Asia The key constructs of PYD listed above have been generally accepted throughout the world with some regional distinctions. For example, a Chinese Positive Youth Development Scale has been developed to conceptualize how these features are applicable to Chinese youth. The Chinese Positive Youth Development Scale was used as a measure in a study of Chinese youth in
secondary schools in
Hong Kong that indicated positive youth development has a direct impact on
life satisfaction and reducing problem behavior for Chinese youth. One specific example of PYD implementation is seen in the project "P.A.T.H.S. (Positive Adolescent Training through Holistic Social Programmes) to Adulthood: A Jockey Club Youth Enhancement Scheme." This program targets junior secondary school students in
Hong Kong (grades 7 through 9 in the North American System). The program is composed of two terms, the first of which is a structured curriculum focusing on the 15 PYD constructs and designed for all students as a "universal prevention initiative." The Tier 2 Program is a more selective prevention model directly targeting students with greater
psychosocial needs identified by the school social work service providers. The label
"at-risk" is intentionally avoided because the term denotes a very negative stigma in
Chinese culture, and therefore discourages participation in the program. Although Chinese
social work agencies commonly target students with greater
psychosocial needs, these PYD programs have rarely undergone thorough systemic evaluation and documentation.
Europe In
Portugal, the utility of positive youth development principles in sporting contexts is beginning to be recognized. Several athletic-based programs have been implemented in the country, but more research is necessary to determine their effectiveness at this point.
Latin America and the Caribbean Positive youth development has also been seen in the form of youth
volunteer service throughout Latin America and the Caribbean. From
Mexico and the
Caribbean to
Central and
South America, this form of implementation has been acknowledged for encouraging both personal and
community development, while oftentimes contributing to
poverty reduction. It has furthermore been seen as a way of promoting civil engagement through various service opportunities in communities. Positive youth development efforts can be seen in the work of the
United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in collaboration with various regional governments and the private sector across Latin America and the Caribbean. This work has focused on providing broader educational options, skills training, and opportunities for economically disadvantaged youth to obtain apprenticeships. The ¡Supérate! Centers across El Salvador are one example, as they are supported by USAID in combination with private companies and foundations, and offer expanded education for high-performing students from poorer economic backgrounds. As of 2011, there were 7 centers in
El Salvador and USAID expressed plans to expand this model across Central America. In
Brazil, the Jovem Plus program offers high-demand skills training for youth in disadvantaged communities in
Rio de Janeiro and the northeastern area of the nation. Other programs include the "Youth Movement against Violence" in
Guatemala and "Youth Upliftment through Employment" in
Jamaica.
New Zealand Tu Tangata In the late 1970s, high profile entertainer
Sir Howard Morrison was a consultant on positive youth development for
Te Puni Kōkiri (Department Of Maori Affairs) and used his profile to improve self esteem, promote achievement and encourage participation in higher levels of learning by young Māori, visiting many schools in the process. He developed
wānanga (education programmes) on
marae and used his entertainment skills to promote the
Tu Tangata, or ‘Stand Tall’ programme. Morrison’s nationwide
Tu Tangata tour in 1979 brought the
Howard Morrison Quartet together again, with
Toni Williams and the Morrison family joining the tour.
Oranga Tamariki Act 1989 The Children's and Young People's Well-being Act 1989 is an Act of the
New Zealand Parliament that was passed in 1989 to "promote the well-being of children, young persons, and their families and family groups." In June 2017, the parliament passed amendment legislation renaming the bill the
Oranga Tamariki Act 1989.
Restorative Justice According to
Howard Zehr, "Two people have made very specific and profound contributions to practices in the field – the
Indigenous people of
Canada and the
United States, and the
Maori of New Zealand... [I]n many ways,
Restorative Justice represents a validation of values and practices that were characteristic of many indigenous groups," whose traditions were "often discounted and repressed by western colonial powers". In 2002, the New Zealand Government passed the Sentencing Act 2002, the Victims’ Rights Act 2002, the Parole Act 2002, and later, the Corrections Act 2004, which incorporated Restorative Justice as an alternative to conventional sentencing. Its guidelines state: Offenders attending a restorative justice conference have the chance to: • take responsibility for their offending • apologise to their victim • decide how to put right the harm they caused • find ways to make sure they don’t reoffend In her 2019 evaluation of the programme, political scientist and litigation lawyer Sarah Mikva Pfander found that the Restorative Justice programme had fallen short of expectations, and needed far more support from the legislature and from the community if it was to succeed.
USA The rates of juvenile offenders were increasing, as youth were steering to bad habits affecting their academic standing and outside of school. The rates of juvenile offenders affected the community's well-being, so it became a governmental issue to find positive development solutions for youth to behave well at schools and elsewhere. The government realized they would need to start working with youth at the school level, as youth who got suspended have a higher chance of getting involved in the juvenile system. A debate that has been happening is the socio-emotional learning (SEL) program that consists of Monarch Room(MR) intervention, a trauma-informed alternative to school discipline. The MR was to promote socio-emotional regulation, and the staff were trained in counseling and trauma-informed to help the youth with sensory states, thoughts, feelings, and "subsequent behaviors". The research for SEL was a 10-year study, and the results showed that Grade 9 students had the highest use of the MR, and, on average, students used it five times a year. The program was successful overall as it showed interest in the youth wanting support, and the introduction of MR led to a decrease in the use of school suspension. However, there was no comparison group to help determine if the decreased levels of the School Disciplinary Act (SDA) were due to the MR initiative. Another solution up for debate to reduce school suspension is the Positive Behaviour Interventions and Support framework (PBIS). This program worked in 3 tiers approach to improve school climate. Tier 1 is teaching the expectations to all students; tier 2 is target support for the small groups of students displaying challenging behavior; tier 3 is individually intervening when working with students with intense behavioral needs.PBIS did find a statistical difference between the schools using PBIS and not for reducing SDA for all students, particularly students with disability and BIPOC students. However, the researchers did acknowledge that using a PBIS framework does not significantly affect the most severe behaviors, e.g., weapons offenses, because, as an intervention, it does not target those types of incidents. PBIS is a proactive and preventative approach. The ratings from the participants were overwhelmingly positive; however, there are concerns about the time requirement to implement the study, which is worth exploring further. An additional solution is Restorative Practices, which are associated with reduced suspension rates and suggest that school-based restorative practices are a promising approach to reducing exclusionary discipline outcomes. The practices are to build a positive school culture and environment. They focus on the problem and not blaming or punishing. To see the effectiveness of this study, they looked at interviews, focus groups, observations, school artifacts, and suspension data to determine the effectiveness of RJP. RJP uses responsive circles, mediations, and re-entry circles for students involved in conflict. They implement RJP to facilitate conflict resolution and remove policies that compete with these practices, i.e., punitive consequences. ==See also==