youth development pro- tional Institute of Education. gramming. However, this article, along with the Green, L.W., & Mercer, S.L. (2001). Can broader literature, contributes to what is known public health researchers and agencies reconcile about youth participation and community the push from funding bodies and the pull from change by emphasizing concrete strategies and communities? American Journal of Public Health, https://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/jces/vol1/iss1/7JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SCHOLARSHIP–Vol. 1, No. 1 43 10 Alfonso: Participatory Research and Community Youth Development 91(12), 1926-1929. youth development. New Directions for Evalua- Greenwood, D.J., & Levin, M. (2000). Re- tion, 98, 47-59. constructing the relationships between universi- Lee, F.C.H., Murdock, S., & Paterson, C. ties and society through action research. In N.K. (1996). An investigation of strategies for prepar- Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.) Handbook of quali- ing teenagers for cross-age and peer teaching roles: tative research (pp. 85-104). Thousand Oaks, CA: Implications for linking research and practice. In Sage. Spawning New Ideas: A cycle of discovery. Conference Harper, G.W. & Carver, L.J. (1999). Out-of- Proceedings of the Annual International Conference the-mainstream youth as partners in collaborative of the Association for Experiential Education (24th, research: Exploring the benefits and challenges. Spokane, WA, September 26-29, 1996). Health Education & Behavior, 26(2), 250-265. London, J.K., Zimmerman, K., & Erbstein, Hart, R.A. (1997). Children’s participation: The N. (2003). Youth-led research and evaluation: theory and practice of involving young citizens in com- Tools for youth, organizational, and community munity development and environmental care. New development. New Directions for Evaluation, 98, York: UNICEF. 33-45. Hart, R., Daiute, C., Iltus, S., Kritt, D., McCormack Brown, K.R., McDermott, R.J., Rome, M., & Sabo, K. (1997). Developmental Bryant, C.A., & Forthofer, M.S. (2003). Youth theory and children’s participation in commu- as community researchers: The Sarasota County nity organizations. Social Justice, 24(3), 33-63. Demonstration Project. Community Youth Devel- Hartman, J.A., DeCicco, E.K., & Griffin, G. opment Journal, 4(1), 40-45. (1994). Urban students thrive as independent re- McCormack Brown, K., Forthofer, M.S., searchers. Educational Leadership, 52(3), 46-47. Bryant, C.A., et al. (2001). Developing youth ca- Horsch, K., Little, P.M.D., Smith, J.C., Good- pacity for community-based research: The Sara- year, L., & Harris, E. (2002). Youth involvement sota County Demonstration Project. Journal of in evaluation & research. Issues and Opportunities Public Health Management and Practice, 7(2):53-60. in Out-of-school Time Evaluation, 1, 1-18. Meucci, S., & Schwab, M. (1997). Children Johnson, R.T. & Johnson, D.W. (1985). Stu- and the environment: Young people’s participa- dent-student interaction: Ignored but powerful. tion in social change. Social Justice, 24(3), 1-9. Journal of Teacher Education, July-August, 22-25. Minkler, M. & Wallerstein, N. (1997). Im- Kelly, D.M. (1993). Secondary power source: proving health through community organization High school students as participatory researchers. and community building: A health education The American Sociologist, Spring, 8-26. perspective. In M. Minkler (Ed.), Community Or- Kirshner, B. & O’Donoghue, J.L. (2001). ganizing and Community Building in Health (pp.30- Youth-adult research collaborations: Bringing youth 52). NJ: Rutgers University Press. voice and development to the research process. Paper Nastasi, B.K., Schensul, J.J., Amarasiri De presented at the Annual Meeting of the Ameri- Silva, M.W., et al. (1998). Community-based can Educational Research Association, Seattle, sexual risk prevention program for Sri Lankan WA. youth: Influencing sexual-risk decision making. Kirshner, B., Strobel, K., & Fernandez, M. International Quarterly of Community Health Educa- (2003). Critical civic engagement among urban youth. tion, 18(1), 139-155. Perspectives on Urban Education, 2(1). Retrieved Ozer, E.J., Cantor, J.P., Cruz, G.W., Fox, April 15, 2004, from http://www.urbanejournal. B., Hubbard, E., & Moret, L. (2008). The diffu- org. sion of youth-led participatory research in urban Landis, D.C., Alfonso, M., Ziegler, S.E., schools: The role of Prevention Support System Christy, J., Abrenica, K., & Brown, K.M. (1999). in implementation and sustainability. American Training youth to conduct focus groups and in- Journal of Community Psychology, 41, 278-289. terviews. Social Marketing Quarterly, 5(4), 23-29. Roth, J.L. (2004). Youth development pro- Larson, R., Eccles, J., & Gootman, J.A. (2004). grams. The Prevention Researcher, 11(2), 3-7. Features of positive developmental settings. The Sabo, K. (2003). A Vygotskian perspective on Prevention Researcher, 11(2), 8-13. youth participatory evaluation. New Directions for Lau, G., Netherland, N.H., & Haywood, Evaluation, 98(Summer), 13-24. M.L. (2003). Collaborating on evaluation for Schwab, M. (1997). Sharing power: Participa-

Published by Nighthawks44 Open Institutional Repository, 2008 JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SCHOLARSHIP–Vol. 1, No. 1 11 Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, Vol. 1, Iss. 1 [2008], Art. 7 tory public health research with California teens. Community Youth Development of Sarasota Social Justice, 24(3), 11-32. County, Fla. Meredith Russo was a recent high Schensul, J.J. (1998). Learning about sexual school graduate from Potter’s Wheel Academy in meaning and decision-making from urban ado- Sarasota at the time of manuscript preparation. lescents. International Quarterly of Community Kellie McCormack Brown is professor and asso- Health Education, 18(1), 29-48. ciate dean for academic affairs in the University Takata, S.R., & Leiting, W. (1987). Learning of Florida College of Health and Human Perfor- by doing: The teaching of sociological research mance. Alfonso can be reached at malfonso@ methods. Teaching Sociology, 15, 144-150. hsc.usf.edu. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Authors’ Note Torres, M.I. (1998). Assessing health in an Thanks to VOICES youth researchers Nicole urban neighborhood: Community process, data Altenes, Lindsey Atha, Eric Brennan, Thomas results and implications for practice. Journal of Cocchi, Chip Kenniff, Liz Liberman, Heather Community Health, 23(3), 211-227. Rola, and Carla Valor; the Coalition of Commu- Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind and society. Cam- nity Foundations for Youth and the Community bridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Foundation of Sarasota County, who funded the Vos, K.E. (2001). Recommended educational research project; the Sarasota County School practices for youth environmental education District, including Sherri Reynolds (pupil sup- from a 4-H youth development perspective. In port services), the middle school coordinators Defining best practices in boating, fishing, and stew- and staff and other faculty at Laurel-Nokomis, ardship education. Retrieved November 1, 2003, McIntosh, Pine View, and Venice middle schools; from http://www.rbff.org/. the Triad Alternative School; staff and graduate students from University of South Florida Pre- vention Research Center; and the local agencies, About the Authors including the Boys & Girls Clubs of Sarasota Moya L. Alfonso is research assistant profes- County, Sarasota County Parks & Recreation, sor for the Florida Prevention Research Center Sarasota Family YMCA, South County Family and senior research coordinator for the Center YMCA, and Sarasota Square Mall. We also thank for Social Marketing at the University of South the JCES reviewer who provided such a thorough Florida. Karen Bogues is executive director of critique of the initial version of this manuscript.

https://digitalcommons.northgeorgia.edu/jces/vol1/iss1/7JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SCHOLARSHIP–Vol. 1, No. 1 45 12 Alfonso: Participatory Research and Community Youth Development

$SSHQGL[$)RFXV*URXS$QDO\VLVDQG6XUYH\,WHP*HQHUDWLRQ:RUNVKHHWV UHIRUPDWWHGIRUSXEOLFDWLRQWR¿WRQRQHSDJH

:RUNVKHHW92,&(6)RFXV*URXS Data Analysis — Team Activity

%UHDNLQWRWHDPVDQGGRWKHIROORZLQJIRUHDFKIRFXVJURXS 5HDG\RXUQRWHV /LVWHQWRSDUWVRIWKHWDSHZKHUHQRWHVDUHLQFRPSOHWH ,GHQWLI\WKHPHVZLWKLQHDFKJURXS/RRNIRUSDWWHUQVLQZKDWWKH\RXWKVDLGRUGLGQ¶WVD\DQGDVN \RXUVHOIWKHIROORZLQJTXHVWLRQV

‡ :KDWGLGHDFK\RXWKLQWKHJURXSVD\WRDQVZHUWKHTXHVWLRQ" ‡ :HUHWKHUHDQVZHUVWKDWZHUHWKHVDPH"'LG\RXWKDJUHH" ‡ :HUHWKHUHDQVZHUVWKDWZHUHGLIIHUHQW"'LG\RXWKGLVDJUHH" ‡ +RZPDQ\JDYHWKHVDPHDQVZHU" ‡ :DVWKHDQVZHULQUHVSRQVHWRD³OHDGLQJ´TXHVWLRQRUZDVLWDVSRQWDQHRXVUHVSRQVH">([DPSOH RIOHDGLQJ³6R\RXWKLQNWREDFFRLVEDG"´³

:RUNVKHHW92,&(67KHPHVDQG4XRWHV Directions: Use this form to record themes and transcribe quotes that do a good job of demonstrating PDMRUWKHPHV)RFXV*URXS'HVFULSWLRQ

)DPLO\ 3HHUV School Neighborhood )XWXUH Themes: Themes: Themes: Themes: Themes: Quotes: Quotes: Quotes: Quotes: Quotes:

:RUNVKHHW92,&(6)RFXV*URXS$QDO\VLV²/DUJH*URXS$FWLYLW\ /RRNIRUVLPLODULWLHVDQGGLIIHUHQFHVDFURVVHDFKIRFXVJURXS

‡ :KDWZHUH\RXWKWU\LQJWRVD\" ‡ :KDWGLGQ¶W\RXWKWDONDERXW"'LGWKH\IDLOWRPHQWLRQVRPHWKLQJ\RXWKRXJKWIRUVXUH  WKH\ZRXOGWDONDERXW" ‡ :KDWZHUHWKH\VD\LQJLQFRPPRQ" ‡ 'LGWKH\GLVDJUHHZLWKHDFKRWKHU" ‡ +RZGRWKHJURXSVFRPSDUH"&RQVLGHUZKDW\RXDFFRPSOLVKHGRYHUDOO ‡ 'LG\RXJHWDQDQVZHUWRHDFKTXHVWLRQ" ‡ $UHWKHDQVZHUVXVHIXO":KDWHOVHGRZHQHHGWRNQRZ LHSRVVLEOHVXUYH\TXHVWLRQV "

$SSHQGL[%3UHWHVWLQJ$VVLJQPHQW 3XUSRVH7RWU\RXWRXUVXUYH\EHIRUHLW¶VWRRODWHWRPDNHLWEHWWHU Directions: )LQGWKUHHWRIRXUIULHQGVRUIDPLO\PHPEHUVZKRDUHWR\HDUVRIDJHDQG:21¶7EHWDNLQJWKH VXUYH\IRUUHDO$VNWKHP DQGWKHLUSDUHQWV LIWKH\ZLOOKHOS\RXWU\RXWDVXUYH\7HOOWKHPWKHIRFXV LVQ¶WRQWKHLUDQVZHUVVRPXFKDVRQLIWKHVXUYH\PDNHVVHQVHRULVFRQIXVLQJ6FKHGXOHDWLPHWR PHHWZLWKWKHP3UHWHVWLQJWDNHVDERXWPLQXWHV

Steps: +DQGWKHPWKHVXUYH\%HIRUHWKH\VWDUWDVNWKHP³:KLOH\RX¶UHWDNLQJWKHVXUYH\SOHDVHFLUFOH DQ\ZRUGV\RXWKLQNRWKHU\RXWKZRXOGWKLQNZHUHFRQIXVLQJRUGLGQ¶WPDNHVHQVH´ /RRNDW\RXUZDWFK²ZULWHGRZQZKDWWLPHWKH\VWDUWDQGZKDWWLPHWKH\¿QLVK 7DNHQRWHVRQTXHVWLRQVWKH\DVNZKLOHWDNLQJWKHVXUYH\+DYHWKHPSXWDVWDUE\TXHVWLRQVWKH\ FRXOGQ¶WDQVZHUHDVLO\ 2QFHWKH\¶UH¿QLVKHGDVNWKHPWRWHOO\RXLQWKHLURZQZRUGVZKDWWKHLQVWUXFWLRQVDVNHGWKHPWR GR7DNHQRWHV D'RHVWKHLUGHVFULSWLRQPDWFKZKDWWKHLQVWUXFWLRQVVD\" E,IQRWKRZFRXOGZHFKDQJHWKHLQVWUXFWLRQV"  $VNWKHPWRVKRZ\RXZKLFKZRUGVWKH\FLUFOHG)RUHDFKZRUGWKH\FLUFOHGDVNWKHPKRZWKH\ ZRXOGPDNHLWOHVVFRQIXVLQJ:KLFKZRUGVKRXOGZHXVH"  $VNWKHP³,VWKHUHDQ\WKLQJHOVHZHFRXOGGRWRPDNHWKHVXUYH\EHWWHU"´  7KDQNWKHPIRUWKHLUKHOS %ULQJWKLVFRPSOHWHGIRUPWRRXUQH[WPHHWLQJ

Published by Nighthawks46 Open Institutional Repository, 2008 JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SCHOLARSHIP–Vol. 1, No. 1 13