The program implemented by the Red Hook Justice Center in Brooklyn, NY., was designed to address positive perceptions of crime held by many young people in the apartment houses where these youths lived (Swaner, R., & White, E., 2009). The intent of the program that funded the study was to change behaviors among young people in the Red Hook Houses becoming more social and to change their attitudes toward crime through an effective marketing campaign (Swaner, R., & White, E., 2009). The study used adolescences from the area to conduct the interviews of their peers to see what would be needed to change attitudes.
Challenges with youth engagement One of the challenges the researchers faced was finding youth that were comfortable with being leaders …show more content…
3). Implying a disconnect from society because a group of people are low-income and of color, as a reason to conduct a study, provides a negative im-age all groups who share that distinction. No distinction was made between if the behaviors the Red Hook teenagers presented were due to economics or race. The participants in the Red Hook study mentioned to reseaercheers their unhappiness with the article in the local newspaper labeling them “at risk” (Swaner, R., et al, 2009). A comparable study of young people from another area where they were of a primarily different racial background might have better proven this point. The program dealt with the issue of social disconnect by holding the interviews at local hang out spots, and alternative schools the students were sent to “for youth who have had difficulties in traditional school environ-ment” believing they would be more likely to participate in the study (Swaner, R., et al, 2009, p. 3). The young people in the study were most connected to their peers and not a traditional family structure, therefore researchers felt for purposes of the study, the interviews for participants be held outside tradi-tional community places (Swaner, R., et al, …show more content…
For example, over 70% of students who said they would be com-fortable commenting at a public meeting, however, the actual number of those who ended up com-menting was barely over 50% (Swaner, R., et al, 2009). Researchers explained the difference may have been due to youth not realizing how difficult speaking in front of people could be, and the in-tention was not to answer dishonestly (Swaner, R., et al, 2009). Another contradiction was the fact that results of questions asked of the adolescence on perceptions of selling certain drugs, was not in line with the message of the marketing campaign of “selling drugs is bad”. The youth who partici-pated in the study did mention to researchers they thought it would be hypocritical to produce a campaign against also doing drugs, since they also smoked recreational drugs themselves (Swaner, R., et al, 2009). The attitudes toward certain risky behavior was not very different at the end of the pro-gram than it was at the beginning as researchers observed it should have been (Swaner, R., et al, 2009). It is believed it may have been due to respondents saying what they felt the adults expected to
Challenges with youth engagement One of the challenges the researchers faced was finding youth that were comfortable with being leaders …show more content…
3). Implying a disconnect from society because a group of people are low-income and of color, as a reason to conduct a study, provides a negative im-age all groups who share that distinction. No distinction was made between if the behaviors the Red Hook teenagers presented were due to economics or race. The participants in the Red Hook study mentioned to reseaercheers their unhappiness with the article in the local newspaper labeling them “at risk” (Swaner, R., et al, 2009). A comparable study of young people from another area where they were of a primarily different racial background might have better proven this point. The program dealt with the issue of social disconnect by holding the interviews at local hang out spots, and alternative schools the students were sent to “for youth who have had difficulties in traditional school environ-ment” believing they would be more likely to participate in the study (Swaner, R., et al, 2009, p. 3). The young people in the study were most connected to their peers and not a traditional family structure, therefore researchers felt for purposes of the study, the interviews for participants be held outside tradi-tional community places (Swaner, R., et al, …show more content…
For example, over 70% of students who said they would be com-fortable commenting at a public meeting, however, the actual number of those who ended up com-menting was barely over 50% (Swaner, R., et al, 2009). Researchers explained the difference may have been due to youth not realizing how difficult speaking in front of people could be, and the in-tention was not to answer dishonestly (Swaner, R., et al, 2009). Another contradiction was the fact that results of questions asked of the adolescence on perceptions of selling certain drugs, was not in line with the message of the marketing campaign of “selling drugs is bad”. The youth who partici-pated in the study did mention to researchers they thought it would be hypocritical to produce a campaign against also doing drugs, since they also smoked recreational drugs themselves (Swaner, R., et al, 2009). The attitudes toward certain risky behavior was not very different at the end of the pro-gram than it was at the beginning as researchers observed it should have been (Swaner, R., et al, 2009). It is believed it may have been due to respondents saying what they felt the adults expected to