Abstract
Many positive youth development (PYD) programs are based on a particular PYD framework as a method for describing the program’s intention and expected outcomes. This paper presents a critical review of eight select program frameworks that are commonly used to describe PYD programs. The review reveals considerable variation in the science supporting these frameworks, with corresponding variability in their programmatic application. To account for this variation, the frameworks were grouped into three categories based on the science and context in which they were developed. After a review of the historical and organizational context for the need and use of program frameworks, we present brief reviews of the frameworks, then close by discussing implications for practice, research, and policy.
Highlights
As the field of positive youth development (PYD) has matured, frameworks to describe program theory and identify program outcomes have been developed
The consensus of the PYD committee experts convened by the national 4-H leadership was that local 4-H programs are still not guided consistently by positive youth development frameworks and the research supporting the frameworks
This review focused on PYD frameworks that aligned with the stated purposes and goals of PYD programs: (a) promoting positive youth development by focusing on the situations and processes that facilitate healthy development (Small & Memmo, 2004); (b) helping youth reach full potential (Roth, Brooks-Gunn, Murray, & Foster, 1998); (c) providing support and opportunities for success (Gambone, Klem, & Connell, 2002); (d) building community capacity (Benson, 1997; Connell, Gambone, & Smith, 1998; Eccles & Gootman, 2002); and (e) approaching youth as assets to be developed rather than problems to be fixed (Pittman & Irby, 1996; Pittman & Zeldin, 1995)
Summary
As the field of positive youth development (PYD) has matured, frameworks to describe program theory and identify program outcomes have been developed. Local programs are often developed based on limited understanding of a framework’s theory of change and action, resulting in programming that may wander far from the PYD elements purported to be guiding the program. This journal is published by the University Library System, University of Pittsburgh and is cosponsored by the University of Pittsburgh Press.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
