one page summary

1

Organized Activities as

Developmental Contexts for Children

and Adolescents

Joseph L.Mahoney

Yale University

Reed W.Larson

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Jacquelynne S.Eccles

University of Michigan

Heather Lord

Yale University

School-age children in the United States and other Western nations spend almost half of their

waking hours in leisure activities (Larson & verma, 1999). How young persons can best use this

discretionary time has been a source of controversy. For some, out-of-school time is perceived as

inconsequential or even counterproductive to the health and well-being of young persons.

Consistent with this view, the past 100 years of scientific research has tended either to ignore this

time or to focus selectively on the risks present during the out-of-school hours (Kleiber &

Powell, chap.2, this volume). More recently, however, there is increased interest in viewing out-

of-school time as an opportunity for young persons to learn and develop competencies that are

largely neglected by schools. Researchers are beginning to recognize that along with family,

peers, and school, the organized activities in which some youth participate during these hours are

important contexts of emotional, social, and civic development. At the same time, communities

and the federal government in the United States are now channeling considerable resources into

creating organized activities for young people’s out-of-school time (Pittman et al., chap.17, this

volume). The primary aim of this volume is to bring scientific research to bear on how this time

can be used constructively.

In this chapter, we overview central issues in the field of research on organized activities to

provide a background and framework for the chapters that follow. Four main areas are addressed.

First, we discuss definitional issues in the field and clarify what is meant by organized activities

within this volume. Second, we outline the available research indicating that participation in

these activities affects shortand long-term development. Third, we consider the features of

organized activities thought to account for their developmental impact and, lastly, we review

evidence on factors that Influence participation in these activities and whether youth benefit from

their developmental potential.

WHAT ARE ORGANIZED ACTIVITIES?

This volume focuses principally on formal activities for children 6 to 18 years of age that are not

part of the school curriculum. By “organized,” we refer to activities that are characterized by

structure, adult-supervision, and an emphasis on skill-building (e.g., Eccles & gootman, 2002;

Larson, 2000; Roth & Brooks-gunn, 2003). These activities are generally voluntary, have regular

and scheduled meetings, maintain developmentally based expectations and rules for participants

in the activity setting (and sometimes beyond it), involve several participants, offer supervision

and guidance from adults, and are organized around developing particular skills and achieving

goals. These activities are often characterized by challenge and complexity that increase as

participants’ abilities develop (e.g., Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Larson, 1994). In general, organized

activities share the broad goal of promoting positive development for the participants.

A variety of labels have been used to describe organized activities for young persons. They

usually denote the who (school-age, child, adolescent, youth), where (school-based, community-

based), what (activities, programs, organizations), and when (after-school, extracurricular,

summer, nonschool, out-of-school) elements of participation. These descriptors are meaningful

and do clarify the phenomenon of interest. Accordingly, we use the term organized activities to

refer to these variations collectively. The word organized is also used to make clear that so-

called unstructured activities (e.g., watching television, listening to music, “hanging out” with

peers, and “cruising” in cars) and other forms of passive leisure (e.g., eating, resting, and

personal care) are not the focus of this volume, except as a backdrop of what else youth might be

doing during their after-school hours (Kleiber & Powell, chap.2, this volume; Osgood et al.,

chap.3, this volume).

Breadth and Diversity of Activities

The range of organized activities available to children and adolescents in the United States and

other Western nations is substantial (Carnegie Council, 1992; Eccles & gootman, 2002; Quinn,

1999). They include nationally sponsored youth organizations and federally funded after-school

programs (e.g., Boys and girls Clubs, YMCA, YWCA, 21st Century Community Learning

Centers, 4-H, Boy/girl Scouts, Camp Fire). They involve community, school, and locally

organized programs: autonomous grassroots youth developmental organizations, faith-based

youth organizations, and activities provided by parks and recreation services, museums, libraries,

youth centers, youth sports organizations and amateur leagues (e.g., little league), school-

sponsored extracurricular and after-school activities, and community service programs. They

also include specifc types of activities (e.g., sports, music, hobby clubs, social clubs, religious,

service activities) that can be differentiated on the basis of activity-related goals, atmosphere,

and content (Roth & Brooks-gunn, 2003).

This volume considers organized activities across this diverse range. Methodological and

logistical challenges make it diffcult to study national organizations and little research is

available at this level of assessment. By contrast, considerable research has been conducted on

community-sponsored programs and activities (e.g., Eccles & gootman, 2002; Kirshner et al.,

chap.7, this volume; McIntosh et al., chap.15, this volume; Stattin et al., chap.10, this volume),

and school-based extracurricular activities (e.g., Barber et al., chap.9, this volume; Eccles &

Templeton, 2002; Pedersen & Seidman, chap.5, this volume). Recently, school-sponsored after-

school programs for elementary and middle-school youth have been increasing dramatically and

research is beginning to be conducted on these activities (Casey et al., chap.4, this volume;

vandell et al., chap.20, this volume; Weisman et al., chap.21, this volume). Finally,

developmental research that compares different types of activities is relatively new and featured

in several chapters (e.g., Barber et al., chap.9, this volume; Eccles & Barber, 1999; Hansen,

Larson, & Dworkin, 2003; Jacobs et al., chap.11, this volume; Pedersen & Seidman, chap.5, this

volume). Studies of specifc activities have been common in the fields of leisure studies and

sports psychology and are also considered here (e.g., Duda & Ntoumanis, chap.4, this volume;

O’Neill, chap.12, this volume; Scanlan et al., chap.13, this volume).

ORGANIZED ACTIVITIES AND SALIENT

DEVELOPMENTAL TASKS FOR YOUNG PERSONS

In order to evaluate how these organized activities contribute to development, scholars are

examining whether they help children and adolescents address the developmental tasks

associated with their age periods—how they help youth achieve age-appropriate competencies.

During childhood, key developmental tasks in our society include (a) acquiring habits of physical

and psychological health, (b) forming a positive orientation toward school and achievement, (c)

getting along with others including peers and adults, and (d) acquiring appropriate value systems

about rules and conduct across different contexts. These issues remain important during

adolescence, but are renegotiated in the light of interdependent changes in the bio-psycho-social

system (Eccles, Barber, Stone, & Temple ton, 2003; Mahoney & Bergman, 2002). In addition,

new tasks such as identity formation, personal mastery/efficacy, intimacy with peers, and

preparation for the transition to adulthood and postsecondary education or work become

increasingly important across adolescence (Brown, Clausen, & Richer, 1986; Collins, 2002;

Levesque, 1993). In the global world of the 21st century, the development of competencies to

move between diverse contexts defned by ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, and other forms

of difference is increasingly important (Larson, Wilson, Brown, Furstenberg, & verma, 2002).

Achieving competency at these tasks allows an individual to take advantage of personal and

environmental resources that promote positive functioning in the present, reduce the risk for

developing problem behaviors, and increase the likelihood for healthy adjustment in the future

(Eccles et al, 2003; Mahoney & Bergman, 2002; Masten & Coatsworth, 1998). Research shows

that participation in organized activities can have a range of positive Influence on children and

adolescence. We now highlight some of this evidence for school-sponsored extracurricular

activities, and community-based and after-school programs.

Extracurricular Activities and Community Programs

Involvement in organized activities such as sports teams, lessons, and clubs is relatively common

during adolescence. For example, among youth ages 12 to 17 from the National Survey of

Families (NASF; 1997), 57% participated on a sports team, 29% participated in lessons, and

60% participated in clubs or organizations after school or on weekends during the last year.

Recent reviews support the conclusion that participation in organized activities helps young

persons negotiate the salient developmental tasks of childhood and adolescence (e.g., Eccles &

gootman, 2002; Eccles & Templeton, 2002).

Increased Educational Attainment and Achievement. A longstanding finding from quasi-

experimental and experimental studies is that participation in extracurricular activities and

community programs promotes education attainment. This includes low rates of school failure

and dropout (e.g., Hahn, Leavitt, & Aaron, 1994; Mahoney & Cairns, 1997; McNeal, 1995), high

rates of postsecondary school education, and good school achievement (e.g., Eccles & Barber,

1999; Mahoney, Cairns, & Farmer, 2003; Marsh, 1992; Otto, 1975, 1976). Explanations for these

education gains include the association of participation in organized activities with heightened

school engagement and attendance, better academic performance and interpersonal competence,

and higher aspirations for the future (e.g., Barber, Eccles & Stone, 2001; grossman & Tierney,

1998; Lamborn, Brown, Mounts, & Steinberg, 1992; Mahoney et al., 2003; Newman, Wehlage,

& Lamborn, 1992).

Reduced Problem Behaviors. A number of studies indicate that participation in organized

activities is associated with reduced problem behaviors across adolescence and into young

adulthood. For instance, earlier work in sociology shows that activity participation is related to

low rates of delinquency (e.g., Elliott & voss, 1974; Hanks & Eckland, 1976). More recent

developmental research shows that involvement in organized activities reduces the likelihood of

developing problems with alcohol and drugs (grossman & Tierney, 1998; Youniss, Yates, & Su,

1997, 1999), aggression, antisocial behavior, and crime (e.g., Jones & Offord, 1989; Mahoney,

2000; Rhodes & Spencer, chap.19, this volume), or becoming a teenage parent (Allen, Philliber,

Herrling, & gabriel, 1997). Activity-related affliations with nondeviant peers, mentoring from

adult activity leaders, and the fact that organized activities represent a conventional endeavor that

is highly valued, challenging, and exciting represent the main explanations why organized

activities protect against problem behaviors (e.g., Barber et al., chap.9, this volume; Fletcher,

Elder, & Mekos, 2000; Larson, 2000; Rhodes & Spencer, chap.19, this volume).

Heightened Psychosocial Competencies. Organized activity participation is positively

associated with psychosocial adjustment in a number of areas (Eccles & gootman, 2002). For

instance, participation is related to low levels of negative emotions such as depressed mood and

anxiety during adolescence (Barber et al., 2001; Brustad, Babkes, & Smith, 2001; Larson, 1994;

Mahoney, Schweder, & Stattin, 2002). Motivation for learning and high self-efficacy is linked

with participation (Catalano, Berglund, Ryan, Lonczak, & Hawkins, 1999; Duda & Ntoumanis,

chap.14, this volume). These contexts also appear ideal for promotion of a more general

psychological capacity—initiative—which involves the application of extended effort to reach

long-term goals (e.g., Larson, 2000; Larson et al., chap.8, this volume). Finally, maintaining or

increasing self-esteem (e.g., McLaughlin, 2000; Rhodes & Spencer, chap.19, this volume) and

developing a clear and civic-minded identity (McIntosh et al., chap.15, this volume; Youniss,

McLellan, Su, & Yates, 1999) appear to be positively Influenced by activity participation. The

unique combination of psychological features and opportunities for social relationships and

belonging are main factors thought to impact these psychosocial processes.

Extracurricular Activities During Childhood. Although most investigations of organized

activities have been conducted with adolescents, available research suggests that children benefit

from participation as well. For example, consistent participation in extracurricular activities

during kindergarten and first grade is related to high reading and math achievement (National

Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHD] Early Child Care Research

Network, 2004). A moderate level of participation during the first grade has also been associated

with high levels of social competence several years later (Pettit, Laird, Bates, & Dodge, 1997).

Similarly, participation in extracurricular activities during middle childhood is indicative of

positive achievement and emotional adjustment (McHale, Crouter, & Tucker, 2001; Posner &

vandell, 1999), and predicts perceived competence and values during adolescence (Jacobs,

Lanza, Osgood, Eccles, & Wigfield, 2002; chap.11, this volume).

After-School Programs

Owing in large part to increases in maternal employment, after-school programs now provide a

common form of child care and adult supervision for over 7 million American children with

working parents (Capizzano, Tout, & Adams, 2000). In addition, many after-school programs are

implemented with the goal of providing safe environments and alternatives to self-care, as well

to take advantage of opportunities for social and academic enrichment during the nonschool

hours (vandell et al., chap.20, this volume). These programs are oriented to children in the

elementary and middle-school years.

Relative to children in other after-school arrangements, quasi-experimental longitudinal studies

show that consistent participation in after-school programs promotes positive academic

performance and reduces behavior problems such as aggression (Pettit, Laird, Bates, & Dodge,

1997; vandell et al., chap.20, this volume; Weisman et al., chap.21, this volume). Similarly,

formal evaluations of after-school programs comparing participants and nonparticipants over

time have found fewer school absences, higher school achievement, and improved work and

study habits for participants. 1 Parents of participants also report that after-school programs

support their work schedules and that they worry less about their children’s safety. These

benefits are frequently stronger for disadvantaged children, those with social, academic, or

language defcits, and families residing high-risk neighborhoods.

Overall, after-school program participation appears to promote competence in several key

developmental tasks during middle childhood including academic performance, school

engagement, and social behaviors and relationships. The likelihood for benefcial outcomes

appears greatest for: (a) after-school programs of higher quality and those in later stages of

development, (b) students who show greater consistency in their program participation, and (c)

programs serving low-income and low-achieving students at high risk for developing social-

academic problems. However, many after-school programs focus on academic achievement

rather than aiming to promote competence in personal and interpersonal domains (vandell et al.,

chap.20, this volume). Future research will need to examine what types of programs best serve

the needs of young persons in the short and long term (Quinn, chap.22, this volume).

The 21st-century Community Learning Centers. Funding that supports the 21st-century

Community Learning Centers (21st CCLCs) provides a major source of after-school programs in

the United States. A national evaluation of the 21st CCLCs was recently undertaken by

Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. A report describing the first-year findings of the evaluation

purports that the 21st CCLCs had little impact on the academic or social behavior of the

participating elementary and middle-school students (U.S. Department of Education, Offce of

Under Secretary, 2003). This provided the basis for a proposed 40% budget reduction for the

21st CCLCs in 2004 (Education Budget Summary and Background, 2003). However, there are

several limitations with the evaluation. For instance, the elementary school sample was not

representative of the larger population of elementary schools receiving 21st CCLC funds.

Comparison groups in the middle-school sample were not equivalent; the after-school

participants were at much higher risk at the beginning of the study. The absence of certain

baseline data, treatment and comparison group contamination, and issues surrounding the

evaluation’s timing and measurement were also methodological concerns in the National

Evaluation (Bissell et al., 2003; Mahoney, 2003), Finally, the quality of the programs included in

the evaluation was not systematically considered. As already noted, the quality of after-school

programs is very important for their effectiveness. Due to these several limitations, making

generalizations about the effectiveness of the 21st CCLCs based on the reported first-year

findings do not seem warranted. Extrapolation to after-school programs in general is not possible

on the basis of the 21st CCLC evaluation, particularly in light of the several carefully controlled

intervention studies that provide solid evidence of the effectiveness of high quality after-school

programs.

Summary

Organized activities are important contexts that help young persons build competencies and

successfully negotiate the salient developmental tasks of childhood and adolescence.

Participation is associated with academic success, mental health, positive social relationships and

behaviors, identity development, and civic engagement. These benefits, in turn, pave the way for

long-term educational success and help prepare young persons for the transition to adulthood.

However, although the research findings are generally positive, variations across the types of

programs and the participants suggest the need for researchers to differentiate the features of

programs that facilitate development and the conditions under which the benefits is most likely

to occur.

FEATURES OF ORGANIZED ACTIVITIES THAT

PROMOTE DEVELOPMENT

The preceding section makes it clear that organized activities are contexts in which children and

adolescents develop a range of important competencies. But why is this so? Why should

activities such as playing hockey for the school team, singing in a youth community chorus,

participating in school government, or spending afternoons in after-school program activities

matter?

To address this question, a committee of scholars appointed by the National Research Council

and Institute of Medicine recently evaluated what features of contexts promote positive

development (Eccles & gootman, 2002). By looking at research on development in contexts such

as families and schools, they derived the list of eight key features in Table 1.1 that are proven to

facilitate positive growth (see also Blum, 2003; Lerner, Fisher, & Weinberg, 2000; Roth &

Brooks-gunn, 2003). The panel cautioned that no single feature from this list is sufficient to

ensure positive development, but also that few contexts are likely to provide optimal experiences

in all of these areas. They also cautioned that future research can be expected to add to or refine

this list. Nonetheless these eight features represent the state of the art for thinking about what

might make organized activities such as hockey, student government, or an after-school program

an effective context of development.

TABLE 1.1Features of Contexts That Promote Positive Development

These features can be considered as explanatory mechanisms or mediators by which participation

in organized activities affect the development process. The available research evaluating these

features for organized activities is limited but generally indicates, first, that many organized

activities are high on several of these features and, second, that these features are linked to the

positive outcomes described. On the first point, organized activities typically offer a context of

safety during the after-school hours (e.g., McLaughlin, 2000), often provide opportunities for

skill building and efficacy (Larson, 2000), and are frequently important contexts of supportive

relationships with adults and peers (e.g., Barber et al., chap.9, this volume; Hansen et al., 2003;

Mahoney et al., 2002; Rhodes & Spencer, chap.19, this volume).

Although research specifcally linking these features to outcomes is rare, the National Research

Council committee concluded that successful youth programs are characterized by many of these

features. The most successful programs provide integration between a youth’s family, school,

and community experiences, engage youth in relationships with caring adults, and provide many

of the other positive features (Eccles & gootman, 2002; Pittman et al., chap.17, this volume;

Walker et al., chap.18, this volume). Targeted research that begins to critically test the specifc

linkage between some of these features and positive development is only beginning. As one

exemplar, Mahoney et al. (2003) used longitudinal data to show that the fostering of

interpersonal skills in youth programs is a mediator of high aspirations for the future in

adolescence and high educational attainment—including college attendance—at young

adulthood.

Furthermore, we are only beginning to understand how the different combinations of features in

organized activities interact to promote positive development. For instance, although

participation in organized activities appears to affect complex processes such as identity

formation and the development of initiative, this seems to depend on an appropriate balance of

many of the features already summarized (e.g., Barber et al., chap.9, this volume; Larson et al.,

chap.8, this volume; McIntosh et al., chap.15, this volume). Although expert youth workers have

developed a fund of practitioner wisdom for understanding these balancing processes (Pittman et

al., chap.17, this volume; Walker et al., chap.18, this volume), researchers are far behind in

subjecting this wisdom to critical test. Precisely which features are involved and how they co-act

to produce specifc developmental changes have not yet been evaluated. Thus, one task for

researchers is to understand better the interplay between these features, which patterns are most

critical for promoting different competencies, and how these relations may change over

development. A second and related task will be to assess how and why some organized activity

contexts are more effective at providing these positive features than others (e.g., Stattin et al.,

chap.20, this volume; vandell et al., chap.20, this volume). Both tasks will require researchers to

conduct process-oriented studies focused on individual change that are explicitly designed to

assess a broad array of structural and process quality parameters in the activity context. 2

FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE ACTIVITY

PARTICIPATION AND EFFECT DEVELOPMENTAL

OUTCOMES

The preceding sections have described different benefits and positive features associated with

organized activity participation. However, the extent to which organized activities Influence

development can vary across individual youth, programs, and community contexts. To derive the

greatest benefit from organized activities, a youth must participate. 3 The selection processes

affecting whether an individual participates and continues to participate is complex. To begin

with, the degree to which a youth can actually “select” to participate in organized activities

depends on the individual considered, his or her family, and the community in which he or she

resides (Caldwell & Baldwin, in press; Elder & Conger, 2000; Furstenberg, Cook, Eccles, Elder,

& Sameroff, 1999). Activity selection involves a reciprocal process between contextual

constraints and opportunities for participation, and the individual’s motivation and ability to

perceive and act on them.

Demographic and Familial Influences

Availability and affordability of activities are the most basic factors affecting participation. The

presence of resources such as parks, community centers, playing fields, and the availability of

willing and competent adults to provide the activities are requisites. The provision of programs

for youth is generally less in poor urban neighborhoods and isolated rural areas (Carnegie

Council, 1992; Pedersen & Seidman, chap.5, this volume). Beyond availability, factors such as

transportation and a family’s economic means to pay the costs of activities, as well as cultural

and ethnic factors, have considerable Influence on participation rates (Elder & Conger, 2000;

Furstenberg et al., 1999; villarruel et al, chap.7, this volume). These factors—availability,

economy, and culture—are often interrelated and likely account for the relatively low-

participation rates among economically disadvantaged children and adolescents and those from

traditionally defned minority groups (e.g., Hultsman, 1992; Jackson & Rucks, 1993; Pedersen &

Seidman, chap.5, this volume). It may also explain why income support programs and the

provision of culturally appropriate activities appear to increase participation rates (Casey et al.,

chap.4, this volume; villarruel et al., chap.6, this volume).

Parents’ desire to enroll their children in organized activities and their ability to manage their

children’s participation in such activities differ. If parents work full time and children need

transportation to get to organized activities, then it may be quite diffcult for a child to get and

remain involved in such activities. Similarly, if parents fear the types of children and adolescents

likely to participate in the organized activities, they may prefer to keep their children at home

(Furstenberg et al., 1999; Jarrett, 1997; Stattin et al., chap.10, this volume). Finally, if parents

rely on their children for help at home, they may not encourage their children to participate in

organized activities (Elder & Conger, 2000; Fletcher et al., 2000).

Individual Characteristics

An individual’s competence, age, and developmental status can constrain participation in

organized activities. For instance, because skill level can determine access to some organized

activities, particularly in adolescence, early activity involvement may be required for some forms

of later activity participation (McNeal, 1998). Therefore, children who do not (or cannot)

become competent in the skills developed through organized activities early on are likely to fnd

that opportunities for involvement in such activities diminish across childhood and adolescence.

It is no small irony that organized activities are particularly effective at building the very

competencies that would facilitate participation (Larson et al., chap.8, this volume).

The maturity of the youth may also lead some adolescents to drop out of organized activities. In

general, participation in many out-of-school organized activities declines as children move into

and through adolescence (Eccles & gootman, 2002). 4 This refects (a) a decline in some organized

programs for older children, s an increase in competition for membership in available activities

that excludes some youth from participating, (c) the fact that programs do not always provide the

kinds of activities likely to be of interest to adolescents, (d) diminished school budgets that fund

extracurricular activities, and (e) the increase in adolescent employment during the nonschool

hours. Programs that are successful at retaining their adolescent members offer increasing

opportunities for leadership, decision making, and meaningful service (Kirshner et al., chap.7,

this volume; McLaughlin, 2000; Pittman et al., chap.17, this volume; Walker et al., chap.18, this

volume); in other words, they offer opportunities that ft the maturing adolescents’ sense of self

and expertise.

In addition, individual and social-contextual factors ordinarily interact to affect opportunities for

participation. Individuals participate in organized activities for different reasons. Sometimes they

participate of their own volition because they want to participate (they select to be involved). In

other cases, they are recruited by peers, parents, and/or activity leaders to participate based on

personal characteristics, ability, or social connection (they are socialized to participate). Often,

both of these processes—selection and socialization—are at work in the decision to participate.

Furthermore, because participation itself is a socializing experience, experiences while involved

can both increase and decrease the likelihood of continued participation. Thus, continued

participation refects both of these processes.

Finally, greater benefits tend to be evident for students who show consistent participation in

organized activities. For instance, children’s rate of attendance in after-school programs is

positively associated with gains in school achievement and work habits (Cosden, Morrison,

Albanese, & Macias, 2001; Marshall et al., 1997; NICHD Early Child Care Research Network,

in press). Similarly, Barber et al. (chap.9, this volume) and Mahoney et al. (2003) fnd that

whether participation in school-based extracurricular activities is transient or stable affects the

developmental process and related outcomes. These findings are consistent with the broader

literature on effective school and community interventions (e.g., Catalano et al., 1999; Durlak &

Wells, 1997; Eccles & gootman, 2002). Building relationships, forming new behavior patterns,

and acquiring competencies take time. However, the fact that selection and socialization

processes interact to initiate and maintain participation makes it diffcult to evaluate the

effectiveness of long-term participation in organized activities.

Program Resources and Content

As with all programs for children and adolescents, the extent to which organized activities are

benefcial depends on their quality and content. Quality is partly defned by whether a program

offers the eight features shown in Table 1.1. But, it is also affected by the material and human

resources within a program. Indeed, these are likely to be vital to the program’s ability to provide

the eight features. After-school programs for children provide a good example. Considerable

variation exists in program resources, as evident in child-to-staff ratios, staff education, and staff

turnover. Research shows, in turn, that these are related to developmental outcomes for children

in the expected direction (e.g., vandell et al., chap.20, this volume). Children attending programs

that are low on these factors may either fail to benefit or may develop increased rates of problem

behaviors relative to children in alternative and high-quality after-school arrangements. In this

volume, chapter 17 by Pittman et al. provides a valuable discussion of what communities need to

do to build a robust system of high-quality programs to meet the needs of youth.

The content of activities within programs is also likely to affect a youth’s developmental

experiences. Although there is great variability in how adult leaders organize a given activity,

preliminary research suggests that differing activities may provide distinct developmental

opportunities and liabilities. Associated changes in substance use, antisocial behavior, school

achievement, and self-esteem vary across different activities (Barber et al. 2001, chap.9, this

volume; Pedersen & Seidman, chap.5, this volume; Stattin et al., chap.10, this volume). For

instance, in a survey in one community, Hansen et al. (2002) found that high-school youth

reported more experiences related to identity exploration and emotional learning in sports

compared to other organized activities, but also more negative peer and adult interactions.

Consistent with this, a controlled longitudinal study found that sports participation was

associated with increases in both academic achievement and alcohol consumption (Eccles &

Barber, 1999).

It is important to caution that these differences are not likely to inhere in the activity itself. They

could, for example, refect how the current generation of coaches or music directors construct the

culture, values, and goals youth experience in that specifc activity. They could also refect the

current peer culture associated with the activity. Finally, they may also refect the selection of

youth to activities that provide a culture and experiences in line with their current values and

desires. Much future research is needed to begin to separate out how developmental

opportunities are shaped by the type of activity and numerous interrelated factors.

Problematic Activities. To be sure, not all youth activities and programs are benefcial and some

are quite limited in the number of positive features they possess. Some structured activities are

organized in ways that do not facilitate positive development and may be harmful. One example

is provided by mentoring programs. volunteer mentors are often a valuable resource in

remedying the decreased availability of adult guidance for youth and facilitate perceived self-

esteem and school achievement. However, the program may pose a risk if the mentoring

relationship is short-lived or fails (Rhodes & Spencer, chap.19, this volume). A second example

involves participation in youth recreation centers that provide relatively low structure and lack

skill-building aims. Regular involvement in these settings appears to facilitate deviant peer

relationships during adolescence and persistent criminal behavior into adulthood (e.g., Mahoney,

Stattin, & Magnussen, 2001; Stattin et al., chap.10, this volume). This is likely to be particularly

true if such centers attract youth who are already involved in problematic behaviors and activities

(Dishion & McMahon, 1998; Dishion, McCord, & Poulin, 1999; Dishion, Poulin, & Burraston,

2001; Marshall et al., 1997; Pettit, Bates, Dodge, & Meece, 1999; Pettit et al., 1997; Reid &

Patterson, 1989). These examples serve as a powerful reminder that organizing out-of school

activities appropriately is critical and essential.

Other Factors Infuencing Program Impact

There are numerous other factors that may affect the impact of organized activities. Studies have

suggested that high-risk youth may benefit more from organized activities than other youth

(Eccles & Temple ton, 2002; Mahoney, 2000), The likely explanation is that these youth have

less access in other parts of their lives to the types of resources and developmental experiences

that these activities provide, thus the impact is likely to be greater (Elder & Conger, 2000). Little

research has been done to evaluate how gender and ethnicity may Influence a child’s likelihood

of gaining from a program (Pedersen & Seidman, chap.5, this volume). It should not be assumed

that a single program will be equally benefcial to youth with differing backgrounds. An

important horizon of future research is to understand how the ft between a youth program and the

characteristics of individuals shapes development (Eccles & Templeton, 2002).

OVERVIEW OF THE CONTENTS

This book presents conceptual, empirical, and policy-relevant advances in research on children’s

and adolescent’s participation in the developmental contexts represented by extracurricular

activities and after-school and community programs. Many of the issues brought to light in this

chapter are taken up in greater detail in the chapters to follow.

The volume is organized into three main sections. Part I discusses social and cultural

perspectives on organized activity participation. It begins with the historical evolution of leisure

activities in the United States and the associated risks inherent in a leisure experience that is

unstructured and lacks involvement in organized activities. Next, new perspectives on the role of

organized activity involvement in the development of youth from low-income families and those

from traditionally defned minority groups are provided. Finally, the involvement of youth as

participants in the research process itself is considered. Part II provides a collection of new

empirical studies on how participation in organized activities affects developmental processes

and outcomes. Across the chapters, particular attention is given to the developmental experiences

provided through participation in difference types of organized activities, and how the

experiences translate into psychosocial adjustment and competence. It concludes with a

commentary by Jacquelynne Eccles that discusses chapters in Parts I and II of this volume. Part

III links the conceptual and research knowledge base on organized activities to practice and

policy issues surrounding out-of-school time for young persons. This includes empirically based

and practical guidance for developing effective organized activities in general, and specifc

insights into optimal practices for community and after-school programs. This section concludes

with a commentary on out-of-school practices and policy considerations by Jane Quinn.

REFERENCES

Allen, J.P., Philliber, S., Herrling, S., & gabriel, K.P. (1997). Preventing teen pregnancy and

academic failure: Experimental evaluation of a developmentally based approach. Child

Development, 64, 729–742.

Barber, B.L., Eccles, J.S., & Stone, M.R. (2001). Whatever happened to the jock, the brain, and

the princess? Young adult pathways linked to adolescent activity involvement and social

identity. Journal of Adolescent Research: Special Issue, 16, 429–455.

Bissell, J.S., Cross, C.T., Mapp, K., Reisner, E., vandell, D.L., Warren, C., & Weissbourd, R.

(2003, May 10). Statement released by the Members of the scientific Advisory Board for the 21st

Century Community Learning Center Evaluation.

Blum, R.W. (2003). Positive youth development: A strategy for improving adolescent health. In

R.M.Lerner, F.Jacobs, & D.Wertlieb (Eds.), Promoting positive child, adolescent, and family

development: A handbook of program and policy innovations (vol. 2, pp. 237–252). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.

Brown, B.B., Clasen, D., & Eicher, S. (1986). Perceptions of peer pressure, peer conformity

dispositions, and self-reported behavior among adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 22,

521–530.

Brustad, R.J., Babkes, M.L., & Smith, A.L. (2001). Youth in sport: Psychological considerations.

In R.N.Singer, H.A.Hausenblas, & C.M.Janelle (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology (2nd ed.,

pp. 604–635). New York: Wiley.

Caldwell, L.L., & Baldwin, C.K. (in press). A developmental approach to understanding

constraints to adolescent leisure. In E.Jackson (Ed.), Constraints to leisure. State College, PA:

venture.

Capizzano, J., Tout, K., & Adams, g., (2000). Child care patterns of school-age children with

employed mothers. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.

Carnegie Council. (1992). A matter of time: Risk and opportunity in the outof-school hours. New

York: Carnegie Corporation.

Catalano, R.F., Berglund, M.L., Ryan, J.A., Lonczak, H.S., & Hawkins, J.D. (1999). Positive

youth development in the United States: Research findings on evaluations of positive youth

development programs. Report to the US Department of Health and Human Services, Offce of

the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation and National Institute for Child Health and

Human Development. Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. New York: Carnegie

Corporation of New York.

Collins, W.A. (April, 2002). More than myth and metaphor: The developmental signifcance of

adolescent romantic experiences. Presidential address presented at the Biennial Meeting of the

Society for Research on Adolescence, New Orleans, LA.

Cosden, M., Morrison, g., Albanese, A.L., & Macias, S. (2001). When homework is not home

work: After-school programs for homework assistance. Educational Psychologist, 36, 211–221.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper &

Row. Dishion, T.J., McCord, J., & Poulin, R. (1999). When interventions harm: Peer groups and

problem behavior. American Psychologist, 54, 755–764.

Dishion, T.J., & McMahon, R.J. (1998). Parental monitoring and the prevention of child and

adolescent problem behavior: A conceptual and empirical formulation. Clinical Child and

Family Psychology Review, 1, 61–75.

Dishion, T.J., Poulin, F., & Burraston, B. (2001). Peer group dynamics associated with iatrogenic

effects in group interventions with high-risk young adolescents. In D.W. Nangle & C.A.Erdley

(Eds.), The role of friendship in psychological adjustment (pp. 79–92). San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Durlak, J.A., & Wells, A.M. (1997). Primary prevention mental health programs for children and

adolescents: A meta-analytic review. American Journal of Community Psychology: Special

Issue: Meta-Analysis of Primary Prevention Program, 25, 115–152.

Eccles, J.S. & Barber, B.L. (1999). Student council, volunteering, basketball, or marching band:

What kind of extracurricular involvement matters? 14, 10–43.

Eccles, J.S., Barber, B., Stone, M., & Templeton, J. (2003). Adolescence and emerging

adulthood: The critical passage ways to adulthood. In M.H.Bornstein, L.Davidson, C.L.M.Keyes,

K.A.Moore, & The Center for Child Well-being (Eds.), Well-being: Positive development across

the life span (pp. 383–406). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Eccles, J.S., & gootman, J.A. (Eds.). (2002). Community programs to promote youth

development. Committee on Community-Level Programs for Youth. Board on Children, Youth,

and Families, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research

Council and Institute of Medicine. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Eccles, J.S., & Templeton, J. (2002). Extracurricular and other after-school activities for youth.

Review of Research in Education, 26, 113–180.

Education Budget Summary and Background (2003). Retrieved May 10, 2003, from

http://www.ed.gov/offces/OUS/Budget03/summary/index.html.

Elder, g.H. & Conger, R.D. (2000). Children of the land: Adversity and success in rural

America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Elliot, D., & voss, H. (1974). Delinquency and dropout. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Fletcher, A.C., Elder, g.H., Jr., & Mekos, D. (2000). Parental Influence on adolescent

involvement in community activities. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 10, 29–48.

Furstenberg, F., Cook, T., Eccles, J., Elder, g., & Sameroff, A. (1999). Managing to make it:

Urban families in adolescent success. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Grossman, J.B., & Tierney, J.P. (1998). Does mentoring work?: An impact study of the Big

Brothers Big Sisters Program. Evaluation Review, 22, 403–426.

Hahn, A., Leavitt, T., & Aaron, P. (1994). Evaluation of the Quantum Opportunity Program

(QOP): Did the program work? Waltham, MA: Brandeis University, Heller graduate School.

Hanks, M.P., & Eckland, B.K. (1976). Athletics and social participation in the educational

attainment process. Sociology of Education, 49, 271–294.

Hansen, D., Larson, R., & Dworkin, J. (2003), What adolescents learn in organized youth

activities: A survey of self-reported developmental experiences. Journal of Research on

Adolescence, 13, 25–56.

Harms, T., Jacobs, E.v., & White, D.R. (1996). School-Age Environment Rating Scale

(SACERS). New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.

Hultsman, W.z. (1992). Constraints to activity participation in early adolescence. Journal of

Early Adolescence, 12, 280–299. Jackson, E.L., Rucks, v.C. (1993). Reasons for ceasing

participation and barriers to participation: Further examination of constrained leisure as an

internally homogeneous concept. Leisure Sciences, 15, 217–230.

Jacobs, J.E., Lanza, S., Osgood, D.W., Eccles, J.S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Changes in children’s

self-competence and values: gender and domain differences across grades one through twelve.

Child Development, 73, 509–527.

Jarrett, R.L. (1997). African American family and parenting strategies in impoverished

neighborhoods. Qualitative Sociology, 20, 275–288.

Jones, M.B., & Offord, D.R. (1989). Reduction of antisocial behavior in poor children by

nonschool skill-development. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 30, 737–750.

Kinney, D.A. (1993). From nerds to normals: The recovery of identity among adolescents from

middle school to high schools. Sociology of Education, 66, 21–40.

Lamborn, S.D., Brown, B.B., Mounts, N.S., & Steinberg, L. (1992). Putting school in

perspective: The Influence of family, peers, extracurricular participation, and parttime work on

academic engagement. In F.M.Newmann (Ed.), Student engagement and achievement in

American secondary schools (pp. 153–181). New York: Teacher College Press.

Larson, R.W. (1994). Youth organizations, hobbies, and sports as developmental contexts. In

E.R.K..Silberiesen & E.Todt (Eds.), Adolescence in context: The interplay of family, school,

peers, and work in adjustment (pp. 46–65). New York: Springer-verlag.

Larson, R.W. (2000). Toward a psychology of positive youth development. American

Psychologist, 55, 170–183. Larson, R.W., & verma, S. (1999). How children and adolescents

spend time across the world: Work, play, and developmental opportunities. Psychological

Bulletin, 125, 701–736.

Larson, R., Wilson, R., Brown, B.B., Furstenberg, F.F., & verma, S. (2002). Changes in

Adolescents’ interpersonal experiences: Are they being prepared for adult relationships in the

21st century? Journal of Research on Adolescence, 12, 31–68.

Lerner, R.M., Fisher, C.B., & Weinberg, R.A. (2000). Toward a science for and of the people:

Promoting civil society through the application of developmental science. Child Development,

71, 11–20.

Levesque, R.J. (1993). The romantic experience of adolescents in satisfying love relationships.

Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 22, 219–251.

Mahoney, J.L. (2000). Participation in school extracurricular activities as a moderator in the

development of antisocial patterns. Child Development, 71, 502–516.

Mahoney, J.L. (2003, Spring). A critical commentary on the National Evaluation of the 21st

Century Community Learning Centers. 21 community news: A newsletter for the schools of the

21st century (pp. 1, 6). New Haven: Schools of the 21 st Century, Yale University.

Mahoney, J.L., & Bergman, L.R. (2002). Conceptual and methodological considerations in a

developmental approach to the study of positive adaptation. Journal of Applied Developmental

Psychology, 23, 195–217.

Mahoney, J.L., & Cairns, R. (1997). Do extracurricular activities protect against early school

dropout? Developmental Psychology, 33, 241–253.

Mahoney, J.L., Cairns, B.D., & Farmer, T. (2003). Promoting interpersonal competence and

educational success through extracurricular activity participation. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 95, 409–418.

Mahoney, J.L., & Magnusson, D. (2001). Parent participation in community activities and the

persistence of criminality. Development & Psychopathology, 31, 125–141.

Mahoney, J.L., Schweder, A.E., & Stattin, H. (2002). Structured after-school activities as a

moderator of depressed mood for adolescents with detached relations to their parents. Journal of

Community Psychology, 30, 69–86.

Mahoney, J.L., Stattin, H., & Magnusson, D. (2001). Youth recreation center participation and

criminal offending: A 20-year longitudinal study of Swedish boys. International Journal of

Behavioral Development, 25, 509–520.

Marsh, H.W. (1992). Extracurricular activities: Benefcial extension of the traditional curriculum

or subversion of academic goals? Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 553–562.

Marshall, N., garcia-Coll, C., Marx, F., McCartney, K., Keefer, N. & Ruh, J. (1997). After-

school time and children’s behavioral adjustment. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 43, 498–514.

Masten, A.S., & Coatsworth, J.D. (1998). The development of competence in favorable and

unfavorable environments. American Psychologist, 53, 205–220.

McHale, S.M., Crouter, A.C., & Tucker, C.J. (2001). Free-time activities in middle childhood:

Links with adjustment in early adolescence. Child Development, 72, 1764–1778.

McLaughlin, M.W. (2000). Community counts: How youth organizations matter for youth

development. Washington, DC: Public Education Network.

McNeal, R.B. (1995). Extracurricular activities and high school dropouts. Sociology of

Education, 68, 62–81.

McNeal, R.B. (1998). High school extracurricular activities: Closed structures and stratifying

patterns of participation. The Journal of Educational Research, 91, 183–191.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHD] Early Child Care Research

Network. (2004). Are child development outcomes related to before/after-school care

arrangements? Results from the NICHD Study of Early Child Care. Child Development, 75,

280–295.

Newman, F.M., Wehlage, g.g. & Lamborn, S.D. (1992). The signifcance and sources of student

engagement. In F.M.Newmann (Ed.), Student engagement and achievement in American

secondary schools (pp. 11–39). New York: Teachers College Press.

Otto, L.B. (1975). Extracurricular activities in the educational attainment process. Rural

Sociology, 40, 162–176.

Otto, L.B. (1976). Extracurricular activities and aspirations in the status attainment process.

Rural Sociology, 41, 217–233.

Pettit, g.S., Bates, J.F., Dodge, K.A., & Meece, D.W. (1999). The impact of after-school peer

contact on early adolescent externalizing problems is moderated by parental monitoring,

perceived neighborhood safety, and prior adjustment. Child Development, 70, 768–778.

Pettit, g.S., Laird, R.D., Bates, J.E., & Dodge, K.A. (1997). Patterns of after-school care in

middle childhood: Risk factors and developmental outcomes. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 43,

515–538.

Posner, J.K., & vandell, D.L. (1999). After-school activities and the development of low-income

urban children: A longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 35, 868–879.

Quinn, J. (1999). Where need meets opportunity: Youth development programs for early teens.

In R.Behrman (Ed.), The future of children: When school is out (pp. 96–116). Washington, DC:

The David and Lucile Packard Foundation.

Reid, J.B., & Patterson, g.R. (1989). The development of antisocial behavior patterns in

childhood and adolescence: Personality and aggression [Special issue]. European Journal of

Personality, 3, 107–119.

Roth, J.L., & Brooks-gunn, J. (2003). What is a youth development program? Identifcation of

defning principles. In R.M.Lerner, F.Jacobs, & D.Wertlieb (Eds.), Promoting positive child,

adolescent, and family development: A handbook of program and policy innovations (vol. 2, pp.

197–224). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

U.S. Department of Education, Offce of the Under Secretary. (2003). When schools stay open

late: The national evaluation of the 21st century learning centers program, first year findings.

Washington, DC: Author.

Youniss, J., McLellan, J.A., Su, Y., & Yates, M. (1999). The role of community service in

identity development: Normative, unconventional, and deviant orientations. Journal of

Adolescent Research, 14, 248–261.

Youniss, J., Yates, M., & Su, Y. (1997). Social integration: Community service and marijuana

use in high school seniors. Journal of Adolescent Research, 12, 245–262.

1 See, for example, after-school evaluations of the YS-CARE After School Program http://

www.gse.uci.edu/asp/aspeval/resources/YSCARE13.pdf, LA’s Best http://www.lasbest.

org/learn/eval.html, The After-School Corporation

http://www.tascorp.org/pages/promising_es1.pdf

Summary

2 In contrast to the variety of measures for assessing program quality during early childhood,

there are few established instruments to evaluate out-of-school programs for school-age children

or adolescents (e.g., Harms, Jacobs, & White, 1996). The diversity of program content and goals

that characterize activities and programs for older children and youth may account for this

discrepancy. One possibility is to defne the process quality of out- of-school activities in terms of

the eight features of positive youth contexts summarized in this chapter.

3 Intervention research shows that a treatment can be benefcial for persons who do not directly

receive the treatment. This phenomenon—known as spread of effect—may also be true for

organized activities. For example, whether or not youth participate in organized activities,

problem behaviors are lower if their peer group (Mahoney, 2000) or their parents (Mahoney &

Magnusson, 2001) are participants. Similarly, making organized activities available to

adolescents has been linked to decreased levels of juvenile antisocial behavior in the community

(Jones & Offord, 1989).

4 Participation in school-based extracurricular activities has been found to increase, rather than

decline, across adolescence in some studies (e.g., Kinney, 1993; Mahoney & Cairns, 1997). The

increase in participation may refect the relatively small number of extracurricular activities

available to students prior to middle school and the rapid expansion of extracurricular activities

in high school.