Panel discussion about gun violence, organized by the Regional Gun Violence Research Consortium at Rockefeller Institute of Government, State University of New York. My opening statement in the first video is just under 9 minutes. The full panel is 1 hour. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eprI0PMG064 My opening statement (9 minutes) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arEyQe06MoQ Full panel discussion (1 hour)
Advising the New York City Administration for Children’s Services on Positive Youth Outcomes
With funding provided by the City of New York through its Administration for Children's Services (ACS), the Research and Evaluation Center reviewed and compiled recent research and practice innovations focused on adolescent development and the youth justice system.
Strengthening Youth Justice Practices with Developmental Knowledge and Principles
Youth justice is a challenging environment in which to implement a rigorous PYD approach. The insights and lessons of developmental science do not translate easily into the day-to-day tasks of youth justice systems, which often focus on control and compliance. Youth justice practitioners require assistance as they apply developmental principles. The Positive Youth Justice (PYJ) Model was developed to meet this challenge. It provides a simple framework for designing PYD-compatible interventions for justice-involved young people and for supporting youth justice reforms.
WHYY—Youth Courts and the Value of a Jury of Their Peers
Research shows that young people who participate in youth court or teen court programs may have lower rates of recidivism. Adults involved in the programs attribute much of their success to the influence of positive peer pressure and the value of giving young people a voice in the process. Joining Radio Times host Marty Moss-Coaneus to tell the story of youth courts are Jeffrey Butts of the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, who has evaluated teen court programs across the country; and attorney Gregg Volz, who has implemented school-based youth courts in Chester.
Better Research for Better Policies
In setting priorities for funding and support, intervention programs demonstrated to be effective and efficient are preferred over programs that are well intentioned but untested by rigorous evaluation. An evidence-based approach is undeniably better than an approach based on faith or anecdotes, but the findings of existing evaluations are not sufficient by themselves as a basis for effective policy-making. Translating research into practice requires more than a review of existing studies. It requires knowledge of the research process and its limitations.
What does Positive Youth Development Mean for Juvenile Justice?
As juvenile justice agencies explore the concepts of positive youth development, the National Program Office of Reclaiming Futures asked for a quick, verbal explanation of these ideas.
Practitioner Views of Priorities, Policies, and Practices in Juvenile Justice
Drawing on a national survey of juvenile court practitioners, this study investigates key questions about the effectiveness of juvenile justice and discusses the implications of the findings for research, policy, and practice.
Positive Youth Justice
Positive youth development could be an effective framework for designing general interventions for young offenders. Such a framework would encourage youth justice systems to focus on protective factors as well as risk factors, strengths as well as problems, and broader efforts to facilitate successful transitions to adulthood for justice-involved youth. The positive youth development approach supports youth in making successful transitions from adolescence to early adulthood by encouraging young people to develop useful skills and competencies, and to build stronger connections with pro-social peers, families, and communities). Young people engaged with trustworthy adults and peers in the pursuit of meaningful activities and the acquisition of new skills are more likely to build the developmental assets needed for a positive adulthood.
Jeffrey Butts 