- Author: Matthew Rodriguez
Overview
This past year, 4-H, CalFresh Healthy Living, and the Master Gardener Program in Sutter has been collaborating together to serve youth and their families. Funded by the Sierra Health Foundation, a positive youth development program was designed to include four program components: 1) 4-H Embryology and Water Wizards school programming, 2) CalFresh Healthy Living school programming, 3) Master Gardener school garden programming, and 4) a four-week Ag-Venture summer day camp.
Guided by social-ecological theory, each program component was theorized to increase child well-being through the positive interactions between program staff and youth throughout the duration of the program. Anticipated outcomes included increases in youth's: 1) social skills and responsibility, 2) healthy eating and physical activity, 3) agriculture knowledge and skills, 4) exposure to careers in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). These anticipated proximal outcomes were then theorized to influence youth's: 1) social competency, leadership, and energy balance and 2) college and career readiness. The anticipated distal outcomes include improving overall youth well being. See attached conceptual model.
How did 4-H, CalFresh, and Master Gardener collaborate?
Each week, staff from each program met together to talk about the program. These meetings talked about the following topics: 1) program design, 2) program implementation, 3) program evaluation, and 4) program dissemination. During these conversations, there were many research questions that surfaced. Here are some of the many topics that we uncovered:
- When seeking to target low-income families, should we charge a program fee for youth to participate in the Ag-Venture summer day camp? If so, how should we conceptualize a price that could help establish sustainability for future program implementations while also not "pricing out" the youth from participating?
- Who should staff the day-to-day operations of the youth programming? Should we use volunteers or hire part-time staff? Or should we incorporate a train-the-trainer approach and allow educators to deliver program components?
- What training was needed to ensure that all staff and volunteers have the necessary information to deliver high quality positive youth development programming? What should this training look like?
- How should we describe this entire initiative to external stakeholders? While the program was positive youth development, which is what 4-H does, CalFresh Healthy Living and the Master Gardener Program were also equally involved.
These were some of the many discussions that our team had as we collaborated together as a team. There were certainly some disagreements, which is to be anticipated with group work, but overall the team came together to produce an innovative approach to Cooperative Extension programming among low-income families. These efforts were expected to support UC ANR's public value of "promoting healthy people and communities."
Preliminary results
While data collection is still occurring, here are some of the preliminary results based from questionnaires given to youth, parents, and educators.
- Older youth (grades 4-8) enjoyed the program, felt respected by camp staff, and learned new agriculture knowledge
- Younger youth (grades K-3) had fun at camp, felt camp counselors were nice, and learned more about science
- Parents were satisfied with communications from staff, felt the check-in procedure was easy, and were likely to recommend the summer day camp to other parents
Another result was that 36% of parents were familiar with the University of California Cooperative Extension. Note: A peer-reviewed manuscript with more results is being drafted and will be submitted to a journal in the near future.
What lessons can we glean?
There are many lessons that we can learn from this innovative program. The following are some of the many lessons learned:
- Cooperative Extension program units can collaborate together to promote healthy people and communities.
- There is a need for more youth programming in the community.
- More research is needed on sustainable program staffing:
- Hiring staff required significant time and logistical coordination.
- Utilization of 4-H and Master Gardener volunteers may show promise for establishing a more sustainable staffing model.
- Train-the-trainers appears to be a feasible staffing approach to delivering high-quality youth development programming in the schools.
References
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2007). The Bioecological Model of Human Development. Handbook of Child Psychology, 793-828. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0114
Hsu, M. (2023). Ag-Venture campers dive ‘head first' into agriculture, natural resources. University of California Cooperative Extension. https://ucanr.edu/News/?routeName=newsstory&postnum=57709
/h2>/h2>/h2>/h2>/h2>
- Author: Matthew Rodriguez
Youth Living in Poverty
Poverty is a reality for many youth and their families. According to the Children's Defense Fund, nearly 10.5 million children were considered economically disadvantaged ("poor") in 2019. Many youth experience housing instability. During 2017-18, over 1.5 million school-aged children experienced homelessness (Children's Defense Fund). Youth that live in poverty can face challenging circumstances as they interact with others in various contexts, such as at home, at school, and more broadly in the community. Bronfenbrenner's ecological theoretical framework provides a helpful way to understand that adequate access to resources is vital to youth "thriving."
Structures that Can Perpetuate Poverty
While the topic of poverty can be very complex to understand, research reveals that structures can shape the ebb and flow of resources to underserved communities of color. In her famous article, "Levels of racism: A theoretic framework and a gardener's tale" describes a flower box analogy to illustrate some of the mechanisms that interrelate when seeking to understand the complexities that youth of color can experience, such as racism and limited access to resources.
Watch Video
Reflection Questions
- Read article here.
- In the article, Dr. Jones describes an allegory that contains two flower boxes. The first has rich fertile soil and the second has poor rocky soil. Is there a relation between “poor rocky soil” and poverty? If so, how?
- The allegory goes on to explain the “gardener” prefers red flowers over pink flowers. The pink flowers are planted in the poor rocky soil. Does the pink flower get to “decide” which flower box to reside within? How may this allegory relate to youth living in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods?
- The allegory describes a structure whereby the gardener separates the soil into two different flower boxes. The system maintains that the rich fertile soil goes in one flower box and the poor rocky soil goes into a separate flower box. What structures are prevalent in your community and how do these structures gate keep access to economic resources for youth?
- A central figure in the allegory is “the gardener.” In your opinion, who is the gardener? Why?
Share Your Feedback
I invite you to share your thoughts by submitting a comment to this post. Your input and feedback is a valuable part of the exchange of ideas and information.
References
Arnold, M. E., & Gagnon, R. J. (2020). Positive youth development theory in practice: An update on the 4-H Thriving Model. Journal of youth development (Online), 15(6), 1-23. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5195/jyd.2020.954
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2007). The Bioecological Model of Human Development. Handbook of Child Psychology, 793-828. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0114
Jones, C. P. (2000). Levels of racism: A theoretic framework and a gardener's tale. American journal of public health, 90(8), 1212-1215.
/h2>/h2>/h2>/h2>/h2>/h2>