Developmental Assets : A Synthesis of the Scientific Research on Adolescent Development by Search Institute

• how the scientific literature defines the category of assets; • updated research findings on the impact of the assets on young people’s behaviors, including variations in findings among different populations of youth; • in-depth information on how each asset works; • more recent data on young people’s experiences of the assets from Search Institute surveys of more than 200,000 6th- to 12th-grade youth; • what the literature says about how the assets can be built in young people’s lives. This second edition of Developmental Assets provides critical information for scholars and leaders who seek to understand the rich traditions of scientific research that undergird the asset model. And by highlighting what research has learned about how the assets are built for and with different populations of youth, it also serves as an invaluable reference for people who seek to build assets for youth in their organizations and communities.

$29.95

#0338

and Nancy Leffert

Developmental Assets A Synthesis of

Search Institute

“Scholars of youth development owe Peter Scales, Nancy Leffert, and their colleagues at Search Institute a great debt for providing an exemplar of applied developmental science. . . . In building a compelling case for a focus on the assets requisite for healthy youth development, the work of Search Institute is making a singular and sustainable contribution to the future of civil society in America.” Richard M. Lerner, from the Foreword

Peter C. Scales

Foreword by Richard M. Lerner

Developmental Assets

n the first edition of Developmental Assets: A Synthesis of the Scientific Research on Adolescent Development, Peter C. Scales and Nancy Leffert reviewed more than 800 scientific articles and reports that relate to Search Institute’s conceptual framework of developmental assets—positive relationships, opportunities, skills, values, and selfperceptions that all young people need to be healthy, caring, and productive. This volume retains that fundamental literature review and incorporates lessons learned from five years of subsequent research. A chapter is dedicated to each category of developmental assets (support, empowerment, boundaries and expectations, constructive use of time, commitment to learning, positive values, social competencies, and positive identity). Each chapter in this new edition shows:

Scales / Leffert

An Updated Resource on the Research Foundations of Developmental Assets

the Scientific Research on Adolescent Development

SECOND EDITION

Peter C. Scales and Nancy Leffert Foreword by Richard M. Lerner Search Institute • Minneapolis

Developmental Assets

A Synthesis of the Scientific Research on Adolescent Development  

Copyright © 1999, 2004 by Search Institute All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any manner whatsoever, mechanical or electronic, without prior permission from the publisher except in brief quotations or summaries in articles or reviews, or as individual charts or graphs for educational use. For additional permission, write to Permissions at Search Institute. 10

Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Scales, Peter, 1949– Developmental assets : a synthesis of the scientific research on adolescent development / Peter C. Scales and Nancy Leffert. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1-57482-338-8 (acid-free paper) 1. Adolescent psychology. I. Leffert, Nancy, 1949– . II. Title. BF724.S327 1999 305.235′5—dc21 98-47379

Search Institute 615 First Avenue Northeast, Suite 125 Minneapolis, MN 55413 612-376-8955 800-888-7828 www.search-institute.org Credits Editors: Eugene C. Roehlkepartain, Kate Tyler, Kathryn (Kay) L. Hong, Tenessa Gemelke Design: Diane Gleba Hall Production: Becky Manfredini, Mary Ellen Buscher About Search Institute Search Institute is an independent, nonprofit, nonsectarian organization whose mission is to provide leadership, knowledge, and resources to promote healthy children, youth, and communities. The institute collaborates with others to promote long-term organizational and cultural change that supports its mission. For a free information packet, call 800-888-7828.

Contents Foreword, by Richard M. Lerner, Ph.D. Preface to the Second Edition Acknowledgments

xiii

xxi

List of Figures and Tables

xxiii

Introduction: The Framework of Developmental Assets

Developmental assets are the positive relationships, opportunities, competencies, values, and self-perceptions that youth need to succeed.

The External Assets 1. The Support Assets

Supported young people know they can rely on positive, fulfilling relationships with many adults in their families, schools, and communities.

2. The Empowerment Assets

Young people are empowered to the extent that they are seen by others as resources, make contributions to society, and feel free of threats to their safety.

3. The Boundaries-and-Expectations Assets

Boundaries and expectations are the rules, standards, and norms in families, schools, neighborhoods, and communities that guide young peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s choices and regulate their behavior.

vii

Contents

4. The Constructive-Use-of-Time Assets

A healthy community offers a rich array of constructive, engaging opportunities and activities to all young people.

The Internal Assets 5. The Commitment-to-Learning Assets

119

A young personâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s commitment to learning is strongly influenced by relationships with family, peers, and others, as well as by the school environment.

6. The Positive-Values Assets

149

Positive values become deep commitments that guide how young people think and act.

7. The Social-Competencies Assets

173

Social competencies are the skills young people need to confront new situations, face hard decisions, and interact effectively with others.

8. The Positive-Identity Assets

193

Shaping oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s self-concept, beliefs, capacities, roles, and personal history is one of the central tasks of adolescence.

Postscript: Lessons from the Research References Index

viii

267

221

211

Preface to the Second Edition

In the larger sweep of time, five years is not terribly significant. But when it comes to research in the psychological and social sciences, five years is a significant span of time. A plethora of empirical work involving thousands of studies has appeared since the first edition of Developmental Assets: A Synthesis of the Scientific Research on Adolescent Development. At Search Institute, our continued scientific research and work with social change in communities have necessitated an ongoing familiarity with this current scholarship; we are pleased to observe that the synthesis and conclusions we presented in  still hold. The research on adolescent development continues to support the validity of the framework of developmental assets as a theoretically sound lens through which to understand adolescent development and to energize and inform strategies that communities can use to become more developmentally attentive places for young people. Although our basic conclusions remain the same, we have learned a great deal in the past five years. For example, all the data we reported in the  edition were based on Search Institute studies from the ‒ school year aggregate sample of nearly , students in grades ‒ from more than  U.S. communities. The sample was illuminating as a portrait of developmental well-being among young people, but it largely represented white youth from smaller towns and more intact, more affluent families. As a result, some have wondered how applicable the developmental assets framework is for youth of color, youth who live in economically poor settings, and urban youth.

xiii

Preface to the Second Edition

For this edition, each chapter contains updated Search Institute data from an aggregate sample of more than , students in grades ‒ from more than  U.S. communities surveyed in the ‒ school year. Although still not a true nationally representative sample, this sample was more diverse than the earlier one in terms of race/ethnicity, geographic representation, and socioeconomics, and was further weighted to align with the most recent census figures on adolescents’ race/ethnicity and geographic residence. Given those different sample characteristics, it is meaningful that the percentages of young people reporting they experience the developmental assets are comparable to what we reported in . In addition, the data across racial/ethnic diversities similarly link a higher number of developmental assets to less engagement in patterns of risk behavior and greater evidence of thriving (Developmental assets: A profile of your youth, ; Sesma & Roehlkepartain, ). The developmental assets framework remained useful and valid with this much more diverse sample. Further, in this new edition of Developmental Assets, we describe other smaller studies with more diverse samples of young people that Search Institute has conducted over the past few years. These studies in Colorado Springs (with one-third of the students non-white; Scales, Leffert, & Vraa, ) and Houston (nearly all Hispanic or African American, economically poor, urban high school students; Scales, Foster, Mannes, Horst, Pinto, & Rutherford, in press) add to the growing research foundation showing that although there may be some differences in which assets are most helpful for particular groups of youth, all groups of young people benefit from experiencing those developmental assets. Research also continues to support the basic conclusions we described in  about the relation of developmental assets to academic achievement. Asset-like constructs measured by other researchers are related to a variety of measures of school success, and Search Institute’s own measures of the  developmental assets are related to students’ self-reported grades. But over the past five years we also have conducted a study using actual Grade Point Average (GPA) as the outcome, and we reach the same conclusion in this current edition: Students at each successively higher level of assets have significantly higher GPAs (Scales & Roehlkepartain, ). We now know that, as predicted, the same relations seen between assets and outcomes at one point in time (“concurrent” relations) generally were seen across time as well (“longitudinal” relations). The connections between assets and outcomes in this study were significant, but, as expected, not as strong or consistent across outcomes over time as those observed at a single point in time. For most risk and thriving outcomes, higher levels of assets were related to better outcomes several years later. For example, asset-depleted students (‒

xiv

Preface to the Second Edition

assets in ) had about a C average three years later, but asset-rich students (‒ assets) had about a B+ average three years later (Scales & Roehlkepartain, ). In the  edition of Developmental Assets, we also discussed the role that adults outside young people’s families play in their positive development. Since then, we have conducted several national studies—two with U.S. adults and one with U.S. adolescents aged  to —that provide fresh perspectives for this current edition. The studies and new data underscore our earlier conclusions about the significant gap between how much adults believe they ought to be engaged with young people, and how engaged they really are. We found that young people who have more of the “other adult” assets that come from adults outside the home report fewer risk behaviors and more thriving, but that only a minority of adults could be said to be highly engaged with young people. These studies have led us to draw a number of practical implications—several of which we note in the new edition—about how to change social norms and expectations so that more adults connect positively with “other people’s kids” to build developmentally attentive communities (Scales et al., ; Scales, Benson, & Mannes, ; Scales, Benson, & Roehlkepartain, ). We have also learned much about the developmental assets framework from our study of its applicability in the middle childhood period, that period of life (grades ‒) immediately preceding the adolescent years. Overall, we conclude that, as predicted, children in middle childhood probably experience more assets than do adolescents, but that, like adolescents, large minorities of young people may not experience many of even the most common assets (Scales, Sesma, & Bolstrom, ). Our post- learnings, although needing to be elaborated and confirmed with additional empirical data, add to the growing confidence that the developmental assets framework has both scientific and applied utility across the first two decades of life. Since  the developmental assets framework has increasingly had an impact on shaping and contributing to theory in positive youth development (Benson, Scales, Hamilton, & Sesma, ; Benson & Saito, ; Connell & Kubisch, ), applied developmental science (Lerner, ; Benson, Scales, & Mannes, ), and the science-based development of community programs for youth (Eccles & Gottman, ) and health promotion programs for youth (Mahoney & Lafferty, ). It has also served as one of the organizing approaches for the increasing emphasis scholars and practitioners alike are giving to the study and promotion of thriving in young people (Scales, Benson, Leffert, & Blyth, ; Lerner et al., ; Scales & Benson, ) and to the creation of national systems of positive indicators of youth development to stand beside traditional measures of youth problems and deficits (Moore & Lippman,

Preface to the Second Edition

). We were beginning to notice these impacts in the late s; however, the emergence of the developmental assets framework as a leading component of both theory and science-based application in youth development has noticeably accelerated in the first few years of the st century. This trend has provided scholars, practitioners, and policymakers with increasing evidence of the power of developmental assets to mobilize communities and make a difference for diverse young people. As the research continues to reveal new insights, we identify many opportunities for future inquiry. We would like to see peer-reviewed papers in the literature showing how developmental assets were intentionally increased in a sample of young people, and that the theory successfully predicted the concomitant changes in their risk and thriving outcomes. Limits in existing research permit questions about the effectiveness of the developmental assets framework to linger. The first longitudinal study of assets and outcomes in a sample of several hundred youth (Scales & Roehklkepartain, ; Roehlkepartain, Benson, & Sesma, ) helps ameliorate such doubts; however, more such research is needed, especially studies investigating (a) how assets can be increased over time, and (b) the connection between those increases and positive developmental gains. Another related strand of needed research is a deeper understanding of how assets work. Our recent research has reinforced the conclusion that the number of assets young people experience matters to their development, but there has been far less exploration of the processes by which that influence is exerted. Such work needs to include identifying particular clusters of assets that theoretically may have greater impact than other assets on specific developmental outcomes, and then examining whether those relations are observed, both concurrently and longitudinally. The challenge is to avoid becoming reductionist and formulaic about the implications for program and practice that arise from such studies; for example, take two doses of positive family communication, three of school boundaries, and add an hour a week of youth programs, and voilà, young people will abstain from alcohol and other drug abuse. There is great temptation to identify the “most important” assets, either generally or with regard to specific outcomes, and then for communities to focus on building only those. But young people live in complexly connected, multilayered environments of self, family, school, community, and peers. Attempts to reduce developmental cause and effect within such a system to a few “most important” linear relationships are bound to miss the ecological whole that is more than the sum of its parts. Still, it is neither theoretically defensible nor grounded in common sense to suspect that all  assets have equal power to affect positively all developmental outcomes. Somewhere between avoiding ex-

xvi

Preface to the Second Edition

ploration of linkages among particular assets and specific outcomes and imagining that the whole of human development can be reduced to such simple connections lies a fertile area for significant research over the next five years that has meaningful applied implications. Finally, more scientific and practical work in communities needs to be done to integrate the asset framework with other approaches to problem prevention and promotion of positive youth development. Although Search Institute has always advocated for comprehensive approaches to youth development (Benson, ; Benson, ; Scales, ), the framework is sometimes misunderstood as promoting an either/or orientation in which communities must choose between risk reduction and promotion of young people’s positive well-being (Pollard, Hawkins, & Arthur, ). Since , there are increasing examples of communities attempting to blend or integrate approaches such as the developmental assets framework and the social development model (Whitlock & Hamilton, ), the latter often referred to as the risk and protective factors approach (Hawkins, Guo, Hill, Battin-Pearson, & Abbott, ). Studies examining how those two influential approaches and others (e.g., the recent “positive psychology” movement—see Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, ) can complement each other and provide a more valuable impact for young people when used together are notably absent in the literature and are sorely needed. We wrote in the  Introduction that asset building was an approach based more on opportunities than risks and represented a more hopeful, optimistic perspective than many traditional, risk-focused approaches to youth development. Today research and leading efforts in the field (e.g., Weissberg, Kumpfer, & Seligman, ) suggest more than ever that both prevention science and research-based promotion of positive youth development are necessary for either approach to achieve its promise for young people. Although the future holds many more research opportunities, our recent work has yielded numerous confirmations of the scientific and practical importance of the developmental assets framework for promoting the well-being of diverse young people. While we suggested in  that both scholars and practitioners could use the framework with confidence, the ensuing years have enabled us to be even more optimistic about its value in helping inform and guide new efforts in the promotion of positive youth development. We hope this new edition of Developmental Assets helps add stimulus to that noble goal. Peter C. Scales Manchester, Missouri

xvii

Preface to the Second Edition

Selected Readings Benson, P. L. (). The troubled journey: A portrait of th–th grade youth. Minneapolis: Search Institute. Benson, P. L. (). All kids are our kids: What communities must do to raise caring and responsible children and adolescents. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Benson, P. L., & Saito, R. N. (). The scientific foundations of youth development. In P. L. Benson & K. J. Pittman (Eds.), Trends in youth development: Visions, realities, and challenges (pp. ‒). Boston: Kluwer Academic/Plenum. Benson, P. L., Scales, P. C., Hamilton, S. A., & Sesma, A., Jr. (in press). Positive youth development: Theoretical issues, research, and applications. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. , 6th ed. New York: John Wiley. Benson, P. L., Scales, P. C., & Mannes, M. (). Developmental strengths and their sources: Implications for the study and practice of community-building. In R. M. Lerner., F. Jacobs, & D. Wertlieb (Eds.), Handbook of applied developmental science, Vol. , Applying developmental science for youth and families—Historical and theoretical foundations (pp. ‒). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Connell, J. P., & Kubisch, A. C. (). Community approaches to improving outcomes for urban children, youth, and families: Current trends and future directions. In A. Booth & A. C. Crouter (Eds.), Does it take a village? Community effects on children, adolescents, and families (pp.‒). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Developmental assets: A profile of your youth. (). Minneapolis: Search Institute (‒ school year aggregate dataset). Eccles, J., & Gootman, J. A. (Eds.). (). Community programs to promote youth development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Hawkins, J. D., Guo, J., Hill, K. G., Battin-Pearson, S., & Abbott, R. (). Long term effects of the Seattle social development intervention on school bonding trajectories. Applied Developmental Science, , ‒. Lerner, R. M. (). Developmental assets and asset-building communities: A view of the issues. In R. M. Lerner & P. L. Benson (Eds.), Developmental assets and asset-building communities: Implications for research, policy, and practice (pp. ‒). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum. Lerner, R. M., Brentano, C., Dowling, E. M., & Anderson, P. M. (). Positive youth development: Thriving as the basis of personhood and civil society. New Directions for Youth Development, No. , ‒. Mahoney, C. A., & Lafferty, C. K. (). Special issue: Positive youth development. American Journal of Health Behavior,  (Supp. ), S–S. Moore, K. A., & Lippman, L. (Eds.). (). Conceptualizing and measuring indicators of positive development: What do children need to flourish? New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum. Pollard, J. A., Hawkins, J. D., & Arthur, M. W. (). Risk and protection: Are both necessary to understand diverse behavioral outcomes in adolescence? Social Work Research, , ‒. Roehlkepartain, E. C., Benson, P. L., & Sesma, A., Jr. (). Signs of progress in putting children first: Developmental assets among youth in St. Louis Park, ‒. Minneapolis: Search Institute (download at www.children-first.org). Scales, P. C., & Benson, P. L. (in press). Thriving in adolescence. In R. M. Lerner & C. Fischer (Eds.), Applied developmental science encyclopedia. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

xviii

Preface to the Second Edition

Scales, P. C., Benson, P. L., Leffert, N., & Blyth, D. A. (). Contribution of developmental assets to the prediction of thriving among adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, , ‒. Scales, P. C., Benson, P. L., & Mannes, M. (). Grading grown-ups : How do American kids and adults relate? Highlights from a national study. Minneapolis: Search Institute (download at www.search-institute.org). Scales, P. C., with Benson, P. L., Mannes, M., Roehlkepartain, E. C., Hintz, N. R., & Sullivan, T. K. (). Other people’s kids: Social expectations and American adults’ involvement with children and adolescents. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum. Scales, P. C., Benson, P. L., & Roehlkepartain, E. C. (). Grading grown-ups: American adults report on their real relationships with kids. Minneapolis: Search Institute and Lutheran Brotherhood. Scales, P. C., Foster, K., Mannes, M., Horst, M., Pinto, K., & Rutherford, A. (in press). School-business partnerships, developmental assets, and positive outcomes among urban high school students: A mixed-methods study. Urban Education,  (March ). Scales, P. C., Leffert, N., & Vraa, R. (). The relation of community developmental attentiveness to adolescent health. American Journal of Health Behavior,  (Supp. ), S–S. Scales, P. C., & Roehlkepartain, E. C. (). Boosting student achievement: New research on the power of developmental assets. Search Institute Insights & Evidence, (), ‒. Scales, P. C., Sesma, A., Jr., & Bolstrom, B. J. (). Coming into their own: How developmental assets promote positive growth in middle childhood. Minneapolis: Search Institute. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, , ‒. Sesma, A., Jr., & Roehlkepartain, E. C. (). Unique strengths, shared strengths: Developmental assets among youth of color. Search Institute Insights & Evidence, (), ‒. Weissberg, R. P., Kumpfer, K. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (). Prevention that works for children and youth. American Psychologist, , ‒. Whitlock, J. L., & Hamilton, S. F. (). The role of youth surveys in community youth development initiatives. Applied Developmental Science, , ‒.

xix

About the Authors Peter C. Scales, Ph.D., senior fellow in the Office of the President at Search Institute, is a developmental psychologist, author, speaker, and researcher who is widely recognized as one of the nation’s foremost authorities on the healthy development of children, youth, and families. Among his previous positions, Dr. Scales has served as director of national initiatives for the Center for Early Adolescence, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; chair of the Alaska Governor’s Commission on Children and Youth; and research director, Syracuse University’s Institute for Family Research and Education. In addition to numerous scientific articles and chapters, Dr. Scales is author of more than a dozen books and monographs, including The Sexual Adolescent (Duxbury), A Portrait of Young Adolescents in the s (Center for Early Adolescence), Great Places to Learn: How Asset-Building Schools Help Students Succeed (Search Institute), Other People’s Kids: Social Expectations and American Adults’ Involvement with Children and Adolescents (Kluwer/Plenum), and most recently, Coming into Their Own: How Developmental Assets Promote Positive Growth in Middle Childhood (Search Institute). The winner of the  U.S. Administration for Children and Families Commissioner Award for “outstanding leadership and service in the prevention of child abuse and neglect,” he earned his doctorate and master’s degree in child development and family relations from Syracuse University, and his bachelor’s degree in psychology also from Syracuse University. Nancy Leffert, Ph.D., Associate Dean in the School of Psychology, Fielding Graduate Institute in Santa Barbara, CA and formerly Senior Research Scientist at Search Institute, is a developmental psychologist, licensed independent clinical social worker, researcher, author, and speaker who specializes in development during adolescence and childhood. She is the  recipient of the Hershel Thornburg Dissertation Award by the Society for Research on Adolescence. Dr. Leffert has previously served in several positions at the University of Minnesota and as director of the Child and Youth Problems Clinic, Family Service Association of San Diego County. In addition to many scientific articles and chapters, Dr. Leffert is coauthor of Starting Out Right: Developmental Assets for Children (Search Institute), Shema: Listening to Jewish Youth (Search Institute), and Making the Case: Measuring the Impact of Youth Development Programs (Search Institute). She earned her doctorate in child psychology from the Institute of Child Development, University of Minnesota, and her master’s of social work and bachelor’s degree from California State University at San Diego.

$29.95

#0338

and Nancy Leffert

Developmental Assets A Synthesis of

Search Institute

Peter C. Scales

Foreword by Richard M. Lerner

Developmental Assets

Scales / Leffert

An Updated Resource on the Research Foundations of Developmental Assets

the Scientific Research on Adolescent Development

SECOND EDITION