A Lost Generation of Youth
Posted: Thursday, September 06, 2007
by Dr. Donnovon Outten
Entitled Enterprise Consulting, Inc.
The Department of Labor funds a number of youth-oriented programs age range 12- to 25- year-old. The purpose of these programs involves the development of youth and employability and occupational skills training in a number of different forums. However, it is my recommendation that the U.S. federal government do a better job with auditing their programs and analyzing the needs of the community. Programs that are needed and those that prove to be successful are not being funded or refunded because of budget cuts and allocations to other federal programs. I suggest that the federal government provide more support to youth programs and schools that are in an economically disadvantage areas.
In 2004, the U.S. Department of Labor's Employment and Training Administration awarded $9.2 million to the National Urban League to design and implement a national model program for at-risk, out-of-school, and adjudicated youth between the ages of 16-24. In partnership with faith-and community-based organizations, Urban League affiliate sites are providing youth career-focused employability skills, paid internships, and on-the-job training to help participants enter full-time, private sector employment. I applaud Secretary Chao and the First Lady Laura Bush to make this initiative a priority however there is still a greater need.
Although it may appear that the federal government is disbursing money to programs, they could do more. In spring of 2000 the Department of Labor awarded its first 36 Youth Opportunity Grants to youth living in empowerment zones, enterprise areas and other impoverished urban and rural areas. This five-year initiative seeks to target high-poverty areas in order to expand job opportunities for youth. Over this five-year tenure Department of Labor was committed to distribute 250 million dollars to these 36 cities in need. The majority of those 36 cities had programs that had proven to be successful, which leaves the question how come the Department of Labor not refund those programs?
A model that I recommend is the Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs ( GEAR UP ) funded by the federal government. GEAR UPs primary initiative is to lead youth to post secondary education. GEAR UP is a discretionary grant program designed to increase the number of low-income students who are prepared to enter and succeed in post secondary education. GEAR UP provides 6-year grants to states and partnerships to provide services at high-poverty middle and high schools. GEAR UP grantees serve an entire cohort of students beginning no later than the seventh grade and follow the cohort through high school. GEAR UP funds are also used to provide college scholarships to low-income students. Programs such as GEAR UP are a true reflection of serving the needs of the community.
To improve GEAR UP, I recommend that this program work with the out-of-school population as well with the in school population. There are many youth who obtain their GED and could use their services. This program could also be improved by educating youth about the options of going to technical schools and entrepreneurship as well colleges and universities. Business involvement is crucial to the long-term success of teens. At-risk students often need more than their school guidance counselors or teachers can give them. What they need is the real-world perspective of adults, especially those in business ( Laabs, 2004) . This program could be an ideal program if they incorporated more business involvement and alternative education in their program.
The National Network for Youth advocates has an obligation to educate and encourage policy makers to be active in acknowledging, protecting, and enhancing the value of youth to the nation. I agree with them; however, programs can survive with private sector funding. With collaborations of community organizations and private grants youth programs could exist without the aid of the federal government. It appears that policy makers hold too much power in making decisions with regard to youth and their development. Thus, private organizations could contribute and build programs without restrictions of the federal government and address the needs of youth in their communities.
The ideal model for a youth program would be to have funding coming from several different sources. It would be suitable to have federal, state, and private sector money being utilized for the ideal model. When one source becomes low or depleted, the other will pick up the difference to continue funding. However, three different sources of income do not mean three different sets of rules and outcomes. The program will adhere to one set of outcomes that will suffice all three stakeholders. The private sector funding will be comprised of a collaboration with different entities contributing to the funds. The ideal model will have an internal and external auditor to maintain program compliance. The ideal model will also have a grant writing team; this team will be responsible for researching and obtaining new grants for program sustainability.
The ideal model will incorporate leadership skills to all participants; it is vitally important the participants possess these skills to succeed throughout their life. The ideal model will incorporate such skills as trust, communication, and being a visionary leader.
Participants will learn that trust is an important leadership characteristic. They must earn the trust of their co-workers, supervisors, and future employees. When trust is established, employees will continue to work hard one day at a time. Without trust, the process will more than likely linger beyond the expected time line. People trust others they know authentically who have their best interests at heart (Pearce, 2003). Participants will understand that by establishing this trust; they will have employees who will work hard for them.
Communication is a significant leadership trait that every good leader must have and be able to use effectively. Participants will be encouraged to develop their own leadership style and learn the best way to communicate with others. Pearce (2003) stated that, if leaders recognized their own automatic emotional responses, they could actually adjust their communication to be more appropriate, less demanding, and more inspiring. Participants will be encouraged to do some self-reflecting about how they communicate with other people. They will have to be diligent in recognizing their weaknesses and willing to work to overcome them to be an effective communicator. Heifetz (2003) believed that people must begin to confront the choices and challenges that face them. By participants overcoming their challenges and weaknesses, they are developing strong leadership skills.
The ideal model will teach participants to look towards the future and visualize what they may become and what they will achieve. Being a visionary leader is worth the risk because the goals extend beyond material gain or personal enhancement. By making the lives of people around you better, leadership provides meaning in life (Heifetz & Linsky, 2002). Participants will learn what it means to be a visionary leader and that vision starts from within. It grows from their past and the history of people around them. In addition, their vision goes beyond themselves and how they might serve others to make an impact on the lives of others.
The process in developing the ideal model will start with putting together a collaboration of experts in the field of youth development. The collaboration will lay out a 5-year plan for the program. The plan will consist of program funding and sustainability; program projected outcomes, policy, and procedures; community involvement; and target population. The ideal model will have consistent follow up with participants at 1-month, 3-month, and 6-month intervals to ensure success. Some programs emphasize a disciplinary orientation and others focus on developing an innovative program that seeks to meet students' unique educational needs (Lehr & Lange, 2003). The ideal program will be unique because it will address the specific issues of the target population and their needs.
The process will also include providing wraparound services for participants. By providing such a service, it will enable the program to service the true needs of the participants. Previous research (Carney & Buttell, 2003) has suggested wraparound services provide the necessary support for youth to allow them to develop appropriate skills. Juvenile delinquents who received wraparound services when compared to those receiving conventional services (e.g., counseling, substance abuse treatment, tutoring) were absent from school less often, were suspended from school less often, less apt to run away from home as frequently, less combative, less likely to be picked up by the police, and more likely to have a job (Carney & Buttell, 2003). The ideal program will be able to expand their aide to participants with providing wraparound services.
Finally, it is essential to involve all stakeholders in the process of developing the ideal model. Over time, the stakeholders create an upward spiral of confidence and courage, which results in positive and successful student achievement (Covey, Merrill, & Merrill, 2003). One of the key stakeholders is parents and the influence they have in their children lives. The ideal model will interact and engage the participants parents at every level. Previous research has suggested parental involvement is one of the key factors in alternative education students persisting in school and achieving either their high school diploma or General Education Diploma certificate (May & Copeland, 1998).
Educators, policy makers, and researchers are regularly confronted with claims about the effectiveness of various educational programs and policies meant to help improve children's achievements ( Slavin, Fshola, & Normore, 2000) . However, they fail to take all youth into account from different geographic, economic, and social backgrounds. The main goal of the ideal program is to create opportunities for participants that would not be afforded to them otherwise.
References
Carney, M. M., & Buttell, F. (2003). Reducing juvenile recidivism: Evaluating the wraparound services model . Research on Social Work Practice, 13, 551-568.
Covey, S. R., Merrill, A. R., & Merrill, R. R. (2003). First things first. New York : The Free Press.
Heifetz, R. (2003). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge , MA : Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Heifetz, R., & Linsky, M. (2002). Leadership on the line: Staying alive through the dangers of leading. Boston : Harvard Business School .
Laabs, J. J. (2004. Disadvantaged teens work toward a better future. Personnel Journal, 73(12), 34-40.
Lehr, C. A., & Lange, G. M. (2003). Alternative schools serving students with and without disabilities: What are the current issues and challenges? Preventing School Failure, 47(2), 59-65.
May, H. E., & Copeland, E. P. (1998). Academic persistence and alternative high schools: Student and site characteristics. High School Journal, 81, 199-209.
Pearce, T. (2003). Leading out loud: Inspiring change through authentic communication. San Francisco : Jossey Bass.
Slavin, R., Fashola, O., & Normore, A. H (2000). Show me the evidence! Proven and promising programs for America s schools. Canadian Journal of Education, 25(2), 21-24.
This Article has been viewed 53 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (1 total)This is a great article and extremely informational.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.