A variety of benefits can come from out-of-schools activities. Based on the articles, what do you see as the most valuable benefits? Propose a policy or change that could aide in more

Youth & Society 43(4) 1381 –1406

© 2011 SAGE Publications Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0044118X10386077

http://yas.sagepub.com

386077 YAS43410.1177/0044118X103 86077Jones and DeutschYouth & Society © The Author(s) 2010

Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

1Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo 2University of Virginia, Charlottesville

Corresponding Author: Jeffrey N. Jones, Western Michigan University, 1903 W. Michigan Ave., 2440 Sangren Hall, Kalamazoo, MI, 49008 Email: [email protected]

Relational Strategies in After-School Settings: How Staff– Youth Relationships Support Positive Development

Jeffrey N. Jones1 and Nancy L. Deutsch2

Abstract

Staff–youth relationships are a key strength of after-school settings, though more research is needed to understand the actual processes whereby these interpersonal connections lead to beneficial outcomes. This qualitative study focuses on the relational strategies that staff employ within an urban youth organization, and the ways in which those strategies contribute to a posi- tive developmental climate. Researchers observed staff–youth interactions for a year and conducted a series of interviews with 17 youth between the ages of 12 and 18. We found three specific relational strategies that staff used to develop relationships with youth. These were minimizing relational distance, active inclusion, and attention to proximal relational ties. These strategies contribute to an overall supportive culture, suggesting a relational pedagogy in this after-school setting. The staff–youth relationships serve as the foundation for both youth engagement in programs and the promotion of positive developmental outcomes.

1382 Youth & Society 43(4)

Keywords

after-school programs, adult–youth relationships, positive youth development

Anecdotal as well as empirical evidence suggest that youth organizations can provide caring environments that promote youth development (Hirsch, 2005; McLaughlin, 2000). These community-level interventions often take a strengths-based approach in line with the emerging positive youth develop- ment movement (Lerner, Almerigi, Theokas, & Lerner, 2005; National Clear- inghouse on Families & Youth, 2009) and are frequently locally constructed to target specific youth needs (Dubois, Doolittle, Yates, Silverthorn, & Tebes, 2006). There is increasing interest in the broader developmental potential of after-school settings (Hirsch, 2005; Larson, 2000; Riggs & Greenberg, 2004). Whereas previous work has focused on youth outcomes, researchers are increasingly concerned with the processes that contribute to outcomes (Rhodes, Spencer, Keller, Liang, & Noam, 2006). In recent years, a literature has evolved concerning the importance of social capital for youth in low- resource communities, citing after-school programs as places where social capital may be gained (Bottrell, 2009; Jarrett, Sullivan, & Watkins, 2005). One potential source of social capital is nonfamilial adults, and research indi- cates that relationships between youth and caring adults are paramount to the success of after-school programs (DuBois & Karcher, 2005; Rhodes, 2004). This qualitative study focuses on the specific relational strategies employed by staff and explores the mechanism by which these strategies contribute to a supportive culture for youth. We draw from youth and staff perceptions of interpersonal relationships in an urban Boys & Girls Club. Our research con- firms previous findings and extends the discussion on adult–youth relation- ships in after-school settings to consider the specific means by which staff can draw on these relations to promote engagement in developmental activities and programs.

In 2002, the National Research Council (NRC) reported that youth organi- zations provide social assets for youth that can promote healthy development. Indeed, researchers have documented a variety of youth outcomes associated with participation in youth organizations including higher self-esteem, increased motivation, and academic achievement (Larson, 2000; Mahoney, Lord, & Carryl, 2005). Expanding on research documenting specific outcomes, research- ers are increasingly studying after-school programs in terms of the broader developmental needs of youth. Positive youth development (PYD) refers to efforts aimed at helping youth achieve their potential, viewing youth as having competencies to be developed rather than risk factors to be prevented

Jones and Deutsch 1383

(Lerner, Almerigi, et al., 2005; National Clearinghouse on Families & Youth, 2009). Outcomes associated with positive youth development range from spe- cific domains, such as academic achievement and avoidance of risk-taking behaviors (i.e., gang activity or pregnancy), to more conceptual domains which have been termed the “5 Cs” of PYD: character, connection, confi- dence, competence, and caring (Lerner, Almerigi, et al., 2005). Researchers have found that interactions that occur in nontraditional and out-of-school settings can support important prosocial skills (Noam & Tillinger, 2004) and contribution, which is theorized as an outcome when other PYD constructs are present (Lerner, Lerner, et al., 2005). The NRC report (2002) proposes several recommendations to advance the potential of after-school settings and suggests that youth organizations need to promote the development of both personal and social assets. Yet the report also concludes that we know little about the processes that occur within organizations which contribute to youth outcomes.

Staff–Youth Relationships A promising area of research on after-school settings is adult–youth relation- ships. This literature is informed by research on teacher–student relation- ships and mentoring. Spencer (2006) describes the mentoring dynamic as a relational process. Staff in after-school organizations contribute to the essen- tial features of these settings by creating appropriate structure in a safe envi- ronment and by promoting a sense of belonging, feelings of personal efficacy, and positive social norms (Mahoney, Eccles, & Larson, 2004). A sense of belonging is critical in healthy development. This is facilitated by supportive relationships (DuBois & Karcher, 2005; Rhodes, 2004), which some have suggested are often less available in the life experiences of disadvantaged youth (Bottrell, 2009; Hamilton et al., 2006). Mentoring relationships influ- ence not only academic achievement but also psychosocial development (Larson, 2000).

Prior work has demonstrated that relationships with staff are key to youths’ attachments to after-school programs as home-places (Deutsch & Hirsch, 2002; Hirsch, 2005). The club-as-home model, in which youth develop an emotional attachment to an organization driven primarily by psychosocial aspects of the place, points to how relationships can contribute to an overarching socioemo- tional experience for youth. According to this model, aspects of the program such as feeling cared about and having close relationships with adult staff are important components of the overall environments of after-school settings that may keep youth involved as they age. These relationships may then serve as

1384 Youth & Society 43(4)

important sources of social capital for youth (Bottrell, 2009; Brunie, 2009; Lin, 2001).

Urban youth programs are also social learning environments; adults can facilitate learning by providing opportunities to overcome challenges at an appropriate developmental level (Larson & Walker, 2006). The literature on social capital suggests that interpersonal interactions are one factor which can lead to positive individual and group outcomes (Brunie, 2009). Lin (2001) describes social capital as the use of connections and relationships to achieve goals; this interpersonal engagement opens access to new resources. Stack (1996) considers capital as an interconnected web of “commitments and obligations” (p. xv) between individuals. Social capital, constructed and maintained through adult–youth relationships, can promote youth resilience (Bottrell, 2009). Youth organizations stand at a unique developmental crossroads in the ecological framework of youth; they are able to support and bridge relationships across the settings in youths’ lives (Noam & Fiore, 2004). Thus, successful after-school programs may have a relational culture that supports youth through multiple processes. The role of adult staff in after-school settings is complex and the research literature will benefit from more empirical descriptions of what posi- tive involvement means in terms of youth experience (Hilfinger Messias, Fore, McLoughlin, & Parra-Medina, 2005).

Relational Strategies and Youth Participation The relational view of adolescent development focuses on the engagement between individuals. This framework can be useful in creating environments that encourage youth by supporting positive interactions that build on internal motivations and interests (Noddings, 2005). Relational psychology posits that learning takes place only through the interactions between people; learn- ing is realized indirectly through active dialogue. The relational experience is then transferred to engagement with the “text” or the material to be learned (Bingham, 2004). In schools, of course, this text is the curriculum. However, in after-school settings, in the absence of the curricular demands of the schools (Pace, 2003), the text is positive youth development more broadly; many youth organizations focus on supporting youth competencies across domains from academics to prosocial behaviors to risk aversion. The rela- tional ties that emerge through patterns of interactions between club mem- bers and staff contribute to developmental change; they form “developmental stepping stones” (p. 50) on which youths’ later experiences build (Fredriksen & Rhodes, 2004).

Jones and Deutsch 1385

The relational model has implications for the potential of the after-school space as a social learning environment. This builds from a constructivist perspective, one that views staff and youth as partners, or co-constructors, of learning experiences (Jones & Perkins, 2006). Interpersonal relationships are critical in development, as youth construct new knowledge in social contexts (Vygotsky, 1978). This is facilitated through caring relationships with adult mentors in proximal interactions (Goldstein, 1999). Supportive relationships promote learning and push youth to participate in new activities (Fredriksen & Rhodes, 2004).

Aitken, Fraser, and Price (2007) talk about negotiations in informal learn- ing environments, which involve trust and the sharing of power and authority. Indeed adult–youth relationships are not perceived by youth as uniformly sup- portive across settings. Youth contrast their relational experiences in the vari- ous spheres of their lives. They report higher levels of relational trust with Boys & Girls Club staff compared with teachers in the school setting, articu- late increased feelings of community when they feel respected, and describe a sense of connection in the after-school setting (Deutsch & Jones, 2008). A sense of social trust makes youth feel agentic and valued. This is essential in building social and relational capital for minority youth, who are “more likely to present as disconnected, if not disengaged” (Kelly, 2009, p. 528) from youth serving settings.

Pedagogy refers to a theoretical perspective of instruction and interaction. The relational approach that we document in this article reflects a conscious effort to establish deep connections with the youth and to transfer this engage- ment to the “text” of positive youth development. Participation in after-school programs can be facilitated by positive staff–youth relationships (Jarrett et al., 2005; Lerner, Almerigi, et al., 2005) and can promote personal, behavioral, and academic competencies (Anderson-Butcher, Newsome, & Ferrari, 2003; Durlak & Weissberg, 2007). It is also important to note that cultural and con- textual factors influence the decision to participate in after-school programs (Perkins et al., 2007). Participation then must be considered as a process as well as an outcome within the relational space of the after-school setting.

This qualitative study extends our understanding of the processes that operate within after-school settings. We focus on the importance of the staff– youth relationship in the youths’ sense of place. We were guided by several questions aimed at understanding the strengths of adult–youth relationships in after-school settings: (a) what specific strategies do staff employ that are rela- tional in nature, (b) what about these relationships support the social learning environment, and (c) how do staff use their relationships and engagement

1386 Youth & Society 43(4)

with youth to promote constructs and activities related to positive youth development?

Through observations and interviews, we find that staff engage in specific relational strategies to build their relationships with youth. Youth report expe- riencing these relational strategies as supportive. Staff develop a capital through the relationships that they exchange for meaningful participation in programs aimed at promoting positive youth outcomes. These interactional processes thereby contribute to a relational pedagogy, or a supportive culture, in this after- school setting specifically based on adult–youth relationships. These findings have implications for after-school programs and for social policies designed to promote healthy adult–youth relationships in the community.

Method Youth organizations provide a social context within which youth engage in learning experiences through patterns of interpersonal relationships. Way (2005) observes that meaningful research is a process of engagement, more than a struggle for objectivity. We chose qualitative methods to study relation- ships from the perspective of the youth and staff members in an after-school program. These research strategies are well suited for community-based research and can inform more ecologically sensitive data collection (Stein & Mankowski, 2004; Stewart, 2000) as well as allowing for in-depth examina- tion of interpersonal processes in context.

Site and Sample The Midtown Boys & Girls Club is a boisterous and active space located in a community recreation building. It is situated on the grounds of a public middle school in a lower-income neighborhood of a small mid-Atlantic city. The club operates on a drop-in model, wherein youth can come and go with or without participation in any of the club’s more formal programs. Because of its low annual membership fee, it is a de facto public space available to youth from across the city, although primarily used by youth in the local neighborhood. Many members attend the middle school right next door, though others attend local elementary and high schools and take district buses that bring them to the club. At designated times, the club has access to the gym facilities of the school as well as the adjacent and expansive playing fields. There are designated areas for the various functions of the club, including a snack area, an education room with computer access, a teen room, an open great room with game tables, and several smaller rooms for programs and

Jones and Deutsch 1387

meetings. Though these spaces have defined purposes, these shift with the daily needs and activities at the club. The after-school club has both organized programs and activities, including psychosocial programs, tutoring, and com- munity service groups, and more informal, unstructured time. Youth interact with fellow club members, staff, and volunteers in a typical day.

The larger ethnographic sample included all of the youth and staff that participated at the club over the course of one year. This sample was inclusive of the 12 staff and 250 to 300 registered club members (there were approxi- mately four staff and 50 to 70 youth present on a typical day). We worked with staff to identify club members aged 12 to 18 that attended regularly or that had been involved with the club for an extended period of time to pur- posefully select our interview sample. We were particularly interested in the perceptions of those individuals that were actively engaged in the setting and had invested in the setting with their time. Based on these criteria, the first author approached 26 youth, 23 (86%) of whom agreed to participate in the study. Seventeen (74%) returned consent forms and comprised the interview sample. These 17 youth were approximately balanced in regard to gender and age group (12-14 vs. 15-18). The majority were African American (all indi- viduals mentioned are African American unless otherwise noted). Two youth report other ethnicities (White, mixed ethnicity). Of the 12 staff members at Midtown during the study, approximately half were male, seven were African American, five were White, and many came from similar economic back- grounds as the club members, some even from their neighborhood. Thus, Midtown was a more culturally congruent setting than the youths’ schools. It is well documented that the teaching population is primarily White, female, and middle class (Banks et al., 2005). The literature on teacher–student rela- tionships has documented that this can create contradictions, resistance, and a cultural space between teachers and their students (Merryfield, 2000; Ogbu, 1992). As documented below, this contrasts with the environment at Midtown, wherein staff used culture, along with other factors, to reduce the relational distance between themselves and the youth.

Data-Collection Strategies Researchers took the role of participant–observer (see Marshall & Rossman, 1999; Miles & Huberman, 1994), recording observations through in-depth field notes. The participant–observer approach yields a contextualized view of individuals’ everyday interpretations of their experiences (Miller, 1997). Observation as a research strategy is ideally suited to the study of the ongoing and reciprocal nature of interaction in social settings; observations gather data

1388 Youth & Society 43(4)

that are independent of youth and staff perceptions of their relationships. The first author was engaged in the research site three to four afternoons per week, typically for two to four hr per visit, over the course of one year. The second author visited and recorded field notes for girls-only programs and other spe- cial events. Levels of participation of course can vary within the participant– observer approach. We played an active role in the research setting. Like the staff that we observed, we minimized relational distance when appropriate by wearing casual clothes, using colloquial language, and in general approximat- ing what Mandell (1988) refers to as the least-adult role in interaction and data collection. Staff perceptions were captured through field notes of informal discussions that took place during observations throughout the study period.

After spending five months developing relationships and trust with youth and staff the first author conducted a semistructured interview with each of the 17 sample youth and follow up interviews with 11 of the sample youth. Interviews can aid in the discovery of meanings that people assign to interac- tions (Seidman, Tseng, & Weisner, 2006). The interviews included a series of questions building on earlier research (i.e., identity exploration and develop- ment) as well as questions probing themes that emerged from observations at Midtown (e.g., staff–youth relationships, relational differences across set- tings).1 The median length of interviews with youth participants was 29 min, and interviews ranged from 19 to 50 min. There was typically two months between the first and second interview.

Analysis The research process was iterative. Emerging themes of study originated in on-site observations. These were developed in the context of existing theory and literature and through critical discourse in meetings between the first and second authors. The first semistructured interviews included a series of ques- tions building on these themes. As these themes were identified, we fashioned follow-up interview questions to capture youth responses to these phenomena and recorded in detail all staff–youth interactions in observations. The field notes were analyzed as a source of data and additionally were used to contex- tualize the patterns identified through the analysis of interview data. This is a potent approach that can yield a deep understanding of social processes in context (De Groot, 2002). The triangulation of data was possible in analysis with data from multiple sources; observations, interviews, and documents from the organization. NVivo, a computer software program, was used as an analytic tool in the research process. This facilitated the examination of open (preexisting) and focused (emergent) codes that were applied to these qualita- tive data sources (Marshall & Rossman, 1999).

Jones and Deutsch 1389

Results and Discussion

Overall, youth in our study describe rich relationships with the staff. Indeed, several name staff as the most influential figures in their lives. For example, Jay, a 17-year-old male, reports, “The single [most influential] person— probably Mr. R. [a director] because he was a good part of my life. Anytime I get in trouble I would come to see him or he’d talk to me or he was just a good person to be around.” The supportive nature of youths’ relationships with staff is consistently invoked as a major contributor to the overall culture of the after-school program:

He made it so fun, and he did so much stuff with us. He tried to be our dad, our big brother; he tried to be our everything. And I think that’s maybe because he showed us that he cared. (Kanaya, 15-year-old, female)

You know sometimes when you walk in here, people will look after you and stuff. I think that’s an important thing . . . But I’m saying that they don’t just look after you sometimes, they actually care about you. (Helen, 12-year-old, female)

This is not to suggest that the relationships and interactions we observed were uniformly or universally positive. Indeed, the youth that we interviewed share varying relational experiences in the club setting:

It’s just like some of the staff, I know that they can be playful and some can be mean, and some can be boring and sit around a desk all day. (Michael, 12-year-old, male)

Yet the majority of youths’ descriptions of their relationships with staff were positive. These relationships appear to be paramount to youths’ affirma- tive experiences in this setting. Below, we unpack the strategies that staff use to build relationships with youth and consider how these relationships support engagement in programs and positive youth development.

Relational Strategies Early on in the study, it became apparent that the staff were dedicated to reach- ing all kids in the club and making the most of their connections with youth:

Some of the kids are very intelligent. I feel all the kids are smart in some way—they might not show it this way, but they’re smart. So you

1390 Youth & Society 43(4)

gotta open up different ideas and different activities that grabs that part of their attention. And then you get their focus, and they’ll be able to participate in different events. (Grant, Midtown staff)

As we observed staff like Grant using individual interests and connections to engage youth, we became interested in the specific actions that staff took to build relationships with youth that were then used for the benefit of youth engagement (i.e., involvement in programs and activities) and positive devel- opment (i.e., encouraging competencies such as prosocial behavior and social skills). We came to conceptualize this phenomenon as “relational strategies.”

Three specific strategies emerged through the analysis of data: minimizing relational distance, active inclusion, and attention to proximal relationships. As staff members make deliberate attempts to form positive, lasting relation- ships, they find success in downplaying authoritative roles, highlighting mutual interests, and making cultural connections with youth. This strategy, which minimizes the “distance” between the adults and youth, contributes to their ability to make connections with the teens. They make efforts to actively include marginalized youth, reducing peer rejection. Attention to proximal relational ties, such as youths’ relationships with other club members and family, in addressing conflicts and problem solving, is also used to build con- nections and support positive outcomes. Below, we address each of these strategies individually before presenting an example that illustrates how these actions collectively contribute to a relational pedagogy that supports youth engagement and development.

Minimizing Relational Distance Age and staff–youth relationships. One of the challenges of working with

teens is that part of the task of adolescence is the exploration of individual autonomy. In the process of developing increased independence, youth often push the limits of adult authority figures, testing their emerging adulthood within the bounds of their relationships with adults. Thus, the distance between teenagers and the adults who interact with them can seem like an unbridgeable gulf. One of the relational strategies that staff use in this setting is to deliber- ately minimize age distinctions. Often staff are youthful themselves. This youth organization tends to hire young adults of college age who often share a common background with youth in terms of neighborhood, race, and ethnicity. Indeed, when visitors and community members enter the club, oftentimes they have difficulty delineating staff from youth. We saw staff capitalize on this in their interactions with youth. And youth are quick to note the close proximity

Jones and Deutsch 1391

in age. When asked about the influence of club staff, a Midtown club member observes,

Staff, they’re just so funny and most of them are college students. They’re pretty close to my age anyway so they’re fun and they’re open. They’re like—on the upside, they’re like mature teenagers. (C. J., 15-year-old, female)

Other researchers have found that youth perceive staff as “peer-like” adults and that this is a strength of these relationships (Hirsch, 2005). However, this also suggests a danger of this relational strategy: its potential to tip over to disrespect and a lack of authority. For the most part, we found that staff balanced minimizing age differences with retaining adult authority. C. J. highlights this as follows:

At school it’s like strict discipline. You have to do exactly what they say no matter what you want to do. At the Club it’s like you can just play around with staff and they’re more like your peers, but you treat them with more respect because they’re not your equals. (C. J., 15-year-old, female)

Culture. Hirsch (2005) calls after-school programs “One-stop shopping for mentoring” (p. 57). He notes that mentoring relationships are strongest when there is a cultural connection between youth and staff. Staff consistently used slang and culturally resonant language in addressing youth.

In an organized program, one of the male teens stood up and grabbed his baseball hat. Craig (staff) said, “Where you going?” The teen replied, “To the bathroom.” Craig joked, “You taking your hat? O.K. I’ll see you later, dawg.” There was laughter from the whole group of teens. (Field note excerpt)

This use of teen language and idioms aids in eliminating relational differ- ences of age as well as culture. The staff member, through his use of local teen slang demonstrates his familiarity and comfort with the teens’ culture, both blurring the age difference and highlighting the shared culture between them. He makes himself a part of their group through his discourse in the informal and ongoing process of building relationships. After this interaction, Craig got the teens to work on a college preparation program. He took the opportunity to engage the youth in the program, thereby cashing in this social/relational

1392 Youth & Society 43(4)

capital for increased participation in an activity designed to promote posi- tive youth development (in this case, academic goal-setting and college guidance).

The use of narrative contributes to a cultural connection that, along with the other techniques, minimizes relational distance (Gee, 1996). In an organized career preparation program, a young female staff member used personal nar- rative to share her own experiences and highlight aspects of her background which were common to many of the youth:

I came up from nothing, nothing. I lived with relatives because my parents weren’t there at al

Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers

Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.

Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS

Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?

Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.

We write plagiarism Free Content

Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.

Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.