Table of Contents
Title page
Copyright page
Editorial Board
Issue Editors' Notes
Social capital: Enhancing youth programming and youth outcomes
Linking community and youth development
Defining and measuring social capital
Program practices that build social capital
Contextual considerations in developing social capital
Conclusion
Executive Summary
Chapter One: Social capital: Its constructs and survey development
Chapter Two: Measuring social capital change using ripple mapping
Chapter Three: Social capital and youth development: Toward a typology of program practices
Chapter Four: Using multiple youth programming delivery modes to drive the development of social capital in 4-H participants
Chapter Five: A community development approach to service-learning: Building social capital between rural youth and adults
Chapter Six: Social capital and vulnerability from the family, neighborhood, school, and community perspectives
Chapter Seven: Engaging underrepresented youth populations in community youth development: Tapping social capital as a critical resource
Chapter Eight: Engaging young people as a community development strategy in the Wisconsin Northwoods
Chapter 1: Social capital: Its constructs and survey development
The process
Identifying the constructs of social capital
Implications and conclusions
Chapter 2: Measuring social capital change using ripple mapping
Significance
Learning from ripple mapping
Youth and adult partnerships improving communities across states
Conclusion
Appendix: Steps for a participatory mapping process
Chapter 3: Social capital and youth development: Toward a typology of program practices
Research approach
The interaction of bridging and bonding social capital to create an upward spiral
Toward a typology of youth development activities and social capital
Strategies for increasing bonding social capital
Conclusion
Chapter 4: Using multiple youth programming delivery modes to drive the development of social capital in 4-H participants
4-H and social capital
Life skills and social capital
The four essential elements and social capital
4-H club programming
Peer-to-peer interviews
4-H club community service projects
4-H after-school programs
4-H school enrichment
Conclusion
Chapter 5: A community development approach to service-learning: Building social capital between rural youth and adults
Case studies of rural service-learning and civic engagement
Findings from the case studies
Implications for youth development
Recommendations for practitioners
Areas for further research
Conclusion
Chapter 6: Social capital and vulnerability from the family, neighborhood, school, and community perspectives
Positive outcomes
Dimensions of vulnerability
Cooperative Extension as a solution
Social capital
Conclusion
Chapter 7: Engaging underrepresented youth populations in community youth development: Tapping social capital as a critical resource
Pivotal grantee practices
Conclusion
Chapter 8: Engaging young people as a community development strategy in the Wisconsin Northwoods
Iron County: Attracting and retaining young people on the Gogebic Range
Florence County: Setting the stage for youth voices and action in community development
Implications
Index
Youth Programs as Builders of Social Capital
Matthew Calvert, Mary Emery, Sharon Kinsey (editors)
New Directions for Youth Development, No. 138, Summer 2013
Gil G. Noam, Editor-in-Chief
This is a peer-reviewed journal.
Copyright © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., A Wiley Company. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means, except as permitted under sections 107 and 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the publisher or authorization through the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923; (978) 750-8400; fax (978) 646-8600. The copyright notice appearing at the bottom of the first page of an article in this journal indicates the copyright holder's consent that copies may be made for personal or internal use, or for personal or internal use of specific clients, on the condition that the copier pay for copying beyond that permitted by law. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying, such as copying for general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, for creating collective works, or for resale. Such permission requests and other permission inquiries should be addressed to the Permissions Department, c/o John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030; (201) 748-6011, fax (201) 748-6008, www.wiley.com/go/permissions.
Microfilm copies of issues and articles are available in 16mm and 35mm, as well as microfiche in 105mm, through University Microfilms Inc., 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346.
New Directions for Youth Development is indexed in Academic Search (EBSCO), Academic Search Premier (EBSCO), Contents Pages in Education (T&F), Current Abstracts (EBSCO), Educational Research Abstracts Online (T&F), EMBASE/Excerpta Medica (Elsevier), ERIC Database (Education Resources Information Center), Index Medicus/MEDLINE/PubMed (NLM), MEDLINE/PubMed (NLM), SoclNDEX (EBSCO), Sociology of Education Abstracts (T&F), and Studies on Women & Gender Abstracts (T&F).
New Directions for Youth Development (ISSN 1533-8916, electronic ISSN 1537-5781) is part of the Jossey-Bass Psychology Series and is published quarterly by Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company, at Jossey-Bass, One Montgomery Street, Suite 1200, San Francisco, CA 94104-4594. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to New Directions for Youth Development, Jossey-Bass, One Montgomery Street, Suite 1200, San Francisco, CA 94104-4594.
Subscriptions for individuals cost $89.00 for U.S./Canada/Mexico; $113.00 international. For institutions, agencies, and libraries, $298.00 U.S.; $338.00 Canada/Mexico; $372.00 international. Electronic only: $89 for individuals all regions; $298 for institutions all regions. Print and electronic: $98 for individuals in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico; $122 for individuals for the rest of the world; $343 for institutions in the U.S.; $383 for institutions in Canada and Mexico; $417 for institutions for the rest of the world. Prices subject to change. Refer to the order form that appears at the back of most volumes of this journal.
Editorial correspondence should be sent to the Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Gil G. Noam, McLean Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 115 Mill Street, Belmont, MA 02478.
Cover photograph by © franckreporter/istockphoto
www.josseybass.com
ISBN: 9781118743720
ISBN: 9781118743744 (epdf)
ISBN: 9781118743812 (epub)
ISBN: 9781118743850 (mobi)
Gil G. Noam, Editor-in-Chief
Harvard University and McLean Hospital
Editorial Board
K. Anthony Appiah
Princeton University
Princeton, N.J.
Dale A. Blyth
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis, Minn.
Dante Cicchetti
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis, Minn.
William Damon
Stanford University
Palo Alto, Calif.
Goéry Delacôte
At-Bristol Science Museum
Bristol, England
Felton Earls
Harvard Medical School
Boston, Mass.
Jacquelynne S. Eccles
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Mich.
Wolfgang Edelstein
Max Planck Institute for Human Development
Berlin, Germany
Kurt Fischer
Harvard Graduate School of Education
Cambridge, Mass.
Carol Gilligan
New York University Law School
New York, N.Y.
Robert Granger
W. T. Grant Foundation
New York, N.Y.
Ira Harkavy
University of Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Penn.
Reed Larson
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Urbana-Champaign, Ill.
Richard Lerner
Tufts University
Medford, Mass.
Milbrey W. McLaughlin
Stanford University
Stanford, Calif.
Pedro Noguera
New York University
New York, N.Y.
Fritz Oser
University of Fribourg
Fribourg, Switzerland
Karen Pittman
The Forum for Youth Investment
Washington, D.C.
Jane Quinn
The Children's Aid Society
New York, N.Y.
Jean Rhodes
University of Massachusetts, Boston
Boston, Mass.
Rainer Silbereisen
University of Jena
Jena, Germany
Elizabeth Stage
University of California at Berkeley
Berkeley, Calif.
Hans Steiner
Stanford Medical School
Stanford, Calif.
Carola Suárez-Orozco
New York University
New York, N.Y.
Marcelo Suárez-Orozco
New York University
New York, N.Y.
Erin Cooney, Editorial Manager
Program in Education, Afterschool and Resiliency (PEAR)
Issue Editors' Notes
we focus on social capital as a unifying theme for this volume as a way to enhance youth involvement strategies in both the youth and community development contexts. Social capital has been defined as the glue that makes communities work. It is composed of both vertical and horizontal networks, norms of reciprocity and trust, strong ties (bonding) that lead to people helping each other, and enforcing norms of social control and weak ties (bridging) that link people and organizations to resources, information, and influence.1 We focus on social capital for two key reasons. First, research demonstrates that programs that build social capital produce stronger outcomes for youth in terms of reaching educational and employment goals and in becoming contributing citizens. Evidence also exists that programs with a focus on social capital have greater youth attendance and participation. Second, a growing body of research indicates a strong correlation between a prosperous community and strong stocks of social capital. Both community and youth development efforts have tended to occur independent of one another, yet the pattern is changing as successful community change indicators demonstrate the power of youth involvement. At the same time, vibrant youth development efforts emerge from projects where youth choose to make a difference in the community.
This volume addresses the nexus of this convergence. By focusing on social capital, we can better understand what practices in youth and community development create or build social capital assets at the individual, group, and community levels. We explore how examples of the 4-H Youth Development Program and other similar programs contribute to the development of social capital at the individual and community levels, thereby fostering and enhancing positive youth development as well as community development.
Readers familiar with the concept of positive youth development will recognize the value of relationships, connections, and interlinkages mentioned in the definitions of social capital to the positive development, support, and well-being of all children and youth. Through ties and connections at the family, neighborhood, school, and community levels, young people gain access to a multitude of opportunities, experiences, and forms of support, including those in the areas of education, jobs and careers, emotional growth, and life skill development. Youth who have access to these connections are more likely to experience a successful transition to adulthood.2
Ferguson provides a critical synthesis of the international literature on social capital in relation to young people's well-being. For Ferguson, the social capital literature “indicates that this social resource [social capital] can facilitate positive outcomes with respect to children's and youth's wellbeing, including reducing adolescent pregnancy, delinquency, academic failure, and child maltreatment.” Based on her work, Ferguson concludes that it can be beneficial to utilize a “social capital theoretical lens . . . to further explore various outcomes related to children and young people's wellbeing.”3 This conclusion is based on two findings from her review: that social capital contributes to the welfare of children and youth and that social capital is second only to poverty in having the highest influence on children's development and future success.
An often cited small qualitative study of three youth-serving organizations offers additional support for the important role of social capital. Jarrett, Sullivan, and Watkins found that structured youth programs can and do facilitate the development of social capital.4 Although some benefits of participation in youth programs are well documented for youth, little is known about the specific impact of participation on individual social capital development as well as on community social capital. We know that programs adhering to positive youth development principles foster youth-adult partnerships and relationships that encourage active participation in community-oriented activities, often over many years in such programs as 4-H.
Social capital is about more than one-to-one relationships: it adds value to the whole community as others can tap into the networks and accumulated trust. In fact, Chazdon, Allen, Horntvedt, and Scheffert presented their definition of social capital “as the web of cooperative relationships between members of the community that allows them to act collectively and solve problems together.”5
We find in examining community-based youth programs that where these programs are strong, they result in an upward spiral of social capital across the community. Trust and productive relationships between youth and adults lead to expanded opportunities for youth development while building overall community capacity for civic engagement and community betterment. As the articles that follow indicate, youth programs can intentionally develop social capital for youth as they tap into interpersonal and organizational networks, and youth programs can also be a location for the strengthening of social capital for an entire community.
Social capital, according to the national-level Committee on Community-Level Programs for Youth, is a practical construct for examining the linkages and connections, and hence the developmental resources, that young people experience in a particular setting.6 The first two articles focus on measuring this practical construct for the benefit of practitioners and researchers by using tools developed and tested by a multistate group of 4-H and extension youth development practitioners. The tools enable practitioners to document impact and engage youth and adult stakeholders in focusing on community involvement, social networks, and the development of community capital.
In the opening article, Richard P. Enfield and Keith C. Nathaniel document their effort to develop survey and interview tools to measure youth social capital and the contribution of 4-H program experiences to the constructs that make up social capital. Next, Barbara Baker and Elaine M. Johannes describe an asset-mapping strategy that engages youth and adult partners in reflecting on the ripple effect of their activities on the community.
As Enfield and Nathaniel note, some researchers have questioned the precision of social capital as an explanatory construct, but it nevertheless retains value for practitioners and a range of community stakeholders. Team members have found that assessing and drawing attention to social capital has helped emphasize the value of new relationships, increased the trust of youth in communities, strengthened young people's sense of community, and created opportunities to strengthen social capital further. Measuring social capital assists practitioners in making a case for the public value of youth work that intentionally creates social capital for participants and the broader community. Stakeholders will appreciate that communities are better off when youth organizations are engaged in building bridges to the community and fostering interpersonal relationships among diverse people.
This volume also addresses the question of what program practices and structures contribute to networking and the development of social capital at both the individual and community levels. These results will inform both practitioners and researchers in the fields of youth development and community development. Program practices also have implications for the mitigation of disparities, the production of inclusivity, and the creation of relationships among members of diverse communities.
This volume explores the role of community-focused programming in developing social capital not only for participants but also for the community at large. We hypothesize that where these programs are strong, they result in a spiraling up of social capital across the community, leading to expanded opportunities for youth development while building overall community capacity for civic engagement and community betterment.7
In his book Unanticipated Gains: Origins of Network Inequality in Everyday Life, Mario Luis Small makes a strong case that the practices and the structures of programs and organizations in which people participate routinely shape their social interactions more than their deliberate networking.8
In the third article, Mary Emery reviews findings from our research teams' efforts to map the impact of community-engaged youth programs across the nation and proposes a typology of youth program focused on bridging and bonding to foster social capital at the individual and community levels. The typology suggests that different methods of organizing youth development activities can have an impact on the development of social capital. Using the typology, youth and adults can intentionally change the organization of youth development programs to build in more opportunities to build social capital.
Next, Sharon Kinsey provides examples of different 4-H modes, from 4-H clubs and camps to school-based programs, to illustrate ways in which the practices of the nation's largest youth program foster social capital development.
Access to social capital, like other forms of capital, is not equally available to all members of society or a given community. Social capital is identified with communitarian forms of social organization, including those with positive and negative social outcomes. Successful youth programming counteracts the dark side of social capital. This form of social capital can exclude people, resulting in less diverse settings, as well as include individuals in reactionary movements and gangs.9 However, the bright side of social capital is also generated among marginalized populations and can provide important supports to getting by and getting ahead.10
Bonita Williams and Suzanne M. Le Menestrel take a national look at the needs of vulnerable youth and how cooperative extension and other youth programs are addressing those needs. Then Nancy Erbstein provides a grounded example of community-based programs that developed successful strategies for engaging vulnerable youth in building social capital for youth and adult community leaders.
Rural communities, with their more personalized networks and overlapping ties, provide the context for the final two articles. Steven A. Henness, Anna L. Ball, and MaryJo Moncheski focus on community-based service-learning and provide specific examples of how program practices develop social capital for rural youth and communities. Finally, William Andresen, Margaret Dallapiazza, and Matthew Calvert show how rural communities struggling for economic viability have turned to youth development as a key strategy for community development.
The articles in this volume make the case that youth programming that builds social capital provides benefits for the youth and adults involved, as well as for the community as a whole. Strategies for intentionally increasing the level of social capital can easily be integrated into existing programs, thus increasing the public good associated with supporting youth development. These articles also demonstrate that community development efforts can benefit from youth involvement. Youth engagement that fosters the development of both bridging and bonding social capital across generations can lead to the spiraling-up effect, leading to stronger youth outcomes at the same time it supports the possibility of overall community prosperity.
Matthew Calvert
Mary Emery
Sharon Kinsey
Issue Editors
Notes
1. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(Suppl.), S95–121.
2. Scales, P. C., Benson, P. L., Leffert, N., & Blyth, D. A. (2000). Contribution of developmental assets to the prediction of thriving among adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 4(1), 27–46; Benson, P. L. (1997). All kids are our kids: What communities must do to raise caring and responsible children and adolescents. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; National Research Council Institute of Medicine. (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
3. Ferguson, K. M. (2006). Social capital and children's wellbeing: A critical synthesis of the international social capital literature. International Journal of Social Welfare, 15(1), 2–18. P. 9.
4. Jarrett, R. L., Sullivan, P. J., & Watkins, N. D. (2005). Developing social capital through participation in organized youth programs: Qualitative insights from three programs. Journal of Community Psychology, 33(1), 41–55.
5. Chazdon, S., Allen, R. P., Horntvedt, J., & Scheffert, D. R. (n.d.). Reflecting (on) social capital: Development and validation of a community-based social capital assessment. Unpublished manuscript, University of Minnesota Extension.
6. National Research Council Institute of Medicine. (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
7. Flora, C. B., & Flora, J. L. (2008). Rural communities: Legacy and change (3rd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
8. Small, M. L. (2009). Unanticipated gains: Origins of network inequality in everyday life. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
9. Portes, A., & Vickstrom, E. (2011). Diversity, social capital, and cohesion. Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 461–479.
10. Agnitsch, K., Flora, J., & Ryan, V. (2006). Bonding and bridging social capital: The interactive effects on community action. Community Development, 37(1), 36–51; Briggs, X. (1998). Brown kids in white suburbs: Housing mobility and the multiple faces of social capital. Housing Policy Debate, 9(1), 177–221; Floray, C., Floray, J., & Feymy, S. (2004). Rural communities: Legacy and change. Boulder, CO: Westview Press; Gittell, R., & Vidal, A. (1998). Community organizing: Building social capital as a development strategy. London: Sage; Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.
matthew calvert is a 4-H youth development specialist and associate professor of youth development with the University of Wisconsin–Extension Cooperative Extension.
mary emery is the head of the Department of Sociology and Rural Studies at South Dakota State University.
sharon kinsey is the Camden County 4-H agent for Rutgers Cooperative Extension, Rutgers University.
Executive Summary
This article reports on experiences and methods of adapting a valid adult social capital assessment to youth audiences in order to measure social capital and sense of place. The authors outline the process of adapting, revising, prepiloting, piloting, and administering a youth survey exploring young people's sense of community, involvement in the community, and the development of social capital. They then discuss the trade-offs of defining the often amorphous concepts included in social capital as they select measurement scales. The constructs used in the survey are agency, belonging, engagement, and trust for bonding, bridging, and linking forms of social capital.
This article provides a detailed description of how to implement a ripple mapping activity to assess youth program effects on community capital and concludes with examples from Maine and Kansas. The maps lead to group reflection on project outcomes and further research and evaluation questions for group members.
The results from five Maine communities showed that youth in schools and community clubs promoted intentional, mutually beneficial relationships with community groups and businesses and increased shared action on community projects. Likewise, youth in five small Kansas towns implemented and evaluated health promotion projects and found through mapping that youth built social capital in addition to awareness, knowledge, and skills in community health promotion. Ripple mapping helped to demonstrate that actions of youth-adult partnerships in both states improved the built, human, and social capital in small towns.
As part of our inquiry into how youth development and 4-H programming can affect the development of social capital for youth and for the community, we engaged youth in ripple mapping. Based on this information, we provide a typology of participation structures in youth development activities and the expected bridging and bonding social capital outcomes for each type. This article outlines the key factors underlying the typology and discusses strategies for using the typology to expand the impact of youth development and 4-H programming on young people and communities. It also outlines potential implications for increasing opportunities for fostering social capital leading to a spiraling-up effect for youth, volunteers, and the community.