Community-based Arts Program for Youth in Low-Income Communities: A Multi-Method Evaluation

Community-based Arts Programfor Youth in Low-IncomeCommunities: A Multi-MethodEvaluation

Robin Wright Ph.D., Lindsay John Ph.D.,Ramona Alaggia Ph.D., and Julia Sheel

ABSTRACT: This article reports on a multi-method evaluation of a nationalarts program conducted over 3 years in five sites across Canada. Statisticalanalysis involve growth curve modeling of five waves of data and interviewswith participating youth and parents. The results indicate that high-qualityarts programs have a significant effect on children’s in-program behavior andemotional problems. The findings from the qualitative interviews suggest thatactive recruitment, removing barriers to participation, and high parentalinvolvement enhanced youth engagement. Perceived youth gains includedincreased confidence, enhanced art skills, improved prosocial skills, andimproved conflict resolution skills.

KEY WORDS: Youth Community-based Arts Programs; Multi-method Design;Growth Curve Analysis; Emotional and Behavioral Problems.

Introduction

This article reports on a multi-method evaluation of the National Artsand Youth Demonstration Project (NAYDP) conducted over 3 years infive sites across Canada. The NAYDP was launched to: (a) determineif community-based arts organizations can successfully recruit,

Robin Wright, Lindsay John and Julia Sheel are affiliated with School of Social Work,McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H3A 2A7. Ramona Alaggia is affiliatedwith Faculty of Social work, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5S 1A1.

Address correspondence to Robin Wright, School of Social Work, McGill University,3506 University Street, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 2A7; e-mail: [email protected]

Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, Vol. 23, Nos. 5–6, December 2006 (� 2006)

DOI: 10.1007/s10560-006-0079-0

635 � 2006 Springer ScienceþBusiness Media, LLC

engage and sustain youths from low-income communities (9–15 yearsold) throughout a 9-month after-school program, (b) assess the youths’in-program progress in terms of artistic and social skills development,(c) ascertain if community-based arts programs have demonstratedpositive results in improving psychosocial outcomes such as conductand emotional problems, and (d) explore the perspectives of the youthand parents who participated in the program. The multi-method eval-uation strategy involved standardized instruments, attendancerecords, observational data in the form of a behavior checklist andinterviews with parents, and youths.

Literature Review

Despite growing interest in community-based arts programs, little isknown about their effectiveness in preventing and attenuating juve-nile problems, teaching art skills (Clawson & Coolbaugh, 2001), therelationship between program participation, and youth development(Weitz, 1996), engaging, recruiting, and sustaining youths involve-ment, and most importantly the perceptions of the parents and youthwho participate in these programs. Recently the Rand Corporation,after a comprehensive review of existing evaluation research on theimpact of arts-based programs for at-risk youth, concluded that inter-esting arts programs were abound, but few provided good evaluationsof their outcomes (McArthur & Law, 1996). Although theyreport that there is some evidence to substantiate the idea thatarts-based programs could foster desirable outcomes, both the quan-tity and quality of existing programs make it difficult to verify theprograms.

The evaluations that have been conducted to date have focused onthree areas, namely, school-based arts programs, after-school pro-grams, and community-based art programs. For example, Catterall,Chapleau, and Iwanaga (1999) analyzed data from the NationalEducational Longitudinal Survey (NELS: 88) to determine the rela-tionship between involvement in the arts and academic achieve-ment. The results indicated that students involved in school artscurriculum became more creative, had lower drop-out rates,improved social skills, and had higher academic achievement; andthose coming from poorer families who were involved with the artsimproved academically more than those from similar socio-economicbackgrounds not involved in the arts. Similarly, Heath and Roach

636 CHILD AND ADOLESCENT SOCIAL WORK JOURNAL

(1998), using the same database, reported that youth who partici-pate in the arts compared to those who did not were 4 times morelikely to participate in science and math fairs, 3 times more likely towin awards for attendance, and twice as likely to win academicachievement awards. Although these studies identified some encour-aging results, as correlational studies, they were limited in theirgeneralizability (Winner & Cooper, 2000). A 3-year study conductedin Canadian schools (Upitis & Smithrim, 2003) improved upon thedesigns in the above studies in that it compared students in schoolswith art curriculum to control schools without art curriculum. Thefindings showed that students in schools with art curriculum whencompared to students in schools without art curriculum improved onmath tests. However, once household income was entered in aregression analysis, that finding was no longer significant.

Several literature reviews of after-school programs have been con-ducted on their impact on both student academic outcomes and to alesser degree non-academic functioning (Eccles & Templeton, 2002;Fashola, 1998; Hollister, 2003; Scott-Little, Hamann & Jurs, 2002).These authors concluded that the story emerging from the literatureshowed promise to enhance academic achievement, and social andemotional outcomes (Eccles & Templeton, 2002). However, in eachcase they identified that further research was needed to draw firmconclusions about the effectiveness of after-school programs (Scott-Little et al., 2002). Specifically, they identified that the research inthis area was still young and inconsistent, with few experimentalstudies, little data on implementation and process issues, and littlesimilarity in the evaluated outcomes between the studies (Eccles& Templeton, 2002; Fashola, 1998; Hollister, 2003; Scott-Littleet al., 2002).

Most relevant to this article are those after-school programs,located in community-based organizations, that have art activities asthe major focus. There are two studies that fit this category thathave targeted mostly low-income or at-risk youth. In the YouthARTS Development Project (Clawson & Coolbaugh, 2001), a cross-site evaluation was conducted in three locations on an arts-basedprograms targeting at-risk youth (e.g., with juvenile records). Theeffects of the program were examined 22 months after participation.Unfortunately, difficulties that emerged with the design, smallsample sizes, uneven data collection, and program instability,compromised the impact of the study. In another study, Masonand Chuang (2001) conducted the Kumba Kids Program, a

ROBIN WRIGHT ET AL. 637

culturally-based after-school arts program for low-income youth inRochester, New York. They concluded that the program showedpromise, however, the weak design, lack of randomization, andsmall sample size limit the generalizability of the findings. Althoughthe findings from these reviews are relevant for the purpose of thisarticle, it is clear that research specifically on after-school commu-nity-based arts programs is almost non-existent (Mason & Chuang,2001). Hence, the objective of the present article is to build on theexisting research and by reporting the results of the multi-methodevaluation, determine whether such arts programs are effective and,if so, what features of the programs are essential to their success.

Methodology

Participants and Recruitment

The NAYDP, a quasi-experimental research design, was a three-yearlongitudinal study that evaluated community-based arts programs infive sites across Canada. The five sites participating in the study were:(a) located in urban and rural areas, (b) had a focus on youth9–15 years, (c) were located in low-income communities, and(d) reflected the cultural and regional diversity of Canada. The siteswere selected based on specific criteria, namely, a clear philosophyand mission, a well-defined infrastructure, evidence of historical andprojected stability, and credibility in the community as identified bykey informants. Once the sites were chosen, each site employed a sys-tematic outreach strategy to actively recruit youth to the art program.This included a community mapping process that identified appropri-ate locations for reaching out to youth and their parents. A total of183 youths, 9–15 years of age, participated in the study.

Intervention

The youth participated in a 9-month arts program that focused ontheatre but that also included visual arts (mask-making, setdesign, and painting) and media arts (digital filming and editing).Each site developed three cumulative terms of programing basedon the model outlined by the research team. The sites developedan art curricula that featured skill development and social goalsthat were achievable but increased in complexity and challenge.


For example, the sessions focused on exploring self-expression,emphasizing fun, and developing positive group dynamics alongwith the acquisition of performance skills. The 90-minute art ses-sions were held after school, twice a week, from September 2002to June 2003 (for a total of 74 sessions). At each site, the art ses-sions were conducted by a lead instructor, two to three assistantsand an on-site research assistant. In an effort to overcome barri-ers to participation, the program, materials, snacks, and transpor-tation to and from the site were offered free of charge. Theprogram also focused on parental involvement by including familynights and providing regular updates on youth absences andbehavior.

Measures

The multi-method evaluation strategy included attendance forms,standardized behavior checklists completed by youth, parents, andresearch assistants, as well as interviews with youth and parents.Youth and parent questionnaires, measuring conduct, and emotionalproblems, were administered before the start of the program inSeptember 2002 (baseline), every 3 months during the program, anda follow-up 6 months after the end of the program for a total of fivedata collection periods. Youth completed the questionnaires in theirart class. The research assistants met with the parents in theirhome or at a place convenient to them to complete the question-naires. Also, observational data were collected 6 times (twice perterm) by the research assistant using an instrument measuring theparticipants’ in-program behavior such as participation, art skillsdevelopment, prosocial skills development and task completion. Allmeasures were selected from the National Longitudinal Survey onChildren and Youth (NLSCY) and are described, with their internalconsistencies, in Table 1.

Upon completion of the arts programs, interviews were conductedwith youths and their parents to augment and clarify aspects of thequantitative results by exploring their experiences in the program.A total of 30 interviews were conducted with participating youthand parents from the five community arts programs. Based on pur-posive sampling, a sub-sample of 15 youth and 15 parents were ran-domly selected to be interviewed. The sampling strategy for theselection of the youth was determined based on their attendancerate in the program. For example, the average attendance for each


site was calculated by gender. Then, participants who had an atten-dance rate that was equal or higher than the average were enteredinto the pool for selection. For the youth interviews, clustersampling by gender was utilized prior to randomization to reflect thetwo females to one male ratio at the program sites. A total of 10females and five males were selected for the interviews. Two alter-nates per site were also selected as back-up interviewees. The par-ents (person most knowledgeable) of each of the selected childrenwere also interviewed to compare their feedback. An interview guidewas developed by the principal investigators and pilot tested in onesite with two program participants, one male and one female ran-domly selected by gender. Following the pilot test, semi-structuredinterviews were conducted at each site with the youth, and parents.The qualitative component employed the Long-Interview method, a

TABLE 1

Measures Used in the Study

Candidate Variables Description a

Observational measuresParticipation 3-item scale measuring enjoyment

of and engagement in activities0.90

Art skills development 2-item scale measuring whetheryouth meets goals and showsimprovement

0.90

Prosocial skillsdevelopment

12-item scale measuring self-control,communication, respect, cooperation,and problem solving

0.97

Task completion 7-item scale measuring listeningskills and work habits

0.97

Outcome measuresConduct problems 7-item scale measuring bullying,

getting into fights, and vandalism0.86

Emotional problems 8-item scale measuringunhappiness, depression andanxiety

0.81


qualitative methodology that is well suited to uncovering anddescribing multifaceted processes (McCracken, 1988). All interviewswere videotaped and/or audio-taped and transcribed verbatim.

Analytical Strategy

In order to assess the effects of the program, the NAYDPcompared study participants with matched controls from the NLSCY(Statistics Canada, 1995). The control group was selected using themethod of propensity score matching as defined by Rosenbaum andRubin (1983). The amount and direction of changes in the observa-tional and behavioral outcomes were addressed with a multi-levelgrowth curve analysis (Willett, Singer, & Martin, 1998) using theHierarchical Linear Modeling software (Raudenbush, Bryk, Cheong,& Congdon, 2001). The analysis for evaluating the effects of the artsprograms on the observational outcomes of youth in the artsprograms, namely art skills and prosocial skills development, partic-ipation, and task completion, is achieved by regressing eachoutcome, measured repeatedly, on time itself. Unlike the modelingfor the observational outcomes, the one comparing the NAYDP andNLSCY participants models the repeated behavioral measurementon age. Age, instead of time, is used as the independent variablesince the NAYDP and the NLSCY children were not assessed for thesame number of occasions or at similar intervals. Hence, the growthtrajectory is based on the age of the child.

With respect to the qualitative data analysis, all interviews weretranscribed, reviewed, and cleaned in preparation for analysis.Initial coding and categorizing was conducted on a sub-sample ofinterviews from each stakeholder group through line-by-line micro-analysis employing an established five-stage procedure wherein thedata were scanned, edited, refined, and reassembled (McCracken,1988). Themes were extracted, and interpretations made based onemerging categories of the study data that resulted in the develop-ment of a coding framework. After the initial coding framework wasdeveloped, the transcribed interviews were imported into N*Vivo, asoftware package commonly utilized in the analysis of qualitativedata, and then coded along the developed framework. Within thisprocess, trained multiple coders were employed for testing of inter-rater reliability on coding and consistency of category development.


A sub-sample of interviews was coded independently by differentcoders and themes were developed and reviewed until satisfactoryagreement was reached.

Results

The results are presented as follows: (a) sample description, (b) atten-dance rates in the program, (c) observational outcomes, namely, par-ticipation, art skills development, prosocial skills development, andtask completion, (d) behavioral outcomes, namely, conduct and emo-tional problems, and (e) perceptions of the program as reported byyouth and parents.

Sample Description

Across all sites, as reported by the person most knowledgeable(PMK), the sample was approximately 59% White; 26% Aboriginal;11 % Black; 6% Asian; 5% Latin American, and 4% identified them-selves as ‘‘other’’. Participants had the option of checking off morethan one category. These percentages reflect the racial and ethnicdiversity of the Canadian population. In terms of the PMK’s maritalstatus, 38 % were married, 14 % were single-parent families, 24%were either separated or divorced, 20% lived in common law rela-tionships, and 4% were widowed. Forty percent of the parentsreported they were high school dropouts, and 31.5% had receivedsocial assistance (welfare) in the last 12 months, with 40% of thesample reporting a total household income from all sources of lessthan $20,000. At the time of recruitment, 67.8% of the sample wasbetween 9 and 11 years of age, 26.2% between 12 and 13 years ofage, 6% between 14 and 15 years of age and approximately 65%were girls and 35% were boys. Comparisons with national statistics(National Council of Welfare, 2004; Statistics Canada, 2001, 2001a,2002, 2004) showed that the NAYDP Program was successful inrecruiting low-income youth.

Attendance Rates in the Program

Table 2 shows the attendance rates. As can be seen, the averageattendance was estimated at over 80% for the three terms of pro-gramming. Throughout Term One, the average attendance was


estimated at 84% with 93% attending at least 50% of the sessionsand 79% attending 75% of the sessions. In Term Two, the averageattendance was estimated at 80% with 91% attending at least 50%of the sessions and 71% attending at least 75% or more sessions. InTerm Three, the average attendance was estimated at 83% with 95%attending at least 50% of the sessions and 77% attending at least75% of the sessions. Of the 183 participants, 68 or 37% dropped outof the program. This attrition rate is consistent with other researchon community-based programs (Weisman & Gottfredson, 2001).

Sustained participation was enhanced by a number of factorsidentified by the youth and parents in interviews. All youth men-tioned enjoying making new friends and learning about theatre andcinema, being exposed to different activities such as acting, makingcostumes and masks, drumming and music, puppetry, etc. Bothyouth and parents agreed that the program staff was excellent, butfor different reasons. The youth felt the staff were open, patient,funny, understood them, listened to them, and helped them solvetheir problems. Parents appreciated the fact that supervision of theyouth was taken seriously and that staff would contact them if theirchild was absent from the program. As one parent noted with re-spect to a staff member, ‘‘She’s very caring towards the kids andmaking sure, like sometimes (her child...) would not show up ontime and she will call me, fill me in and stuff like that’’.

Parents reported that transportation to and from the program andsnacks were greatly appreciated and that they were pleased that

TABLE 2

Attendance Rates

% SessionsAttended

% Attendingat Least 50%of Sessions

% Attendingat Least 75%of Sessions

Term1 84 93 792 80 91 713 83 95 77

Note: N = 183.


their child had a place to go after school that would ‘‘keep them offthe streets’’. Finally, parents spoke highly about the calibre of thearts programs that helped the children explore what the arts meant,and discover opportunities that may be open to them in the world ofarts.

Observational Outcomes

As shown in Figure 1, for the ‘‘art skills development’’ outcome, thebaseline for the sample is 6.30 (SE 0.18). The average growth rate is0.30 (SE 0.04) and is statistically significant (p < 0.01). This indicatesthat a youth of average age, 11.3 years, starts with a mean score of6.30 and progresses, from baseline, at a rate of 0.30 from assessmentto assessment, for a total of 1.80 throughout the program. For the‘‘prosocial skills development’’ observational outcome, the averageintercepts for the sample is 6.85 (SE 0.16) and the average growth

Participation Art Skills Development

0

2

4

6

8

10

Sco

re

MaleFemale

0

2

4

6

8

10

Sco

re

MaleFemale

Social Skills Development Task Completion

0

2

4

6

8

10

Sco

re

MaleFemale

0

2

4

6

8

10

Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 Time 5 Time 6

Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 Time 5 Time 6 Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 Time 5 Time 6

Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 Time 5 Time 6

Sco

re

MaleFemale

FIGURE 1. Growth curve modeling of observational outcomes ofyouth behavior in arts program.


rate is 0.20 (SE 0.03). The growth rate is statistically significant(p < 0.01). As can be seen again in Figure 1, the participation andtask completion observational outcomes also show statistically sig-nificant improvements (p < 0.01).

Conduct and Emotional Problems Outcomes

As can be seen in Figure 2, the study participants have a higherrate of conduct problems (1.59, SE 0.15) than the control subjects(1.22, SE 0.10) at age 12. Both groups are similar in their growthtrajectories, showing that for every month, youth in both groupsshow a significant decrease of -0.1 (SE 0.002) in conduct problems.

For emotional problems, the average score for a youth of averageage in the NAYDP was slightly lower 2.47 (SE 0.18) than for ayouth of average age in the control group 2.52 (SE 0.13). In terms ofgrowth trajectories, as shown in Figure 3, the NAYDP participantsshowed a significantly higher decrease in emotional problems -0.03(SE 0.008) than the control group. The control group had a muchlower non-significant decrease -0.006 (SE 0.005).

Parent and Youth Perspectives on Observational, Emotionaland Conduct Outcomes

The following discusses the parent and youth perspectives on theobservational, emotional and conduct outcomes and their concerns

0

2

4

6

8

10

8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Age

Sco

re

NAYDP

Control

9

FIGURE 2. Growth curve modeling of conduct problems for NAYDPparticipants and NLSCY matched controls.


with the program that were not captured by the standardized mea-sures. Throughout the interviews, youth and their parents reportedmany gains from the arts programs that supported the quantitativefindings. With respect to art skills development, youth reportedlearning specific artistic skills such as how to memorize lines, dic-tion, mask making, drawing, filming, etc. Parents also noticed thattheir children gained artistic skills and expressed being ‘‘thrilled’’ tosee their children perform. Parents also reported that the programtaught the youth the importance of organizational skills, account-ability, and most of all, they appreciated that the staff taught theyouth to clean up after themselves.

Prosocial skill development in the arts program, specifically theability to work as a team, was often mentioned by youth and par-ents. For example, one youth indicated, ‘‘I had to do teamworkotherwise, well we wouldn’t have been able to make a movie. Thatway I could say, well I am doing teamwork, then as things wentalong I learned that they could be trusted’’. Parents reported thatworking as a team resulted in their children learning important lifeskills such as decision-making, negotiation and compromise in groupsituations. Prosocial skill development was also apparent in theyouth’s ability to develop peer relationships. One parent stated thatshe could definitely see the change in her son’s peer relationships:

I mean, this year, (...) he can make friends easily. Like everybody ishis friend, is no problem. I (...) I don’t have to tell him like you know

0

2

4

6

8

10

8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Age

Sco

re

NAYDP

Control

9

FIGURE 3. Growth curve modeling of emotional problems forNAYDP participants and NLSCY matched controls.


‘If you want to make friends, what should you do’. I don’t have to tellhim anything he does everything himself.

This positive attitude and excitement about the program was fur-ther corroborated by one youth about what he enjoyed most:

My favorite thing would probably have to be acting, in the play wedid, ‘‘The Princess and the Pea’’. It is like, it is just the thrill of actinglive theatre like, for really the first time in front of an audience in cos-tume. Like I had never really done that before.

Youth and parents also reported a decrease in emotional prob-lems: youth were happier, less isolated and more sociable. Oneyouth thought that:

Socially I think it changed me. Like, because I am interacting withpeople doing something I like, I think it’s- for some strange reason Ithink it is made me more open and able to talk with people my ageand socialize a little more. Like before, I was very meek and I guesskinda shy like, I never really made friends? But then I finally, I juststarted to make some.

Other parents reported an improvement in conduct problems. Forexample, one parent noted about her child:

She liked herself, she began to like herself. So it gave her a base of so-cial skills that, up to that point you know, simply hadn’t been avail-able to her. Well, it made a big difference for her because she-actuallythe more she used to act, the less she has to pretend...one of thebehavioral problems we were having with her, was the way she waslike, telling whoppers. And all that stopped within probably about fourmonths, of attending the program regularly.

Parent and Youth Perspectives on Program Challenges

There were several issues that parents and youths identified as con-cerns with the program implementation. The first major concernwas the behavioral management of the youths in the program. Bothparents and youth indicated that: (a) the conflict amongst youth,(b) the disruptive behavior such as swearing at the teacher, and(c) their negative and arrogant attitudes interfered with their posi-tive experience in the program. Second, there were mixed commentsabout the program structure. For example, in one site the parents


noted that the quality and quantity of the snacks was inconsistentand the program did not always start on time due to transportationproblems. This was problematic for the parents as the youth wouldget home later than expected. In addition, the parents noted thatthey did not get advanced notice of the performances throughout theyear and they felt left out of participating fully in the program. Aspreviously mentioned, the program ran for a 9-month period, on asimilar schedule to the school year, September to June. When theprogram ended in June, at the same time as the school year, parentsreported feeling overwhelmed having their youth at home with littleto do. Also, diverse opinions were also reported about the frequencyof the program. For instance, some parents wanted the program torun 3 times a week, while others stated that once a week wouldhave been preferable. The third and major concern from both theparents and youths were the intrusive questions in the standardizedoutcome measures. Several issues were identified: the outcome mea-sures were too long, redundant, and lacked cultural sensitivity.Moreover, the parents felt the questionnaire was a surveillanceinstrument to monitor them. Specifically, the parents were con-cerned that the information collected might result in an investiga-tion by child welfare authorities. Of particular concern, were thequestions asked about smoking, drinking, and drug taking habitsthat they felt were directed at them as cultural and ethnic minorities.

Study Limitations

As with any study, there are limitations that need to be consideredwhen interpreting the findings. First, the matched sample designensured that the groups in the study were very similar with respectto socio-economic status and emotional and behavioral functioning.However, there may be factors for which the matching was unableto control. The key difference in the present study is that the treat-ment group accepted to take part in the activity, while this may nothave been the case for the comparison group. The treatment group,therefore, may be more motivated to participate and improve theiroverall functioning. On the other hand, the treatment group wasactively recruited to participate and it seemed unlikely that theywould be in a visual and performing arts program had they not beenrecruited. Therefore, the evidence suggests the differences foundbetween the groups are due to either treatment effects alone, or a


combination of treatment effects and the treatment group beingopen to personal growth. A matched sample design was employed inthis study to determine if it was feasible to obtain a matched controlgroup for a community-based sample. However, a study using ran-domized assignment of youth to treatment and control groups is thestrongest test of effectiveness and needs to be considered in futureresearch endeavours. Another limitation involves rater bias withrespect to the observational measures completed by the researchassistants who may have been aware of the desired outcomes of thestudy.

The sample chosen for the qualitative interviews were deter-mined by selecting youth and parents who were identified as highattendees. This group was seen to have the most exposure to theprogram and, therefore, represent the most motivated and posi-tively predisposed to the program. However, the quantitative dataanalyses including those with low attendance, reported similarresults.

Discussion and Implications for Practice and FutureResearch

The results from the multi-method evaluation suggest that the youthand parents had positive experiences in the art program and ex-pressed high levels of satisfaction. As noted, the attendance rates inthe arts programs were relatively high and sustained across the threeterms. Parents and youth reported that practical incentives such asoffering the program, transportation, and snacks free of charge andensuring parental involvement from the beginning was reported to en-hance youth engagement in the program. The second key element thatparents felt was important to sustaining participation was the sup-portive atmosphere for the youth that included a youth-focused curric-ulum that was interesting, flexible, and adapted to the youths skilllevel and effective behavioral management of the youth with a focuson conflict resolution, and problem-solving. Parents also reported thesupportive atmosphere was also enhanced by the staff’s consistentcommunication with parents that included sharing of program infor-mation and follow-up of youth absences in order to encourage regularattendance. As identified in the results, the data from the observedmeasures: participation, art skills development, prosocial skills, andtask completion were statistically significant and indicated that, in


these areas, the youth improved over the 9-month period. Parentsalso corroborated that finding and reported an increase in the youth’sconfidence and self-esteem, improved interpersonal skills, positivepeer interaction, increased independence, improved conflict resolutionand problem solving skills, and skill acquisition in art activities. Thedata from the outcome measures on conduct problems showed a simi-lar decrease in conduct problems for the NAYDP and control groups.Even though the NAYDP participants did not demonstrate muchevidence of conduct problems, the research assistants’ observationalassessments and interviews with the youths, and parents seem to sug-gest their conduct did improve. The youth did show a statistically sig-nificant decrease in emotional problems when compared to the controlgroup. This is an important finding as the emotional problemsoutcome measured the youth’s unhappiness, depression, and anxiety.A follow-up of participants would explore the long-term programeffects on clinical depression and suicidal ideation.

Also, to better understand the effects of community arts programson youth, future research should also focus on: (a) a more targetedpopulation of at-risk youth, (b) comparing different arts media,(c) comparing different levels of duration and intensity of artsprograming, and (d) the development of more concise, less intrusiveevaluation tools.

In addition to future research directions, there are implicationsfor future social work practice. It has been identified that to datesocial work practice literature is still predominately influenced bythe clinical treatment focus (Morrison, Alcorn, & Nelums, 1997).More needs to be done to interest social workers in alternative andnon-stigmatizing ways of serving youth, particularly those youthwho are at greatest risk in the after-school hours (Delgado, 2000).The findings here, support the contention that a nine month commu-nity-based arts programs is a viable approach for engaging and sus-taining youth with a limited but positive effect on their psychosocialfunctioning.

Conclusion

This study evaluated a community-based arts program located in fivesites across Canada. Results have shown that youth from low-incomecommunities can be recruited in arts programs and their participa-tion can be sustained over a 9-month period. Findings have also


shown that, once engaged, youth show significant gains in artistic,and prosocial skills development as well as a decrease in emotionalproblems when compared to a control group. Moreover, as reported byparents and youth strategies such as active recruitment, no programfees, free transportation, snacks, and frequent communication withparents enhanced youth engagement and sustained involvement. Per-ceived youth gains, as reported by program participants and theirparents included increased confidence, enhanced art skills, improvedpro-social skills, and improved conflict resolution skills.

Acknowledgment

This work was generously supported by funds from the Samuel andSaidye Bronfman Family Foundation, the Government of Canada’sNational Crime Prevention Strategy, the Department of CanadianHeritage and the Ontario Ministry of Culture.

References

Catterall, J. E., Chapleau, R., & Iwanaga, J. (1999). Involvement in the Arts and HumanDevelopment: General Involvement in Music and Theatre Arts. Los Angeles:Imagination Project, UCLA School of Education and Information Studies.

Clawson, H. J., & Coolbaugh, K. (2001). The YouthARTS Development Project. JuvenileJustice Bulletin. Washington: The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency.Retrieved November 29, 2004, from http://www.ncjrs.org/html/ojjdp/2001_5_2/con-tents.html.

Delgado, M. (2000). New Arenas for Community Social Work Practice with Urban Youth:Use of the Arts, Humanities, and Sports. New York: Columbia University Press.

Eccles J.S., & Templeton J. (2002) Extracurricular and other after-school activities foryouth. In W.G. Secada (Ed) Review of Research in Education (Vol 26, pp. 113–180).Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Fashola, O. S. (1998). Review of Extended-Day and After-School Programs and TheirEffectiveness. Baltimore, Md: Center for Research on the Education of StudentsPlaced at Risk.

Heath, S. B., & Roach, A. A. (1998). The Arts in Non-School Hours.. Menlo Park, CA:Stanford University and the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Hollister, R. (2003). The Growth in After-School Programs and Their Impact. Washing-ton, D.C: Brookings Roundtable on Children.

Mason, M., & Chuang, S. (2001). Culturally-based after-school arts programming forlow-income urban children: Adaptive and preventive effects. The Journal of PrimaryPrevention, 22(1), 45–54.

McArthur, D., & Law, S. A. (1996). The Arts and Prosocial Impact Study: A Review ofCurrent Programs and Literature. Los Angeles, CA: RAND Corporation.

McCraken, G. (1988). The Long Interview. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.


Morrison, J. D., Alcorn, S., & Nelums, M. (1997). Empowering community-basedprograms for youth development: Is social work education interested? Journal ofSocial Work Education, 33, 321–333.

National Council of Welfare. (2004). Fact Sheet: Welfare Recipients. Retrieved Novem-ber 9, 2004, from http://www.ncwcnbes.net/htmdocument/principales/numberwel-fare_e.htm.

Raudenbush, S., Bryk, A., Cheong, Y. K., & Congdon, R. (2001). Hierarchical Linear andNonlinear Modeling, Rel. HLM 5.05. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software Interna-tional.

Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score inobservational studies for casual effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55.

Scott-Little. C., Hamann. M. S., Jurs S. G. (2002). Evaluations of after-school programs:a meta-evaluation of methodologies and narrative synthesis of findings. AmericanJournal of Evaluation, 23(4), 387–419.

Statistics Canada. (1995). National Longitudinal Survey of Children: Overview ofSurvey Instruments for 1994/95, Data Collection, Cycle 1. Retrieved November 11,2004, from http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/89F0078XIE/96001.pdf.

Statistics Canada. (2001). Census Families in Private Households by Family Structureand Presence of Children, by Provinces and Territories. Retrieved November 9,2004, from http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/famil54a.htm.

Statistics Canada. (2001a). Population 15 years and Over by Highest Degree, Certificateor Diploma, by Provinces and Territories. Retrieved November 9, 2004, from http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/educ41a.htm.

Statistics Canada. (2002). Analysis of Income in Canada. Retrieved November 9, 2004,from http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/75–203-XIE/00002/part7.htm.

Statistics Canada. (2004). Population by Sex and Age Group. Retrieved November 9,2004, from http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/demo10a.htm.

Upitis, R., & Smithrim, K. (2003). Learning Through the Arts: National Assessment1999–2002. Toronto: The Royal Conservatory of Music.

Weisman, S. A., & Gottfredson, D. C. (2001). Attrition from after school programs:characteristics of students who drop out. Prevention Science, 2(3), 201–205.

Weitz, J. H. (1996). Coming Up Taller: Arts and Humanities Programs for Children andYouth at Risk. Washington, DC: President’s Commission on the Arts and theHumanities.

Willett, J. B., Singer, J. D., & Martin, N. C. (1998). The design and analysis oflongitudinal studies of development and psychopathology in context: Statisticalmodels and methodological recommendations. Developmental Psychopathology,10(2), 395–426.

Winner, E., & Cooper, M. (2000). Mute those claims: No evidence (yet) for a causal linkbetween arts study and academic achievement. The Journal of Aesthetic Education,34(3–4), 11–75.


Community-based Arts Program for Youth in Low-Income Communities: A Multi-Method Evaluation

Documents

Transcript of Community-based Arts Program for Youth in Low-Income Communities: A Multi-Method Evaluation