What is the scientific method? 

Example Research Question:

What are youth experiences in Credible Messenger programs? - Descriptive: we are trying to describe, not establish causation. 

How do CM programs impact youth life outcomes?- Causal: we are trying to figure out why something is happening. 

Hypothesis: Youth in CM programs have more positive life outcomes than similar youth who do not participate in CM. 

Whether a young person received CM mentoring is the independent variable(s) (X), and life outcomes is the dependent variable (Y). We can think of independent and dependent variables like we do our hypotheses - independent variables are the IF part, while dependent variables are the THEN part. This is also a form of a cause and effect relationship. 

Specific factors, such as connections with mentors or life skills services (independent variables), could have led to increased positive life outcomes (dependent variables). This is why we use Life Event Calendar surveys with a group of young people who received CM mentoring and a group of young people who did not. 

What is the theoretical background for this project? 

We're building this project with a background of positive youth development and an emphasis on community engagement, participatory methods, and racial equity. Positive youth development centers the growth potential of a young person from a disadvantaged background. This is in contrast to other forms of youth frameworks which often emphasize the deficits between youth from disadvantaged backgrounds and youth of privilege.

Community engagement focuses on including, boosting, and building around the voices of the people most directly impacted by the research: those studied in it. Participatory methods stem from this, ensuring the studied populations are as represented in the development of a project as they are in the final results.

Finally, in centering a racial equity lens, we will contextualize the effects of mentoring and youth development in the reality that people of color, especially Black and Latinx individuals, are faced with inequities stemming from a world built on systemic racism. As action oriented researchers, it is our responsibility to recognize the unfairness of our system, adjusting our project goals and direction to combat this.

What are our research questions for this project? How did we build them?

There are three broad steps we're going to take together to get this project going:

1. Picking a topic that we care about.

By joining on to be part of the community research team, you've done this already. You've expressed your passion and care for Credible Messenger mentoring, and that you want to show the world the results!

Since we're conducting two separate credible messenger projects, the areas of interest for each are slightly different:

CM1 (Atlanta, GA; Harris County, TX; Birmingham, AL): Identify how Credible Messenger (CM) mentoring programs promote positive youth development and facilitate youth healing.

CM2 (King County, WA; Phoenix, AZ; Jackson, MS; Bay Area, CA): Identify the political and social factors that shape CM mentoring and the outcomes of CM programming in three different settings (schools, communities, and detention).

2. Considering what we may already know about our topic of interest.

This knowledge isn't just our own though - recall in the lecture video how we discussed literature reviews, where experts from around the world can contribute to each other's knowledge. Our job is to dive into what they've found already and expand upon it with our research!

3. Developing a set of broad questions to guide the project.

In this step we need to find a balance between questions being too easy and too difficult to answer. We also need to ensure that our research is informing our opinions rather than our opinions informing the research. While we apply our research theories and frameworks to the design, we have to maintain a scientific evidence base for how our project is designed.

With all this in mind, below, you'll see a list of questions we established in Urban's grant applications for both projects - don't stress over the data sources we've laid out for them! Your job is to help us refine these questions, add your own, and make sure your questions will be answered.

1. How are CM mentoring programs conceptualized to advance change mechanisms that promote positive youth development? What is the underlying logic model (e.g., objectives, inputs, outputs) and theoretical framework for such programs? 

How we gain the answer(s): Document Review, Staff Interviews, Youth Focus Groups

2. To what extent are CM mentoring programs implemented with fidelity to program models in the diverse communities of Atlanta, Birmingham, and Houston? How does variation in funding, CM training, and professional development affect program fidelity?  

How we gain the answer(s): Program Data, Staff Interviews, Youth Focus Groups

3. How do systems of structural oppression, including racial inequity, affect positive changes for youth in historically marginalized communities? How do CM mentoring programs work to support community healing and restorative or transformative justice perspectives including reparation of harm? 

How we gain the answer(s): Staff Interviews, Youth Focus Groups, Administrative Data

4. What are the short- and long-term effects of CM mentoring programs on positive youth development (e.g., social-emotional healing, life skills, prosocial activities; peer and family relationships) and behavioral outcomes (e.g., school, delinquency, employment), as compared to youth who do not receive CM mentoring? 

How we gain the answer(s): Youth Life Event Calendar Surveys,  Youth Focus Groups, Administrative Data

5. How do the effects of CM mentoring programs interact and vary across a 36-month period? How do these findings help to identify key behavior change strategies and mechanisms, as well as key targets for intervention? 

How we gain the answer(s): Youth Life Event Calendar Surveys, Staff Interviews

6. In what ways can the research-and-practice knowledge sharing between Urban and the CRTs formed in Atlanta, Birmingham, and Houston strengthen CM mentoring programs’ capacity for performance monitoring and for future research to optimize effectiveness? How can this model be adopted by other programs nationwide? 

How we gain the answer(s): Community Researcher Team (CRT) and Advisory Board Meetings, Staff Interviews

Policy and Infrastructure Assessment 

1. What are the social and political factors required for successful CM mentoring in communities? 

How we gain the answer(s): Literature and Policy  Review, Leadership Interviews, Program Staff Interviews

2. What policy and legislative changes are needed to support credible messenger work in each program’s local community? 

How we gain the answer(s): Literature and Policy Review, Leadership Interviews, Program Staff Interviews

3. What key partnerships and interactions between communities, organizations, and systems exist to facilitate successful CM mentoring in different settings? Which partnerships are missing? 

How we gain the answer(s): Literature and Policy Review, Leadership Interviews, Program Staff Interviews

Implementation Evaluation 

4. What are the best practices for CM mentoring in different settings, and how can they be implemented to achieve the best outcomes for youth? 

How we gain the answer(s): Program Document Review, Leadership Interviews, Program Staff Interviews

5. How are CMs recruited, hired, and trained? What similarities and differences exist across sites, youth, and settings? 

How we gain the answer(s): Program Document Review, Leadership Interviews, Program Staff Interviews 

6. What are the eligibility criteria for youth who receive CM mentoring in each setting? How are these criteria similar and different across sites, youth needs, and settings? 

How we gain the answer(s): Program Document Review, Leadership Interviews, Program Staff Interviews

7. What barriers exist for youth to access CM mentoring? How can these be overcome? 

How we gain the answer(s): Program Document Review, Leadership Interviews, Program Staff Interviews

8. What is the mentoring process for CM mentoring programs across settings, including identification, referral, assessment, matching, mentoring (including cultural and geographic responsivity), completion, and follow-up? How does mentoring differ across sites, youth, and settings? How do different programs adapt formal frameworks to their needs, and is programming provided as intended? 

How we gain the answer(s): Program Document Review, Leadership Interviews, Program Staff Interviews

9. What are the key facilitators and challenges to the successful implementation of CM mentoring programs? How are they similar and different across sites, youth, and settings? How can key challenges be addressed? 

How we gain the answer(s): Program Document Review, Leadership Interviews, Program Staff Interviews

Outcomes Evaluation 

10. What is the impact of CM mentoring on youth system(s) involvement and positive youth development? 

How we gain the answer(s): Youth Focus Groups, Life Event Calendar Surveys

11. What are the intended outcomes for youth, CM mentors, and communities from credible messenger mentoring work? How do these differ across sites, youth, and settings? 

How we gain the answer(s): Program Document Review, Leadership Interviews, Program Staff Interviews, Youth Focus Groups

12. What are the perceived immediate and intermediate outcomes for youth, CM mentors, and communities from credible messenger mentoring work? How do these differ across sites, youth, and settings? 

How we gain the answer(s): Youth Focus Groups, Life Event Calendar Surveys

13. What are the measured immediate and intermediate outcomes for youth who receive CM mentoring? How do they vary across sites, youth needs, and settings? 

How we gain the answer(s): Youth Focus Groups, Life Event Calendar Surveys

14. What outcomes are missing and what data are needed to measure them? 

How we gain the answer(s): Youth Focus Groups, Leadership Interviews, Program Staff Interviews