Page 130 - Ana Kozina and Nora Wiium, eds. ▪︎ Positive Youth Development in Contexts. Ljubljana: Educational Research Institute, 2021. Digital Library, Dissertationes (Scientific Monographs), 42.
P. 130
positive youth development in contexts
The hierarchical model of character strengths and virtues was based on
cultural considerations with the authors recognising that empirical stud-
ies could lead to a different model being proposed (Peterson & Seligman,
2004). Numerous empirical studies on the latent structure of self-report-
ed character strengths followed, extracting 3–5 factors with a considerable
overlap in their factors (McGrath, 2015). When people employ their charac-
ter strengths, they use their natural capacities to fulfil their potential and
achieve their goals, which should lead to positive outcomes like achieve-
ments and well-being (Linley & Harrington, 2006). There is growing ev-
idence that certain character strengths can buffer the negative effects of
stress and trauma and that character strengths help young people thrive
(Park, 2004). Many youth development programmes use interventions
aimed at building specific character strengths (e.g. Weissberg & O’Brien,
2004). The Aware-Explore-Apply (A-E-A) model was proposed to describe
how strengths-based approaches lead to positive outcomes (Niemiec, 2013):
individuals (1) build up knowledge of their strengths (aware); (2) explore
how their character strengths relate to valued outcomes in their past and
current experiences; and (3) use their character strengths in their every-
day lives (apply). In the higher education context, this gives students op-
portunities to apply their strengths in the processes of learning, intellec-
tual development, and personal excellence (Louis, 2011). In sum, the VIA
Classification is a ‘common language’ for describing personality traits that
“1. reflect our personal identity; 2. produce positive outcomes for ourselves
and others (e.g., well-being, positive relationships, achievement); and 3.
contribute to the collective good” (Niemiec, 2018, p. 2).
The Positive Youth Development Framework
Alongside the Positive Psychology framework, the Positive Youth
Development (PYD) framework (Lerner, 2007) has emerged independent-
ly. Both frameworks are primarily oriented to a thriving continuum – shift-
ing the focus away from deficits, even though PYD focuses almost exclu-
sively on adolescence (Tolan et al., 2016). The PYD perspective is based on
developmental systems theory. It emphasises that positive development
and thriving can occur when young people’s strengths are systematical-
ly aligned with positive resources that promote their growth (Lerner et al.,
2005). The 5 Cs Model of PYD is the most empirically supported framework
to date (Heck & Subramaniam, 2009). It stresses the strengths of adolescents
and enables youth to be seen as resources waiting to be developed (Bowers
130
The hierarchical model of character strengths and virtues was based on
cultural considerations with the authors recognising that empirical stud-
ies could lead to a different model being proposed (Peterson & Seligman,
2004). Numerous empirical studies on the latent structure of self-report-
ed character strengths followed, extracting 3–5 factors with a considerable
overlap in their factors (McGrath, 2015). When people employ their charac-
ter strengths, they use their natural capacities to fulfil their potential and
achieve their goals, which should lead to positive outcomes like achieve-
ments and well-being (Linley & Harrington, 2006). There is growing ev-
idence that certain character strengths can buffer the negative effects of
stress and trauma and that character strengths help young people thrive
(Park, 2004). Many youth development programmes use interventions
aimed at building specific character strengths (e.g. Weissberg & O’Brien,
2004). The Aware-Explore-Apply (A-E-A) model was proposed to describe
how strengths-based approaches lead to positive outcomes (Niemiec, 2013):
individuals (1) build up knowledge of their strengths (aware); (2) explore
how their character strengths relate to valued outcomes in their past and
current experiences; and (3) use their character strengths in their every-
day lives (apply). In the higher education context, this gives students op-
portunities to apply their strengths in the processes of learning, intellec-
tual development, and personal excellence (Louis, 2011). In sum, the VIA
Classification is a ‘common language’ for describing personality traits that
“1. reflect our personal identity; 2. produce positive outcomes for ourselves
and others (e.g., well-being, positive relationships, achievement); and 3.
contribute to the collective good” (Niemiec, 2018, p. 2).
The Positive Youth Development Framework
Alongside the Positive Psychology framework, the Positive Youth
Development (PYD) framework (Lerner, 2007) has emerged independent-
ly. Both frameworks are primarily oriented to a thriving continuum – shift-
ing the focus away from deficits, even though PYD focuses almost exclu-
sively on adolescence (Tolan et al., 2016). The PYD perspective is based on
developmental systems theory. It emphasises that positive development
and thriving can occur when young people’s strengths are systematical-
ly aligned with positive resources that promote their growth (Lerner et al.,
2005). The 5 Cs Model of PYD is the most empirically supported framework
to date (Heck & Subramaniam, 2009). It stresses the strengths of adolescents
and enables youth to be seen as resources waiting to be developed (Bowers
130
