1. Youth Impact The Effect of Participation in a Youth Development Program on Academic Performance and Social Skills.

2. 2 Research Questions What are the effects of the program from the perspective of alumni? Does participation in the YI program affect the academic performance of the participants? Does participation in the YI program affect the social skills of the participants? Are the youth engaged in social networks within the YI program?

3. 3 Concepts – Academic Performance Three dimensions of Academic Performance  Youth achieves passing grades.  Youth attends school regularly.  Youth demonstrates the ability to concentrate on and be prepared for academic subjects.

4. 4 Concepts – Social Skills Social Skills are defined as specific strategies used by an individual to perform social tasks effectively and thus be judged socially competent.  Social interaction skills which facilitate any positive social interaction: Starting and maintaining a conversation Complementing others Conflict resolution Listens when peers speak

5. 5 Concepts – Social Skills Cont’d Two Dimensions of Social Skills  Peer relations Any type of interaction and behavior amongst peers.  Adult- Child Relations Any type of interaction and behavior amongst adults.

6. 6 Concepts A child’s & adolescent’s social network usually includes close family members, extended family members, and especially their friends. Youth Impact’s social network includes the participants peer group in the program.  Position: can be positive or negative Central - in the center of the network Neutral - not central, and not on the fringe of the network Fringe - on the outskirts of the network

7. 7 Methods – Alumni in Sample Identified 15 alumni, 6 were able to be contacted 6 Alumni  Male 6  Hispanic 5  African American 1  Full-time employment 5  Unemployed 1  GED/HS Diploma 6  Some College 3

8. 8 Methods – Youth Impact Subjects in Sample Purposive sampling was used for the purpose of the study Subjects were selected from a sample who attended a Parent Night at Youth Impact in the Fall of 2005 additionally 110 core youth impact participants were asked to participate.

9. 9 Methods – Control Group Subjects in Sample Control Group Sample selected from the same 7 participating Ogden schools Youth selected from Free Lunch lists and were considered “at risk” children Systematic Random Sample

10. 10 Demographics- Youth Youth Impact (n=39) Average age: 12.16 Most occurring age: 10 Gender: 47.4% male 52.6% female Race: 38.9% Caucasian 50.0% Hispanic 11.1% other Control Group (n=29) Average age: 11.9 Most occurring age: 10 Gender: 41.4% male 58.6% female Race: 37.9% Caucasian 37.9% Hispanic 24.1% other

11. 11 Demographics- Parents Youth Impact (n=39) Average age: 37.1 Gender: 25.6% male 74.4% female Race: 45.9% Caucasian 51.4% Hispanic 2.7% Other Control Group (n=29) Average age: 37.8 Gender: 24.1% male 75.9% female Race: 55.2% Caucasian 31.0% Hispanic 13.8% Other

12. 12 Demographics- Parents cont. Youth Impact (n=39) Education Level: 13.5% less than H.S. 45.9% HS Diploma/GED 29.7% Some college 8.1% Associates 2.7% Bachelors Employment Status: 60.5% full-time 5.3% part-time 23.7% unemployed Household Income: 55.3% less than $20,000 Control Group (n=29) Education Level: 17.2% less than H.S. 24.1% H.S. Diploma/GED 34.5% some college 6.9% Associates 3.4% Bachelors Employment Status: 48.3% full-time 20.7% part-time 27.6% unemployed Household Income: 60.7% less than $20,000

13. 13 Demographics- Parents cont. Youth Impact (n=39) Marital Status: single 21.1% married 47.4% separated 5.3% divorced 21.1% cohabiting 5.3% Relationship to Child: biological/adopted 76.9% step-parent 5.1% legal guardian 17.9% Control Group (n=29) Marital Status: single 10.7% married 64.3% separated 7.1% divorced 10.7% cohabiting 7.1% Relationship to Child: biological/adopted 77.8% step-parent 3.7% legal guardian 14.8%

14. 14 Methods Focus Group Subjects We Used Purposive Judgmental Sampling. Kids were chosen one of two ways: The kids that were already in our sample were asked to participate “Grapevine” kids who heard about the focus groups and wanted to join. (Snowball Sampling)

15. 15 Focus Group Demographics Focus Group Participants (n = 13) Grade 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th Gender Male Female Race Hispanic Caucasian Mix Italian Hawaiian Unsure Amount 4 2 1 10 3 4 3 1 Attendance Average total length Average days per four day week Parents Present in Household Single parent Both parents Other Primary Language Spoken English Spanish English/Spanish Unknown Age Range Average Amount 2.25 years 3.96 5 7 1 10 1 10-16 12.5

16. 16 Number of Subjects in Study 6 Alumni GPA & Attendance records were obtained for 16 Youth Impact and 10 Control Group youths. Work/Study Skills and Social Skills data were collected for 20 Youth Impact youths and 10 Control youths. 13 YI youth participated in focus groups. 39 YI youth in social network analysis.

17. 17 Data Collection- Alumni Face to face interviews. Conducted at Youth Impact.

18. 18 Data Collection- Secondary Data Cross-sectional design Analyzing data for the current school year (2005 – 2006) Transcripts and attendance records were obtained. Missing Data – Reasons. Overall 16 YI participants and 9 Control Group participants.

19. 19 Data Collection- Focus Groups Three different groups were run with four or five participants in each group. Questions were developed before the groups were run and focused on the participants grades and their impression as to whether or not grades were improving because of the program. The groups were tape recorded and later transcribed. Then they were analyzed for common themes and answers.

20. 20 Data Collection Methods – Teacher Surveys 5 teacher surveys were administered for each student in Junior High and High School 1 teacher survey was administered for each student in Elementary school (home room teacher)

21. 21 Data Collection – Teacher Surveys Youth Impact 100 were sent out 55 were returned Return rate: 55% Control Group 56 were sent out 34 were returned Return rate: 60.7% Overall Return Rate: 57%

22. 22 Data Collection – Youth Surveys Three separate surveys were constructed and administered.  One survey was tailored to children in the 4 th and 5 th grade  Another survey was tailored to adolescent’s in middle school and high school between 6 th and 12 th grades  A third survey was tailored to the parents of the participants  Surveys were administered Fall 2005

23. 23 Measurement- Alumni Group collaborated to construct relevant and viable interview questions. Sample interview questions. *How did you learn about Youth Impact? *What influenced you to participate in the program? *In what way, if any, do you think Youth Impact contributed to your educational advancement? *In what ways, if any, did Youth Impact influence you to be more involved in the community

24. 24 Measurement- GPA A, B, C, D, F – Calculated G.P.A. E, S, N, P were assigned values then calculated G.P.A.

25. 25 Measurement- Attendance Attendance is measured in two different ways based on age:  Attendance for middle school, junior high, and high school students is defined as missing four or more periods per day for any reason other than school activities.  For elementary students, attendance is defined as missing an entire day.

26. 26 Measurements- Work/Study 9 questions were asked teachers Teachers rated students on Likert Scales 1 = never (low and negative) 5 = always (high and positive)

27. 27 Measurement- Work/Study Factor analysis indicated 7 of the 9 questions clustered together as one component Responses to the 7 questions were summed and averaged to create a mean The 2 other questions did not cluster together so they remained separate

28. 28 Measurement- Work Study ConceptMeasurement- Questions asked Overall Work/Study Skills 1. Comes prepared 2. Attentive 3. Organized 4. Follows instruction 5. Concentrates on assigned tasks 6. Works well independently 7. Seeks addt’l instruct when need Focus1. Easily drawn off task Comprehends Academic Subjects 1. Comprehends academic subjects

29. 29 Measurement – Social Skills Peer relations  17 indicators Helps peers Takes turns Does no threaten peers Adult-Child relations  7 indicators Cooperative and compliant Easy to discipline Measured using Likert Scale

30. 30 Measurement – Social Skills Factor analysis indicated four components of Peer Relations: Non-aggressive/non-threatening towards peers Peer oriented Cooperates with peers Positively engaged in peer network Factor analysis indicated one component of Adult-child Relations Teacher-child relations

31. 31 Measurement – Social Skills Participation in classroom discussion is a single indicator of social skills that did not cluster together with any other social skills measures. Responses to the questions for each component were summed and averaged to create a mean score on each component of social skills.

32. 32 Measurement – Position in the Social Network Sociometric status Question on child and adolescent survey:  Name 3 peers of the same gender in the Youth Impact Program who you like to spend time with the most and 3 peers of the same gender who you dislike spending time with at the program.

33. 33 Alumni Results – Social/Emotional We found that Youth Impact contributed to the learning of respect, communication skills, and the making of friends and long lasting relationships. Youth Impact contributed to the involvement of the Alumni in community service projects.

34. 34 “R.A.F.N” “Respect All Fear None!”

35. 35 Alumni Results- Social/Emotional We did not find that the Interviewed Alumni had any previous significant behavioral disciplinary problems. What we did not find was a viable way for Youth Impact participants to communicate their suggestions or concerns to staff.

36. 36 Alumni Results – Educational/Economic Found that Youth Impact contributed to educational advancement through scholarships, assistance with book fees, internet access, study halls, letters of recommendation, and policy enforcement regarding attendance at school. We did not find that the Alumni’s educational/career goals significantly changed due to attendance in the program. However, it did make it easier for them to achieve their goals.

37. 37 “I had never thought about working with kids, but Youth Impact helped me realize and opened my eyes to all the things I really could do.”

38. 38 Results - G.P.A. 2.2726 3.0476

39. 39 Focus Group Results - Grades Program made the youth realize the importance of grades. - “I think grades are more important since I came here” said a participant. - Privileges are lost if they get poor grades. - Another participant said “if I don’t get good grades I can’t come to Youth Impact”.

40. 40 Focus Group Results - Grades Program has a study hall to use and staff members who are willing to help, but many do not take advantage of this. - One participant said “Yeah, I use study hall, but not to do my homework”.

41. 41 Focus Group Results - Grades Split opinion about whether or not the program has improved their grades. - One participant said that the program “helps me be prepared” and another said “My grades usually stay the same”.

42. 42 Focus Group Results - Grades Program encourages attendance which inadvertently improves grades. - One participant stated that Youth Impact “makes me want to go to school”.

43. 43 Attendance Data Results Mean Percentage of Days Present at School School Attendance Youth ImpactControl GroupMean Difference Percent of Days Present at School92.8%92.7%0.1% School Attendance Mean Percentage Percentage of days present at school92.8%

44. 44 Attendance Data Results The differences in attendance between the Youth Impact participants and the control group were not statistically significant. The mean percentage of days that the students are attending school differed only by 0.1, with the Youth Impact participants attending 92.8% of the time and the control group participants attending 92.7% of the time.

45. 45 Focus Group Attendance Results When asked if attending the Youth Impact Program makes them want to go to school, the majority of the participants responded similarly, indicating that Youth Impact did motivate them to go to school.  "I didn't go to school for like half the day, but I went for the last hour so I could come to Youth Impact."

46. 46 Focus Group Attendance Results Most of the participants indicated that they thought attending school is very important.  "Like really important you don't want to drop out like my mom did. Your life will turn out crappy and stuff like that. I'm trying not to take my Dad's path cause he dropped out in like twelfth grade."

47. 47 Focus Group Attendance Results The students also expressed that the Youth Impact Staff members didn’t discuss school attendance with them very often.  “I think the only person that really encourages me is [staff member] out in Study Hall.”

48. 48 Focus Group Attendance Results There was a lot of variation in responses when we asked the participants if they are ever late to class or if they ever skip their classes. Most of the participants said that they were late for their first classes of the day and the classes right after lunch, and those were generally the classes they skipped.  "I skip first period and lunches."  "Some of my classes are really boring so, and I don't know anyone in those classes so I don't feel like going."

49. 49 Work Study Results Work/Study Skills Dimensions Mean Score General Classroom Work/Study Skills 3.46 Focus (stays on task)2.97 Comprehension (of academic subjects) 3.6

50. 50 Work Study Results Mean Work/Study Skills Scores Work/Study Skills Dimensions Youth Impact Control Group Mean Difference General Classroom Work/Study Skills 3.413.55-.1395 Focus (stays on task) 2.883.16-.28733 Comprehension (of academic subjects) 3.513.78-.264

51. 51 Social Skills Results Social Skill DimensionsMean Score Peer relations Non-aggressive/threatening towards peers 4.0645 Peer oriented 3.5173 Cooperates with peers 3.5654 Positively engaged in peer network 3.8610 Teacher-child relations3.8485 Participates in classroom discussion3.3850

52. 52 * Significance at the 0.10 level Social Skills Results Mean Social Skills Scores Social skills dimensionsYouth Impact Control Group Mean Difference Peer Relations Non-aggressive/threatening towards peers 3.91634.4165-.50016 Peer oriented3.43023.6916-.26138 Cooperates with peers3.46043.7440-.28365 Positively engaged in peer network3.68354.2160 -.53250 * Teacher-child relations3.76654.0126-.24610 Participates in classroom discussion3.39353.3680-.02550

53. 53 Youth Impact Social Network See diagrams Youth Impact participants are engaged in social networks at the program. Girls’ network is more complex than the boys’ networks. Most central youth are positively central, meaning they have more positive nominations than negative nominations.

54. 54 Conclusions YI facilitates stable long-lasting friendship networks Program helps participants stay on the “straight and narrow”  Alumni suggested that the program helped them to achieve their goals  Analysis of attendance records shows that the program keeps kids in school

55. 55 Conclusions The program has little significant impact on the academic performance of the youth.  Youth Impact Participants have a statistically significant lower grade point average than the control group.  Focus Groups revealed that the staff does not emphasize grades.  Many of the participants indicated that they do not feel that their grades need to improve.  The Work/Study Skills of the YI kids are no better or worse than those of the control group.

56. 56 Conclusions The social skills of Youth Impact participants are no better or worse than the youth in the control group. The analysis of social skills suggested that YI participants are less likely than control group youth to be positively engaged in social networks at school.  This does not mean that the youth are not positively engaged in social networks at YI.

57. 57 Conclusions In fact, the social network analysis shows that most participants in the sample are indeed engaged in social networks at the program. Some youth are more central than others but most participants are connected to the larger network in some way.

58. 58 Recommendations Continue to facilitate social networks among the participants. Continue to provide guidance and support in helping youth achieve their goals.

59. 59 Recommendations Create and implement a social skills program.  To include lessons on skills like: Following instructions Communication skills Taking no for an answer Etc. Staff would learn about the program first so that they can model the social skills being taught to the youth in a way that is consistent with the way the youth are learning the skills.  By modeling the skills, the staff will reinforce the skills the youth are learning in the social skills program.

60. 60 Recommendations Why a social skills program?  Research suggests that better social skills are associated with: Fewer behavior problems. Better academic performance.

61. 61 Recommendations Use the social networks to your advantage when instituting change in the program.  For example, get your central youth to participate in the social skills program.