Impact of Engaging Students in Health Survey Data Analysis and as Full Partners in School Change: Results From a Mixed Methods Study

Abstract

Young people demand and deserve participation in shaping the health and well-being of their community. Getting to Y: Youth Bring Meaning to the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (GTY) is a positive youth development initiative, whereby students analyze local youth health data and create change. This article adds definitive evidence to support the theoretical foundations of GTY expounded by Garnett et al. (2019). A mixed methods convergent study design, collecting quantitative data from pre- and postintervention surveys and qualitative data from focus groups, was enacted during the 2018–2019 school year. Survey participants were 256 students attending 20 Vermont middle/high schools. Surveys measured self-efficacy, health literacy, civic engagement, resiliency, and knowledge. Focus groups with 50 students solicited open-ended feedback. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests determined student-level change over time. Focus group transcripts were coded using grounded theory and a priori codes from the survey. Statistically significant improvements were seen in average scores from pre- to postintervention surveys in all five domains and differences in effect by gender. Results from the focus group complement the quantitative findings. Participation in GTY positively affected youth participant’s understanding of their own health and well-being and increased agency to take action on behalf of themselves and their community. As the Youth Risk Behavior Survey is available nationwide, GTY is poised for replication to critically engage youth with relevant data to inform social change.

Keywords

child/adolescent health health education health literacy school health health promotion youth–adult partnership student engagement youth participatory action research

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alexander

Entwisle

Olson

(2007). Lasting consequences of the summer learning gap. American Sociological Review, 72(2), 167–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240707200202

Anyon

Bender

Kennedy

Dechants

(2018). A systematic review of youth participatory action research (YPAR) in the United States: Methodologies, youth outcomes, and future directions. Health Education & Behavior, 45(6), 865–878. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198118769357

Ballard

Hoyt

Pachucki

(2019). Impacts of adolescent and young adult civic engagement on health and socioeconomic status in adulthood. Child Development, 90(4), 1138–1154. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12998

Bandura

(1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122–147. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122

Beattie

Rich

(2018, April 19). Youth-adult partnership: The keystone to transformation. Education Reimagined. https://www.upforlearning.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Youth-Adult-Partnerships_FINAL.pdf

Benson

P. L.

Scales

Syvertsen

(2011). The contribution of the developmental assets framework to positive youth development theory and practice. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 41, 197–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-386492-5.00008-7

Bringle

Phillips

Hudson

(2004). The measure of service learning. American Psychological Association.

Brown

Teufel

Birch

(2007). Early adolescents perceptions of health and health literacy. Journal of School Health, 77(1), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2007.00156.x

Catalano

Berglund

Ryan

Lonczak

Hawkins

(2004). Positive youth development in the United States: Research findings on evaluations of positive youth development programs. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 591(1), 98–124. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716203260102

10.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). The whole school, whole community, whole child: A collaborative approach to learning and health. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/wscc/pdf/wscc_fact_sheet_508c.pdf

11.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2019). National health education standards. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/sher/standards/index.htm

12.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). What is health literacy? https://www.cdc.gov/healthliteracy/learn/index.html

13.

Constantine

Benard

(2001). California healthy kids survey resilience assessment module: Technical report. Journal of Adolescent Health, 28(2), 122–140.

14.

Creswell

Plano Clark

(2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed). Sage.

15.

Curran

Wexler

(2017). School-based positive youth development: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of School Health, 87(1), 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12467

16.

Fielding

Bragg

(2003). Students as researchers. Making a difference. Pearson.

17.

Garnett

Beattie

Koller

Scott

Maseroni

Holmes

(2019). Participatory survey data analysis as catalyst for empowering youth as school health change agents. Health Promotion Practice, 20(4), 483–488. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839919849029

18.

Guetterman

Fetters

Creswell

(2015). Integrating quantitative and qualitative results in health science mixed methods research through joint displays. The Annals of Family Medicine, 13(6), 554–561. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1865

19.

Gutuskey

McCaughtry

Shen

Centeio

Garn

(2016). The role and impact of student leadership on participants in a healthy eating and physical activity programme. Health Education Journal, 75(1), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0017896914561878

20.

Hall

S. F.

(2019). A conceptual mapping of three anti-adultist approaches to youth work. Journal of Youth Studies, 23(10), 1293–1309. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2019.1669775

21.

Henderson

Milstein

(2003). Resiliency in schools: Making it happen for students and educators. Corwin Press.

22.

Lerner

Benson

(2011). Positive youth development: Research and applications for promoting thriving in adolescence. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 41, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-386492-5.00001-4

23.

McCammon

(2012). Systems of care as asset-building communities: Implementing strengths-based planning and positive youth development. American Journal of Community Psychology, 49(3–4), 556–565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-012-9514-x

24.

Mitra

D. L.

(2014). Student voice in school reform: Building youth-adult partnerships that strengthen schools and empower youth. SUNY Press.

25.

Penaloza

(2019). Focus group interviewing: Skills and technology. Prevention Research Center.

26.

Rubin

(2016). A health literacy report: Analysis of 2016 BRFSS health literacy data. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/healthliteracy/pdf/Report-on-2016-BRFSS-Health-Literacy-Data-For-Web.pdf

27.

Winkelman

Caldwell

Bertram

Davis

(2016). Promoting health literacy for children and adolescents. Pediatrics, 138(6), Article e20161937. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-1937

28.

Zeldin

Christens

Powers

(2013). The psychology and practice of youth-adult partnership: Bridging generations for youth development and community change. American Journal of Community Psychology, 51(3–4), 385–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-012-9558-y