Including the Youth Perspective: The Development of the CPQA Camper Survey

Authors

  • Troy Bennett University of Utah; Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/jyd.2018.559

Keywords:

program quality assessment, camper perspective, youth, self report, camp program quality

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to pilot the use of the CPQA Camper Survey, a camper self-report survey to assess summer camp program quality. The survey is based on the best practices identified in the American Camp Association’s Camp Program Quality Assessment (CPQA) short form (American Camp Association, n.d.). Best practices are organized into 5 subscales on the CPQA: staff behavior; emotional safety; camper choice, planning, and reflection; learning at camp; and nature. The CPQA Camper Survey asked youth campers at 5 different overnight camps to report on their perceptions of how often camp program quality best practices occur at summer camp. Results from the surveys collected showed that for each of the 5 subscales, campers’ average camp program quality ratings tended to cluster around the upper end of the rating scales. Respondents’ answers were consistent across the questions comprising each subscale, which indicates that the questions in each subscale reliably measure the same construct or idea. The results of this study show that the CPQA Camper Survey is one tool that camp directors and administrators can use as part of their program improvement processes to assess the quality of their programs, and thus improve the quality of the camp experience.

References

Akiva, T., Cortina, K. S., & Smith, C. (2014). Involving youth in program decision-making: How common and what it might do for youth? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 1844-1860.

American Camp Association (2005). Directions: Youth development outcomes of the camp experience. Retrieved from www.acacamps.org/research/enhance/directions

American Camp Association (n.d.). Camp Program Quality Assessment (C-PQA) short form. Available at https://www.acacamps.org/resource-library/research/camp-program-quality-assessment-c-pqa

Bialeschki, M. D., Fine, S. M., & Bennett, T. (2016). The camp experience: Learning through the outdoors. In B. Humberstone, H. Prince, & K. Henderson (Eds.), International handbook of outdoor studies. United Kingdom: Routledge.

Bowles, A., & Brand, B. (2009). Learning around the clock: Benefits of expanded learning opportunities for older youth. Washington, DC: American Youth Policy Forum. Retrieved from http://www.temescalassociates.com/documents/resources/highschool/AYPF_ELOs_w-cvr.pdf

Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 1: Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., pp. 793-828). New York: Wiley.

Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., & Pachan, M. (2010). A meta-analysis of after-school programs that seek to promote personal and social skills in children and adolescents. American Journal of Community Psychology, 45(3-4), 294-309.

Eccles, J., & Gootman, J. A. (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Garst, B., Browne, L., & Bialeschki, M. D. (2011). Youth development and the camp experience. New Directions for Youth Development, 130, 73-87.

Grossman, J., Campbell, M., & Raley, B. (2007). Quality time after school: what instructors can do to enhance learning. Philadelphia, PA: Public/Private Ventures. Available at http://www.ppv.org

Larson, R., Eccles, J., & Gootman, J. A. (2004). Features of positive developmental settings. Prevention Researcher, 11(2), 8-13.

Larson, R., Rickman, A. N., Gibbons, C. M., & Walker, K. C. (2009). Practitioner expertise: Creating quality within the daily tumble of events in youth settings. New Directions for Youth Development, 121, 71- 88.

Lerner, R. M., Lerner, J. V., Almerigi, J. B., Theokas, C., Phelps, E., Gestsdottir, S., . . . & von Eye, A. (2005). Positive youth development, participation in community youth development programs, and community contributions of fifth-grade adolescents: Findings for the first wave of the 4-H study of positive youth development. Journal of Early Adolescence, 25(1), 17-71.

Morgan, C., Sibthorp, J., & Browne, L. P. (2016). Moving beyond outcomes: An applied example of implementation evaluation in a youth recreation program. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 34(4), 66-81.

Peisner-Feinberg, E. S., Burchinal, M. R., Clifford, R. M., Culkin, M. L., Howes, C., & Kagan, S. L. (2000). The children of the cost, quality, and outcomes study go to school: Technical report. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center.

Pittman, K. J., Irby, M., Tolman, J., Yohalem, N., & Ferber, T. (2003). Preventing problems, promoting development, encouraging engagement: Competing priorities or inseparable goals? Washington, D.C.: The Forum for Youth Investment, Impact Strategies.

Reisner, E. R., White, R. N., Russell, C. A., & Birmingham, J. (2004). Building quality, scale, and effectiveness in after-school programs. New York, NY: The After-School Corporation.

Rowan, B., Jacob, R., & Correnti, R. (2009). Using instructional logs to identify quality in educational settings. New Directions for Youth Development, 121, 13-31.

Saint-Maurice, P. F., & Welk, G. J. (2014). Web-based assessments of physical activity in youth: considerations for design and scale calibration. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 16(12).

Sheldon, J., Arbreton, A., Hopkins, L., & Grossman, J. B., (2010). Investing in success: Key strategies for building quality in after-school programs. American Journal of Community Psychology, 45(3-4), 394-404.

Shernoff, D. J., & Vandell, D. L. (2007). Engagement in after-school program activities: Quality of experience from the perspective of participants. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36, 891-903.

Sibthorp, J., Paisley, K., & Gookin, J. (2007). Exploring participant development through adventure-based recreation programming: A model from the National Outdoor Leadership School. Leisure Sciences, 29(1).

Smith, C., Devaney, T. J., Akiva, T., & Sugar, S. A. (2009). Quality and accountability in the out-of-school- time sector. New Directions for Youth Development, 121. 109-127. doi:10.1002/yd.299

Vandell, D., Reisner, E., & Pierce, K. (2007). Outcomes linked to high-quality afterschool programs: longitudinal findings from the study of promising afterschool programs. Irvine, CA, Madison, WI: Madison and Policy Studies Associates.

Downloads

Published

2018-04-20

Issue

Vol. 13 No. 1-2 (2018): Special Issue on Camp Experience

Section

Research & Evaluation Studies

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.