Page 80 - Ana Kozina and Nora Wiium, eds. ▪︎ Positive Youth Development in Contexts. Ljubljana: Educational Research Institute, 2021. Digital Library, Dissertationes (Scientific Monographs), 42.
P. 80
positive youth development in contexts
DA are divided into external assets and internal assets. External assets
are defined as support (i.e. family support, positive family relationships,
other relationships with adults, a caring neighbourhood, a good school cli-
mate, parental involvement in schooling), empowerment (i.e. communi-
ty values, helping others), boundaries and expectations (i.e. family bound-
aries, boundaries within the school, boundaries within neighbourhoods,
adult role models, positive peer influence, high expectations) and construc-
tive use of time (i.e. creative activities, youth programmes, religious activ-
ities, time spent at home). Internal assets include a commitment to learn-
ing (i.e. motivation to succeed, learning commitment, regular completion
of homework, connection to the school, reading for pleasure), positive val-
ues (i.e. care, equality and social justice, integrity, honesty, responsibility,
self-control), social competencies (i.e. planning and decision-making, in-
terpersonal competencies, cultural competencies, appropriate conflict res-
olution) and a positive identity (i.e. self-esteem, positive opinion about one’s
future) (Benson et al., 2011).
The 5Cs include competence, confidence, character, connection and
caring (Bowers et al., 2010). Competence is a positive opinion about one‘s
actions in specific areas (e.g. social competencies and academic achieve-
ment), while confidence is defined as an inner feeling of positive self-esteem
and self-efficacy. Character is viewed as the possession of ethical standards
that are consistent with social and cultural norms. Connection represents
the intertwining of positive mutual relations of the individual with his or
her important others, institutions and communities. Caring combines em-
pathy and sympathy.
Both frameworks were well established in the past, where especially
the 5Cs were recognised as the most empirically supported framework to
date (Heck & Subramaniam, 2009). The two paradigms were first estab-
lished and based on the theory and previous findings (i.e. Leffert et al., 1998;
Lerner et al., 2005) and then specific questionnaires were created or adjust-
ed to measure either DA or the 5Cs (Geldhof et al., 2014b; Syvertsen et al.,
2019). The Search Institute formulated a questionnaire to assess young peo-
ple’s experiences and beliefs regarding 40 assets (i.e. the Profiles of Student
Life: Attitudes and Behaviors Survey; Leffert et al., 1998). They were first
meant to serve as the basis for conversation and action and not as a meas-
urement instrument (Syvertsen et al., 2019). However, later, expected con-
nections with several positive outcomes (i.e. positive academic, social, emo-
tional and behavioural outcomes) were confirmed (Benson et al., 2011) and
80
DA are divided into external assets and internal assets. External assets
are defined as support (i.e. family support, positive family relationships,
other relationships with adults, a caring neighbourhood, a good school cli-
mate, parental involvement in schooling), empowerment (i.e. communi-
ty values, helping others), boundaries and expectations (i.e. family bound-
aries, boundaries within the school, boundaries within neighbourhoods,
adult role models, positive peer influence, high expectations) and construc-
tive use of time (i.e. creative activities, youth programmes, religious activ-
ities, time spent at home). Internal assets include a commitment to learn-
ing (i.e. motivation to succeed, learning commitment, regular completion
of homework, connection to the school, reading for pleasure), positive val-
ues (i.e. care, equality and social justice, integrity, honesty, responsibility,
self-control), social competencies (i.e. planning and decision-making, in-
terpersonal competencies, cultural competencies, appropriate conflict res-
olution) and a positive identity (i.e. self-esteem, positive opinion about one’s
future) (Benson et al., 2011).
The 5Cs include competence, confidence, character, connection and
caring (Bowers et al., 2010). Competence is a positive opinion about one‘s
actions in specific areas (e.g. social competencies and academic achieve-
ment), while confidence is defined as an inner feeling of positive self-esteem
and self-efficacy. Character is viewed as the possession of ethical standards
that are consistent with social and cultural norms. Connection represents
the intertwining of positive mutual relations of the individual with his or
her important others, institutions and communities. Caring combines em-
pathy and sympathy.
Both frameworks were well established in the past, where especially
the 5Cs were recognised as the most empirically supported framework to
date (Heck & Subramaniam, 2009). The two paradigms were first estab-
lished and based on the theory and previous findings (i.e. Leffert et al., 1998;
Lerner et al., 2005) and then specific questionnaires were created or adjust-
ed to measure either DA or the 5Cs (Geldhof et al., 2014b; Syvertsen et al.,
2019). The Search Institute formulated a questionnaire to assess young peo-
ple’s experiences and beliefs regarding 40 assets (i.e. the Profiles of Student
Life: Attitudes and Behaviors Survey; Leffert et al., 1998). They were first
meant to serve as the basis for conversation and action and not as a meas-
urement instrument (Syvertsen et al., 2019). However, later, expected con-
nections with several positive outcomes (i.e. positive academic, social, emo-
tional and behavioural outcomes) were confirmed (Benson et al., 2011) and
80
