Recipient Organization
UNIV OF MINNESOTA
(N/A)
ST PAUL,MN 55108
Performing Department
School of Social Work
Non Technical Summary
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) strategic plan advocates to "assist rural communities to create prosperity so they are self-sustaining, repopulating, and economically thriving." Key to this goal is a reduction in rural outmigration and the percentage of rural communities living in persistent poverty. Though government, nonprofit, and corporate leaders all play a significant role in addressing challenges like these, our research shows young people are a largely untapped resource for positive change in their community. While often seen as beneficiaries of community development efforts, young people can also be active contributors to community development (Checkoway & Aldana, 2013; Finn & Checkoway, 1998; Percy-Smith & Burns, 2013). Research indicates that young people both benefit from being involved and provide innovative and creative solutions to some of a community's most pressing problems (Bautista et. al., 2013; Checkoway & Richards-Schuster, 2004; Chung-Do et. al., 2015; Schutt, 2014; Wang, 2006). In other words, their involvement has reciprocal benefits; it both supports their development and improves communities for everyone (Pittman, 2002). Their involvement also forges a stronger connection between young people and their communities, which has been found to reduce youth outmigration from rural communities and be a significant factor in young people returning to rural communities after obtaining education and work experience (Jaffe et al., 2019; McLaughlin, et al., 2014). Therefore, understanding how to invite and support young people's involvement in community development supports the USDA strategic plan, enhances youth development, and enriches communities.Young people's contributions in community development has been found to depend on collaborating with caring adults, which result in strong youth/adult partnerships (Camino, 2005; Zeldin et.al., 2014). Effective partnerships work to expand possibilities for young people. These partnerships allow young people to exercise control over the community development process within a safe context (Cargo, et al., 2003). Adult partners facilitate community connections between involved young people and other community stakeholders, and enhance both young people's knowledge of community resources and processes and skills in working with others. These factors support young people to eventually take informed action to improve their own communities (Chung-Do et. al., 2015; Schutt, 2014). There has been a predisposition to urban context when studying youth participation in the United States. Involving young people in community development opportunities has benefits for rural communities as well. Jaffee, et al. (2019) found that when young people experience community connection and when they feel heard by adults in their communities, they are more likely to stay and return even if they do leave for education or job training. This study expands beyond the urban context to understand what practices, structures, and opportunities support rural youth participation in community development and how these differ from urban and suburban locations.We know this level of involvement has reciprocal benefits for both young people and their communities. Communities benefit from the actions young people take on a local issue or problem (Chawla, 2016; Driskoll, 2107; Hart, 2013). Young people are often able to reach other young people successfully, thus addressing problems adults tend to struggle to navigate. Youth also have creative ideas to solve community problems that adult professionals have not yet thought to try. Additionally, involving young people changes a community's perception of youth from a group that needs to be "dealt with" to a group that desires to be involved in positive ways. Young people benefit too. In addition to knowledge and skill acquisition, participating in activities that emphasize personal control, empowerment, and self-determination correlates to better health and wellness outcomes (Prilleltensky, et al., 2001), and often leads to a sense of robust hope (Riele, 2010). These outcomes have direct impacts on multiple other youth issues and problems, such as a reduction in violence, drug use, and an increase in school engagement and achievement (Riele, 2010). However, "it is not reasonable to expect them to become civically engaged in communities and societies that fail to support them" (Youniss & Yates, 1999, pg. 273). In most communities, there is limited opportunities that support youth involvement, lack of trust between adults and young people, and a general disregard for young people's contribution (Balsano, 2005). Jaffee and colleagues (2019) found that most young people did not feel that adults in their community listened to their concerns. This often translates into actions that neither invite nor provide young people with opportunities to become involved in their communities.Opportunities that currently exist have been found to be mainly directed by adults and takes adult forms, such as participation on a community council. These forms of involvement have been found to be less beneficial for young people and do not fully support their involvement in community issues that they personally care about and want to take action on (Percy-Smith, 2010). More often, they are isolated and segregated from community decision-making and community involvement. While we understand the benefit of involvement and are beginning to understand supportive practices, such as youth participatory action research (Cammarota & Fine, 2008) and youth-adult partnerships (Zeldin et.al., 2013), we still know little about what structures support similar efforts in all communities. In addition, given that most of this research has taken place within urban contexts, we also do not fully understand the revisions required for effective practices and strategies to be fully implemented in rural communities. This study focuses primarily on understanding the larger structures that support youth involvement in community development and also how effective strategies and practices have been translated to rural communities.The importance of this study lies in its efforts to explore how social structures in community's support adults and young people in creating meaningful opportunities that allow young people to actively participate in community development efforts. We still do not know enough about what structures create both enabling and constraining conditions for youth involvement in community development and how context influence appropriate structures for youth involvement. This study will focus on a youth-led philanthropy effort in communities across Minnesota. This model supports a youth leadership group who through community research define youth issues to be addressed and raise funding to support young people to address these issues in innovative ways. This comparative, qualitative study focuses on innovative youth participatory initiatives with locations throughout the State of Minnesota, including in urban (1 sites), suburban (1 sites), and rural (2 sites) communities. A primary goal of the study is to learn what opportunity structures support youth involvement in community development in different geographical areas that support the dual outcomes of community improvement and youth development.
Animal Health Component
85%
Research Effort Categories
Basic
0%
Applied
85%
Developmental
15%
Goals / Objectives
To compare what structures create both enabling and constraining conditions for youth participation in community development in rural, suburban, and urban communitiesTo explore community and individual-level opportunities that support youth voice in community developmentTo understand how and to what degree adults and young people collaborate to accomplish programmatic and self-initiated goals related to community developmentTo understand what youth development and community benefits accrue due to youth involved community development effortsTo document what activities and practices adult and youth participants advocate for as inviting and supporting young people's involvement in decision-making and group action to support community development.
Project Methods
The proposed project emerges from and strongly embraces a community-based participatory research (CBPR) design. CBPR involves intensive engagement with communities in the research design and process and it is a proven, successful research methodology (Walters et al., 2009; Cochran et al., 2008; Smith, 1999). School of Social Work professor VeLure Roholt and Doctoral Research Assistant Fink have been building a collaborative relationship with several communities across Minnesota within a youth-led philanthropy project call YouthBank since 2015. Together, the partners have formed a research collaborative and have met on multiple occasions to build a mutual understanding of what the project objectives could be and what use the research has for both Youthprise and the local communities. From the project onset, partners have been involved in framing the research problem statement and identifying the research approach and questions to be answered. University researchers will continue to work in close relationship with community partners. The primary research questions are: How does youth philanthropy invite young people to become deeply invested in their communities? Does this experience increase their likelihood that they will remain connected and/or committed to their community?Partners have agreed that the study will include a qualitative, comparative design using a purposive, non-random stratified sample of sites ensuring representation of urban, suburban, and rural locations. The primary methods include individual and group interviews, participant observations, activity reports and program document analysis, and workshop activities to gather data on youth participation in community development.Interviews will follow a semi-structure design and include first group interviews with young people followed by individual interviews with young people and adult facilitators. Interview structure will begin with an introduction to the research, and move through questions that invite stories about how they became involved, what they have learned, what they have done, barriers and issues they have encountered and how all of this mattered to understandings of self, community, and future commitments. Interviews will be recorded and transcribed. Other data will be gathered through field notes and review of program documents. The goal of data analysis is to produce a "thick description" (Geertz, 1973), one that goes beyond the activities and describes the way young people and caring adults make meaning of these experiences (Eisner, 1991). Study will emphasize how community opportunities, structures, and policies invite and sustain youth participation in community development, and what practices invite young people to craft identities as community developers and community leaders. To produce this thick description, thematic analysis will be conducted (Patton, 2002; van Manen, 1990). This process includes four stages: Spending time with the data (Taylor & Bogden, 1998); data reduction (Auerbach & Silverstein, 2003); generating themes (van Manen, 1990); and recrafting a whole (van Manen, 1990).