Powell, G.M. (2003). A web of support: Ways to promote youth development in camp through
staffing. Camping Magazine, 76 (1), 64-66.
Youth development is a complicated process, and the support of it in diverse
populations is even trickier. There is no “magic bullet” to solve the dilemma
of how best to support youth as they mature into adults. The magic seems to be
that adults, such as camp professionals, care enough to continue seeking ways
to design programs that offer support as youth move through the process. The
features of positive youth development identified by the Committee on
Community-Level Programs for Youth (Eccles & Gootman, 2002) were introduced
in the last Research Notes Column (Powell & Scanlin, 2002), and in this
column, the concepts will be applied to staffing and program — specifically
program planning as a matrix web, staff supervision through the lens of the youth
development features, and a twist on comprehensive program evaluation.
Planning as a Matrix Web
After examining the features individually — physical and psychological
safety, appropriate structure, supportive relationships, opportunities to
belong, positive social norms, support for efficacy and mattering,
opportunities for skill building, and integration of family, school, and
community efforts — another angle from which to approach evaluation is to
visualize the features as points on a web (see the figure on page 65). Using
specific programs or actions as the connections between the features, think
about ways to coordinate and reinforce efforts to help move youth forward
across job functions in your camp.
Just as when pressure placed on one part of a spider’s web can affect the
entire web, one small change in youth development programs from a systemic
viewpoint, can send vibrations throughout the entire organization. For example,
what are the areas of your program that support more than one feature? Some of the
features build on the elements of the others . . . intentional focus on
positive social norms that include support for efficacy and mattering may lead
to opportunities to belong and supportive relationships. Skill-building
opportunities that include interpersonal skill building as well as program
skills may lead to psychological safety for all community members. Appropriate
structure may lead to both physical and psychological safety that makes it
easier for youth to belong — thereby fostering supportive relationships that
can serve as models for behavior back home or at school. So after looking at
each feature individually, the next step is to address the synergy possible by
looking for the connections between the program elements and the features embedded
in them.
From a systemic viewpoint, camps offer possibilities that do not exist in
many school systems. As adolescents’ developmental needs are changing, they
often shift from a smaller to a larger school — a setting with less personal
contacts with adults and less opportunity to engage in activities (Eccles &
Gootman, 2002). Camp has the potential to increase the personal attention and
engagement levels through the types of programs and leadership offered in a
setting without curriculum demands. The ability to engage youth in programs,
roles, and responsibilities that allow them to be central in the life and
function of the camp takes concerted effort from many directions.
Have you considered bringing staff members who address those different
program areas together to talk about supportive relationships? For example, are
there ways to encourage activity skill instructors to actively discuss group
dynamics as part of their program? Are there ways that the food service
department can support the theme of teamwork in the type of meal served or
maybe in the way that it is served (could it take teamwork on the part of the
campers to complete the meal)? In what ways could the maintenance staff support
the arts and crafts instructor? Could the room be designed so the instructor is
in the middle and can easily reach all of the work areas to support the
children? The point being — in the business of camp — sometimes the
single-mindedness of a department or staff function could limit the creative
potential for all the departments. The extra time to think about
cross-functional potential could lead to more synergistic solutions to daily
functions and implementations.
What area is supportive of one feature but hinders another feature because
of the implementation method? For example, strict limitations and
over-controlled leadership may attain physical safety, but that positive
feature may be to the detriment of appropriate structural and supportive
relationships among staff. Does the physical structure of a building play a
role in how the activities flow with campers? An interesting slant toward the
implementation process comes from the application of a developmental psychology
concept in the field of landscape architecture.
The idea of “affordances” in relationship to children’s environments
(Gibson, 1982) fits hand-in-hand with the features of positive youth
development. Both are seeking to increase the potential for success of
participants by focusing on the possibilities and potentials that need to be in
place to promote positive youth development. The basic idea of affordances in
terms of the physical environment for play, as expanded by Heft (1985),
reverses the focus on the physical environment as a backdrop and places the
possibilities for “a place” at the forefront of program implementation.
Often in program design, the environment is scanned for potential risk
management hazards, but through the lens of affordance, the environmental scan
results in possibilities and potential for what the children can “do” in an experiential
sense and creates a physical and psychological habitat (Barker & Wright,
1955). Synthesizing the creative potential of people, places, and things
generates local opportunities to capitalize on the innovation that exists
literally around the corner . . . and in the modern world; the peek around the
corner could literally be to the other side of the world!
Staff Supervision
The best-laid program planning can be torpedoed or strengthened by the staff
that plan and implement it. While there is no substitute for staff who bring
maturity, sensitivity, and appropriate values to the job, using the features of
positive youth development as a framework for interviews, job descriptions,
observations, and job performance feedback conferences is a step in taking the
outcomes expected for campers and placing the outcomes at the forefront of the
staffing process. How can the knowledge of these features and their resulting
web of support impact your staff-supervision process from beginning to end?
Pull out your current interview protocol. What questions do you ask that
probe the applicant’s background relative to promoting positive youth
development and go beyond asking about program skills and work experience?
Challenge yourself and staff to generate interview questions that allow for
investigation of each feature — and a few that capture the element of the web
design of support across the features.
For example: 1) “I see that you have experience teaching archery. In what
ways could you teach that activity to increase a camper’s sense of belonging
and sense of self-efficacy?” You are communicating that your camp does not
teach an activity just for the program’s skill-building opportunity, and thus
you are challenging the potential staff member to see beyond their skill area.
2) “Describe the emotional climate in the after-school program where you
worked. What role does the counselor have in creating a positive climate for
all of the participants? What have you personally done to affect change in the
emotional climate of a youth development setting?” Here you are able to listen
for descriptors that provide evidence of perception on the part of the staff
member, and then an opportunity to hear and reinforce the role the adult has in
fostering positive behavior and interrupting negative behavior.
The challenge of writing detailed job descriptions that clearly communicate
the expected staff role can be supported by examining the overall message of
the description in light of your mission and outcomes for campers. An attempt
to integrate the features with job functions and the resulting staff behaviors
may trigger further ways to provide intentional support for youth development
at all levels of the camp community.
When writing a job description, consider the following examples of job
features and corresponding functions:
The inclusion of staff behaviors in job descriptions then serves as a
springboard to effective observations by peers and supervisors, and provides a youth
development focus to performance review conferences.
Comprehensive Evaluations
The crafters of the features for positive youth development visualized them
as continuums and did not consider the report to be a conclusive finished
document. Rather, they envisioned it as a starting point for local and
international discussions about how to best support youth development. By
structuring an in-depth evaluation of your program around these features and
asking questions about how best to support youth development, you are
initiating the journey.
Six questions are offered by the committee to investigate your program:
Specific to summer camps, the questions are to be asked in the specific
order and flow from general to specific questions:
Learning more about ways to structure evaluations around the web of support
possible through promoting positive youth development at a deep, systemic level
in camp and sharing those results has potential to increase our ability to help
the campers we serve . . . to use their character skills gained in life and
supported by camp to successfully navigate the transition into adulthood. Camp
can play an important role in that process, and steps to intentionally support
the development can increase our ability to do so.
References
Barker, R.G. & Wright, H.F. (1955). Midwest and its children: The
psychological ecology of an American town. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson &
Co.
Eccles, J & Gootman, J.A. (Eds). (2002).
Community Programs to Promote Youth Development. National Research Council and
Institute of Medicine. National Academy Press: Washington, D.C. The report is
available as an “open book” online at: www.nap.edu/catalog/10022.html.
Gibson, E.J. (1982). The concept of
affordances in development: The renascence of functionalism. In W.A. Collins
(Ed.), The concept of development: The Minnesota symposium on child
development. Vol. 15. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Heft, H. (1985). High residential density and
perceptual-cognitive development: An examination of the effects of crowding and
noise in the home. In J.F. Wohlwill & W. van Vliet (Eds.) Habitats for
children: The impacts of density. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Powell, G.M. & Scanlin, M. (2002). Ways to
promote youth development in camp. Camping Magazine, 75 (5), 14-17.
Gwynn M. Powell, Ph.D., is an assistant
professor in the Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies at the University
of Georgia. Please contact Powell through e-mail, gpowell@coe.uga.edu for further
information regarding article content or to share research ideas.