Description
After reading the article, summarize the article and write your thoughts about the article. Specifically, the summary must be at least two pages (or more), and the critique must also be at least two pages (or more).In summary, you just summarize what the article talks about (do not include your personal thoughts here!). In critique, please write the strengths & weaknesses of the article, and applications/suggestions.You must also follow this instruction as well: no cover and reference pages are required. *Just write your name and the name of the article. The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.) must be followed with 1-inch margins, double-spaced, 12-point Time New Romans, and no spaces in between lines.High-quality writing is expected and also grading (especially about plagiarism) will be strict. You must use your own words for both summary and critique parts. Do not copy and directly paste any sources from the article.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Journal of Sport Management, 2014, 28, 236-249
http://dx.doi .org/10,1123/jsm,2012-0237
©2014 Human Kinetics, Inc,
Maximizing Youth Experiences in Community Sport
Settings: The Design and impact of the LiFE Sports Camp
Dawn Anderson-Butcher
Ohio State University
Allison Riley
Ohio State University
Anthony Amorose
Illinois State University
Aidyn lachini
University of South Carolina
Rebecca Wade-Mdivanian
Ohio State University
Maximizing youth experiences in community sport programs is critical, particularly for vulnerable and/or
marginalized youth who may have limited access and opportunity to these experiences. Using second-order
latent growth modeling, this study explores the impact of a community sport program, the LiFE Sports Camp,
on the development of social and sport skills among vulnerable youth. The importance of a sense of belonging
as a key mechanism that contributes to youth outcomes also is examined. The findings of this research point
to the value of community sport that is strategically designed to promote both sport and social outcomes in
youth, as well as highlights the role of belonging in tbese contexts. Implications for sports management leaders and practitioners are discussed.
Sport is recreational, skillful physical activity
that has an element of competition and is organized in
some manner (Rogers, 1977; Siedentop, Hastie, & van
der Mars, 2004). Broader definitions recognize sports
as physical activity that promotes physical fitness,
improves well-being, fosters social relationships, and
obtains results in competition (World Health Organization, 2011). Systematic reviews of research showcase
the many physical, psychological, social, emotional,
and intellectual benefits of youth sport participation
(Anderson-Butcher, Riley, lachini, Wade-Mdivanian,
Anderson-Butcher is with the College of Social Work, Ohio
State University, Columbus, OH, Riley is with the College of
Social Work, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, Amorose
is with the Department of Kinesiology and Recreation, Illinois
State University, Normal, IL, lachini is with the College of
Social Work, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC,
Wade-Mdivanian is with the College of Social Work, Ohio State
University, Columbus, OH,
236
& Davis, 2012; Fraser-Thomas, Côté, & Deakin, 2005;
Hedstrom & Gould, 2004), Oftentimes youth sport
involvement happens via participation in communitybased sport. Community sport is organized physical
activity based in the community that encompasses both
recreational and competitive elements (Dixon & Bruening, 2011), Community sport programs and activities are
offered through local sport clubs, as well as youth service
organizations such as the YMCA, Boys and Girls Clubs,
nonprofit sport-specific associations, community centers,
and parks and recreation departments. While the exact
number of participants is difficult to determine given
the diversity of activities and organizations sponsoring programs, a recent analysis of data from the Sports
and Fitness Industry Association estimated that in 2011
approximately 21,47 million youth between the ages of
6—17 years of age participated in organized youth sport in
the United States of America (Kelley & Carchia, 2013),
Scholars have estimated the number of sport participants
to range anywhere from 15-46 million for youth 6-18
years of age (see Coakley, 2009). Yet others suggest that
Youth Experiences in Community Sport
approximately three out of every four youth is involved
in organized team sports (see Sabo & Feliz, 2008), Given
the broad reach of these offerings, it is important to understand the role of community sport in promoting positive
youth development. As such, this study examines the
impact of one community sport program on the development of sport and social skills among vulnerable youth,
those that may benefit the most from these experiences.
It also explores the unique role of belonging, wbich has
been identified in the literature as one mechanism affecting the relationship between participation and outcomes.
Literature Review
Community sport is defined by its dual focus on both
developing sport specific competence and fostering
positive developmental outcomes (Dixon & Bruening,
2011 ; Hedstrom & Gould, 2004), For instance, community sport programs traditionally focus on enhancing the
knowledge of the rules and traditions of sport, promoting
the understanding and the application of key strategies
and tactics, and the mastering of skills and techniques
relative to the sport context. While not always the case,
conamunity sport programs also can specifically integrate
positive youth development (PYD) principles into program designs, developing and enhancing positive youth
assets and protective factors including self-esteem and
social and life skills (Anderson-Butcher, Riley, Iachini,
Wade-Mdivanian, & Davis, 2012; Fraser-Thomas, Côté,
& Deakin, 2005; Larson, Hansen, & Moneta, 2006), In
these cases, PYD programming is integrated with sport
specific instruction for participants.
The Design and Management
of Community Sport Programs
The degree to which community sport is organized and
managed to simultaneously promote both of these foci
varies greatly depending on the sport context, program
design and management, and leadership priorities. For
instance, one recent trend points to the increased prioritization of the development of physical competence,
especially as youth sport designs have become more
professionalized, as characterized by year-round training, early specialization, and increased pressures to win
(Gould & Carson, 2008; Visek & Watson, 2005), In
other words, emphasis is primarily focused on sport skill
development and social skills are “caught” as a result,
as opposed to being intentionally taught (see Gould &
Carson, 2008), Other approaches strategically design the
sport context to create specific PYD outcomes such as
personal responsibility and are relatively less concerned
with sport-related skill instruction and athletic outcomes.
For instance, Hellison’s Teaching Personal and Social
Responsibility in Sport (TPSR) model (Hellison, 2003;
Hellison & Cutforth, 1997; Martinek, Schilling, & Johnson, 2001) focuses on the reinforcement and application
of key values (i,e,, respect) through sport and physical
activity participation. Likewise, SUPER (Brunelle,
237
Danish, & Fomeris, 2007; Danish, Fomeris, Hodge, &
Heke, 2004) promotes life skills through specific curriculum that is implemented before or after from sportspecific training sessions.
Regardless of the primary focus, researchers have
wondered whether PYD outcomes, such as enhanced selfconfidence and life skills, are automatic by-products of
community sport participation (Coakley, 2009; Weiss &
Smith, 2002); or if PYD outcomes might be maximized
with more targeted design strategies (Chalip, 2006; Hedstrom & Gould, 2004; Hodge, 1989; Iachini & AndersonButcher, 2012), As a result, a number of scholars have
proposed the need for more intentional community sport
programs that systematically teach life skills within their
designs. For example, Chalip (2006), in his argument to
advance thefieldof sport management, called for research
that examines the “characteristics of interventions that
are effective or ineffective” in promoting healthy youth
outcomes (p, 6), Other sport researchers have made
similar claims (Anthony, Alter, & Jenson, 2009; Eccles
et al„ 2003; Gould & Carson, 2008; Hedstrom & Gould,
2004; Weiss & Smith, 2002),
Qualitative studies have helped advance some theoretical understanding of possible mechanisms to examine
in the context of community youth sport programs. For
example, Riley and Anderson- Butcher(2012) examined
the broader impacts of a dual-focused community youth
sport program and documented important mechanisms
leading to youth outcomes. In their qualitative study,
parents/guardians of participants mentioned important
impacts at the individual, family, parent, and community
level (including the development of social and personal
skills, increased and enhanced communication among
family members, and parent peace of mind due to child
involvement in the program). Study participants attributed
these outcomes to mechanisms such as the focus on sport
and life skills, as well as factors related to opportunities
for youth to engage with program staff and peers. These
findings suggest that the dual focus on teaching sport and
life skills may have broader impacts than program designs
focusing primarily on sport skill development. Others
also report outcomes associated with community sport
participation and further emphasize the added benefits of
designs that intentionally develop life and social skills
(see Cecchini, Montero, Alonso, Izquierdo, & Contreras,
2007; Papacharisis, Goudas, Danish, & Theodorakis,
2005; Gould & Carson, 2008),
In addition, mechanisms and process-related factors,
such as emphases on relationship-building and positive
connections, have been described as essential program
qualities that foster greater impacts (McDonough,
UlMch-French, Anderson-Butcher, Amorose, & Riley,
2013; Riley & Anderson-Butcher, 2012), Further research
in this area is called for; however, especially in relation
to the need to better understand what program aspects
or mechanisms contribute to specific growth and learning (Fraser-Thomas et al,, 2005), One key mechanism
increasingly identified as important in the literature
involves promoting a sense of belonging.
238
Anderson-Butcher et al.
A Sense of Beionging
The value of promoting a sense of belonging has been
identified in quantitative research as an important aspect
of community sport. For instance, research has found that
strong, positive adult-youth relationships are critical for
promoting decreased problem behaviors and increased
prosocial behaviors in afterschool programs with sport
components (Anderson-Butcher, Cash, Saltzburg, Midle,
& Pace, 2004). Ullrich-French & Smith (2009) demonstrated the importance of peer relationships to continued
participation in sport and in turn resultant outcomes. Still
others highlight the importance of team identities, peer
groups, and member structures for the adoption of prosocial values and norms through sports (Eccles, Barber,
Stone, & Hunt. 2003; Youniss & Yates, 1997). In fact,
some research proposes that belonging to a program or
team, beyond just attendance, may be the most important
factor for promoting positive developmental outcomes
(Anderson-Butcher & Fink, 2006). In other words,
attendance alone is not enough. Participants must feel
a sense of belonging and relatedness to a program and
the others involved (i.e., coaches, peers, etc). Although
not specifically examined in past research, there is some
suggestion that a sense of belonging, in turn, fosters
deeper engagement in activities, the adoption of norms
and behaviors of the group, and the further development
of skills (Anderson-Butcher, 2010; Anderson-Butcher
& Fink, 2006).
Gaps in the research remain. In addition, a better
understanding of the specific mechanisms and setting
features contributing to PYD is needed, especially given
some research in this area documents positive youth outcomes and other research does not (Anthony et al., 2009;
Eccles et al., 2003; Fraser-Thomas et al, 2005; Gould &
Carson, 2008). Other limitations exist. For instance, most
of the research in sports-based PYD examines extracurricular activities in general (with sport being one of many
activities). Several researchers (Fraser-Thomas et al.,
2005; Gould & Carson, 2008; Hedstrom & Gould, 2004)
suggest that research is needed in sport-specific contexts,
as well as in sports-based PYD programs intentionally
designed to create social development outcomes. Longitudinal evaluations also are needed to examine growth
over time and the factors contributing to learning (Gould
& Carson, 2008). Last, research is lacking in relation to
understanding the unique challenges and outcomes of
sports-based PYD programs in underserved communities
(Fraser-Thomas et al, 2005).
As such, the purpose of this study is to address
these gaps in the research by using quantitative methods
to examine how one community sport program design
strategy—one that promotes social and sport skills among
vulnerable youth—influences youth outcomes. Gaining
the answer to this question is essential, particularly for
sport managers serving instrumental roles in the design,
management and implementation of community sport
programs (Chalip, 2006).
Method
Specifically, this study examines the impact of participation in one community sport program on key developmental outcomes using growth curve analysis. In addition,
this study examines the influence of a sense of belonging
in contributing to changes in youth outcomes. Before
describing the community sport context and study design,
we will first discuss research positionality related to the
camp that served as the setting for this study.
Specifically, the camp is situated in a broader university initiative that focuses on service and outreach,
teaching and learning, and research related to positive
youth development through sport. As such, research is an
overall objective within the camp and its operations. Thus,
the researchers’ backgrounds, experiences, and relationships with the camp, its campers, and the staff are linked
with the study context. More specifically, the researchers
here served as leaders within the overall initiative and
supported capacity-building and program improvement
efforts. The role was similar to Misener and Doherty’s
position of “insider/collaborator” (2009, p. 466). This
blended role may bring limitations to the study design
and findings due to concerns with objectivity. Strategies
were used to reduce potential bias and subjectivity. For
instance, the researchers responsible for data collection
and management were not involved in the day-to-day
operations of the camp. Likewise, the researcher primarily responsible for data analysis was external to the
university and camp, providing a more neutral perspective and form of member checking. The relationship
and engagement of researchers, however, may also be
seen as a strength given the intimate knowledge among
the researchers of the overall LiFE Sports design and
implementation efforts. This in-depth understanding
may promote a better understanding of the results and
their linkage to the overall program design. Nonetheless,
it is important to acknowledge the possible influence of
researcher positionality in the construction of knowledge
in this study before describing the methods and results.
The methods, results, and findings should be interpreted
with this positionality in mind.
Context
The study was completed at one summer community
sport program called the Learning in Fitness and Education (LiFE) Sports Camp. The LiFE Sports Camp is
designed to provide approximately 600 economically
disadvantaged youth ages 9-16 from the Columbus,
Ohio community with the opportunity to participate in a
four-week summer sports-based PYD program. The mission of the camp is: “to foster social competence among
youth through their involvement in sport, fitness, and
educational activities” (see osulifesports.org). In addition
to focusing on social competence development, the LiFE
Sports Camp also strives to: (a) increase participants’
perceptions of sport competence, and (b) enhance youth
Youth Experiences in Community Sport
sense of belonging and connection to the program and its
staff. Thus, there is a dual emphasis on social and sport
skills development, as well as an emphasis on promoting belonging, to strengthen the relationship between
participation and outcomes. Further details related to the
Camp design are provided next.
The LiFE Sports Camp Design
The LiFE Sports Camp design and curriculum were
developed through a collaborative effort between the LiFE
Sports Camp staff and researchers. To create the LiFE
Sports model, researchers and LiFE Sports administrators
consulted past theory and research in PYD, community
sport, and sports-based PYD, especially drawing from
the Teaching Personal and Social Responsibility Model
(TPSR; Hellison, 2003; Hellison & Cutforth, 1997), effective principles of PYD programming (Eccles & Gootman,
2003), elements of the sports-education model (Siedentop
et al., 2004), initiative-building concepts (Larson, 2000),
and best practices in youth development skills training
(Durlak & Weissberg, 2007). Once the LiFE Sports camp
model was developed, LiFE Sports administration and
graduate students involved in the program wrote curriculum specific to each program activity area.
Each day of the 19-day camp, there is a specific curriculum used that is comprised of classroom-, play- and
sport-based activities to increase social and sport competence. More specifically, youth participate in one hour of
play-based social skill instruction, as well as three one hour
sessions of sport-related instruction that incorporates social
skill practice each day. Sports included as part of the camp
design are basketball, football, lacrosse, health and fitness,
soccer, social dance, softball, and swimming. In addition,
as part of the curriculum, daily activities include scenarios
and role plays where youth practice the application of
skills in reference to other settings, such as the home and
in the community. Throughout the camp, youth also work
individually and in teams to prepEu^e for the LiFE Sports
Olympics, a culminating event where the teams compete
among similar age groups in the sports focused on at camp.
Specific skills targeted in the LiFE Sports Camp and
designed to promote overall social competence include
Self-control, Effort, Teamwork, and Social Responsibility (S.E.T.S). The first target social skill. Self-control, is
defined as the ability to have control of oneself and own
actions (Gresham & Elliott, 1990). An individual must
first be able to control his or her attitudes and behaviors
before he or she can successfully engage with peers and
adults in social settings (Beelmann, Pfingsten, & Lösel,
1994; Hellison, 2003), Other social skill training models
(e,g., Gresham & Elliott, 1990) and sport-based PYD
programs (i.e., TPSR; Hellison, 2003) include this skill
in their program design. In the LiFE Sports curriculum,
self-control is targeted through skill development related
to problem solving, listening, and reading social cues.
Closely linked to self-control is self-directed behavior
and initiative, also known as Effort. Once an individual
239
learns to control actions and behaviors, those actions and
behaviors can become more goal directed and purposeful
(Larson, 2000). The LiFE Sports curriculum includes three
sessions focusing on this social skill, providing opportunities
for campers to demonstrate perseverance and goal-setting.
They also have opportunities to apply effort to specific tasks
and receive positive reinforcement for the apphcation of
effort during sport skill instruction and practice.
Teamwork involves working together as a group to
achieve a common goal or outcome, and is particularly
relevant in the sport and academic contexts (Weinburg
& Gould, 1999), At LiFE Sports, campers have opportunities to create teams, work on group problem solving,
practice negotiation skills, and build social networks. For
instance, campers participate in cooperative games where
success is measured by group effort as opposed to individual achievements. Likewise, campers work together in
teams to prepare for the LiFE Sports Olympics at the end
of camp, making decisions about which teammates will
participate in certain events such as football and dance.
The last skill focused on in LiFE Sports prioritizes
the development of social responsibility. Social responsibility involves adherence to social rules and expectations (Wentzel, 1991), and incorporates an individuals’
contribution to the broader society. Self-control, effort,
and teamwork all have strong ties with social responsibility. Given this, activities that focus on integrating the
four skills together that comprise social competence are
included. Specifically, campers have opportunities to
develop social responsibility through activities focused
on giving back to LiFE Sports, to peers at the camp, to
their families, and to the community. For instance, youth
strategize together in relation to how to acknowledge and
thank LiFE Sports staff and leaders. They create thank
you notes for their counselors and LiFE Sports administrators, as well as implement strategies to engage parents,
family members, and the community in the LiFE Sports
Olympics. Curriculum activities also ask youth to practice
social responsibility in other settings outside of camp.
LiFE Sports staff will ask youth to share ways they’ve
demonstrated social responsibility in their homes, as well
as provide “homework” activities challenging the youth
to practice this skill outside of LiFE Sports sessions.
In addition to sport and social skill development
focused on S.E.T.S., LiFE Sports also incorporates other
best practices in positive youth development into its
design strategy. Foremost, there is an explicit focus on
promoting a sense of belonging among campers through
the use of multiple strategies. For instance, campers are
organized in age-appropriate groups that transition into
teams with camper-created names, logos, and cheers,
Stafï forge bonds and connections with campers through
one-on-one and group instruction and interactions. Peer
relationships are fostered as campers become teammates
who together accomplish certain tasks and activities
throughout the camp. In addition, the camp is based on
a university campus, and fosters a sense of connection
to the university through promoting university athletics.
240
Anderson-Butcher et al.
sharing information about various majors and departments, and exposing youth to university facilities and
experiences (such as eating in the dining hall and riding
campus buses). Staff are also specifically trained in sport
and social skill development, as well as in positive youth
development practices (i.e., Eccles & Gootman, 2002)
involving nurturing relationships with youth and fostering
a sense of belonging.
The LiFE Sports Curriculum also embeds Durlak and
Weissberg’s (2007) tenets of successful youth development skills training. First, the curriculum is sequential,
as skills are introduced in small steps throughout the
camp during play-based education activities. Skills targeted throughout the curriculum build upon one other.
Each session focuses on a different skill, yet campers
have the opportunity to connect and build upon skills
across all sessions. The curriculum also includes active
learning and play-based applications. As such, campers
learn about each specific social competence skill within
a structured educational setting and are provided the
opportunity to practice the skills they have learned in a
sport and recreation setting.
In addition, campers apply effort over a period of
time toward achieving an end goal, a strategy known
to develop initiative and intrinsic motivation (Larson,
2000). Specifically, campers work together to plan for
the LiFE Sports Olympics described above. Building
from the sport education model (Siedentop et al., 2004),
teams identify roles and responsibilities of all members
as they prepare for the competition (which is attended
by family members and local community volunteers).
Youth compete in age-appropriate teams and celebrate
their achievements and those of their peers at this final
culminating event.
Finally, research suggests that the most effective
way to enhance social skills is to demonstrate “acquisition, performance, and generalization” (Gresham, 1990,
p. 233) of skills in other settings. Therefore, campers
have the opportunity to transfer their learning to other
contexts within LiFE Sports (i.e., in the sport activities), as well as to other settings such as at home and
in their community. More specifically, youth also have
opportunities for the application and transference of
skills through involvement in six, two hour LiFE Sports
clinics offered throughout the school year after camp
has concluded. Clinics are organized and implemented
by LiFE Sports staff in partnership with various partners
such as university student-athletes and coaches, staff
from local professional sports teams, and leaders from
local nonprofit organizations. During clinics, youth have
opportunities to learn new tactics and techniques related
to sports such as soccer, basketball, and dance. They also
are reinforced for their demonstration of S.E.T.S. at the
clinic, and asked about how they are applying these life
skills at school and in other social settings during the
year. In summary, the LiFE Sports Camp is one community sport program focused on both sport and social
skill development simultaneously. The 2011 LiFE Sports
Camp served as the context for this study.
Participants
In 2011, 599 youth registered for the LiFE Sports camp.
The parents/guardians of these youth were given a verbal
overview of the study at registration and asked if they
were interested in having their child participate. Of all
youth who registered, 287 youth were granted written
consent from their parents/guardians and met the following criteria for inclusion: (a) attended the camp on
at least 15 of the 19 days, (b) had no more than a single
item on the key study variables missing, and (c) reported
being honest in completing the survey. Please note youth
14 years of age and older also provided assent.
The final participant sample included 169 boys and
118 giris between the ages of 9-16 (M age = 11.85, SD
= 1.54). Participants self-reported a variety of ethnic
backgrounds (72.5% Black, 11.8% multiracial, 4.9%
White, 4.2% Native American, 1.4% Hispanic, 0.7%
Asian, 4.2% other, and 0.3% unreported). The majority of
youth came from disadvantaged circumstances, as 61.3%
reported receiving free and/or reduced lunch at school.
The participants attended an average of 17.38 out of 19
days ofthe camp, and 127 (44.3%) indicated that they had
attended LiFE sports in previous years with an average
of 2.05 (SD = 1.21) years of attendance.
iVIeasures
Given the dual focus on sports and social skills within the
LiFE Sports Camp, measurement focused on assessing
campers’ perceptions related to several key outcomes,
including overall social competence in sport, sport
competence, self-control, effort, teamwork, and social
responsibility. Campers also reported on their sense of
belonging to LiFE Sports and provided basic demographic information. Each measure is described in the
following.
Social Competence in Sport Participants’ abilities to
interact prosocially and maintain positive relationships
with others in the sport context (i.e., social competence)
was measured using a modified version of the Perceived
Social Competence Scale (PSCS) developed by Anderson-Butcher, Iachini, and Amorose (20()8). Given the
sport context of the study, the PSCS was modified for
this setting by adding “in sport” to the end of each item.
Sample items included “I help other people in sport”
and “I get along well with others in sport.” Responses
for the 10-item scale fall along a 5-point Likert scale
ranging from 1 (Not true at all) to 5 (Really true). The
internal consistency estimates in this study, which were
computed using Cronbach’s Alpha (a), were .85 for both
the pre- and post-camp assessments. These values were
greater than .70 indicating an acceptable level of internal
consistency based on Nunnally (1978).
Sport Competence Athletic competence was assessed
using three items that measure youths’ perceptions
of their ability in the sport context (Amorose, 2002).
The first item asked: “How good do you think you are
at sport?” Responses fell along a 5-point Likert scale
Youth Experiences in Community Sport
ranging from 1 {Not good at all) to 5 {Very good). The
second item asked: “When it comes to sports, how much
ability do you think you have?” Responses ranged from 1
{Not much ability at all) to 5 (A whole lot of ability). The
third item asked: “How skilled do you think you are at
sports?” and responses ranged from 1 {Not skilled at all)
to 5 {Very skilled). The internal consistency reliability of
these three items in this study was a = ,88 for the pre- and
post-camp assessment. In addition, the scale has shown
good reliability in past research (Amorose, 2002),
Self-Control Self-control in sport was assessed using
the Social Sports Experience Scale (Anderson-Butcher
et al,, 2010). The items assess participants’ perceptions
of their ability to keep control in sports. Some example
items include “I control my temper when I play sports”
and “I play sports fairly even when an adult is not around,”
Responses fell along a 5-point Likert scale ranging from
1 {Not at all true) to 5 {Really true). The Social Sports
Experience Scale demonstrated acceptable internal consistency reliability in this study, with a =,88 for each of
the two assessments. Additional psychometric support
for this measure was found by McDonough, et al. (2013).
Effort The commitment subscale of the Multidimensional Sportspersonship Orientations Scale (MSOS-25)
was used to measure effort in sport (Vallerand, Brière,
Blanchard, & Provencher, 1997). This subscale consisted
of 5 items assessing participants’ perceptions of their
respect for commitment to sports participation (i.e.,
“I don’t give up even after making many mistakes”).
Responses fell along a 5-point Likert scale ranging from
1 {Doesn ‘t correspond to me at all) to 5 {Corresponds to
me exactly). Internal consistency reliability was demonstrated in this study, with a = .78 at the pre-camp assessment and a = ,79 at the post-camp assessment.
Teamwork Teamwork in sport was measured using The
Teamwork Scale used in previous program evaluations
(Anderson-Butcher et al,, 2010), The scale is comprised
of items assessing participant’s perceptions of different
aspects of teamwork in the sport context. The stem “Wlien
playing sports,,.” is followed by several items such as “I
think teamwork is important” and “I feel confident in my
ability to work in a team.” The 10-item measure employs
a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 {Not true at all)
and 5 {Really true). The internal consistency estimates in
this study were a = .84 for both the pre- and post-camp
assessments.
Sociai Responsibiiity Social responsibility was
assessed using three items that measure participants’
thoughts about helping others in their community. This
scale was originally created to measure 21st-century
skills (Anderson-Butcher, Ball, Medalan, Davis, & WadeMdivanian, 2010.) An example item from the ,scale is “I
believe it is important to help others in my community.”
Participants responded on a 5-point Likert scale with
the anchors 1 {Not true at all) and 5 {Really true). The
internal consistency estimates in this study were a – .79
for both the pre- and post-camp assessments.
241
Belonging Participants’ sense of connection and
belonging to the LiFE Sports Camp was measured using
the 5-item Belonging Scale developed by AndersonButcher & Conroy (2002). Example items include “I feel
comfortable with people at LiFE Sports” and “I am part
of LiFE Sports.” The measure employs a 5-point Likert
scale with the anchors 1 {Not true at all) and 5 {Really
true). This measure has been shown to have adequate
psychometric properties (Anderson-Butcher & Conroy,
2002) and has been used in other sports-based positive
youth development research (McDonough et al,, 2013),
The internal consistency reliability was a = .90 in this
study.
Procedures
Parents/guardians of youth who registered for the LiFE
Sports camp in 2011 were asked by trained research
assistants to include their children in the study. Youth
with parent consent were also asked to assent to participate. Youth participants in the study completed pretest
surveys on the first day of camp. The posttest survey was
completed during the final two days of camp. Respondents took approximately 30 min to complete the battery
of instruments. Please note, youth were allowed to ask
clarifying questions. Some participants required further
assistance with reading the items. All study procedures
were approved by the Ohio State University Institutional
Review Board.
Data Analysis
Our primary data analyses involved a series of second
order latent growth curve models (Hancock, Kuo, &
Lawrence, 2001; Sayer & Cumsille, 2001). This procedure was used for a number of reasons including that it:
(a) allowed us to explore changes in the variables after
controlling for measurement error, (b) gave us information about group level and individ
