Defining the term at risk

The term at risk can mean alot of things in a negative way, but as I read the article briefly it also has a positive outcome with the word "at risk".

The positive side of this confusion is that program providers have some leeway in how they define “at risk” for

their programs. Despite this flexibility, it still is important to have a standard or a reference point for clear

communication between providers, funders

highlights some of the issues surrounding the concept. (http://www.childtrends.org/Files/DefiningAtRisk%5B1%5D.pdf)

Alternatively, some contend that one should not view children themselves as being at risk, but rather the

environments in which children develop. For example, it could be said that the family is at risk. Families are the most critical setting for the development of children, and family risk factors, such as poverty, single parenthood,and low parental education levels, regularly have been found to undermine children’s development.(http://www.childtrends.org/Files/DefiningAtRisk%5B1%5D.pdf)

A third approach would focus on the community, neighborhood, or school context as an at-risk environment. For example, a low-income community with a high crime rate and a low high school graduation rate might be viewed as a place that puts children and adolescents at risk of poor outcomes.

Surprisingly, rather than specifically indicating what children are at risk of, the phrase is often used vaguely to refer to poor life outcomes in general. When outcomes for children are mentioned, they tend to refer to very general, long-term deficits, such as school failure, death, economic dependency, or incarceration. However, particular outof- school-time programs in the community are likely to have more specific goals for “at-risk” children, such as improving grades in school, delaying sexual initiation, or developing conflict resolution skills. Moreover, any given program is likely to have just one or two specific targets; in other words, few programs are seeking to improve arts performance, sports competence, academic skills and test scores, and to encourage volunteering. Thus, in the field, different program providers are likely to have quite different outcomes in mind when they think a child is “at risk” of a poor outcome. Also, as discussed below, both general goals and specific target outcomes can be useful, but for different purposes.(http://www.childtrends.org/Files/DefiningAtRisk%5B1%5D.pdf)

This article basically focuses on positive ways to help at risk families, children, communities etc.

References:

http://www.childtrends.org/Files/DefiningAtRisk%5B1%5D.pdf)

Topic

I chose to do poverty levels in the early childhood Field. I am working currently and I work fora program by the name of Ealry Headstart. It is a program for families that are considered at poverty level, and can not afford childcare ages 6 weeks to 3 years of age. It is like Headstart, but it is not free and has a waived fee that parents pay who can not pay full price. It is a excellent program, and is an opportunity for parents to be able to work and go to school at ease and not stay at home and wonder how they are going to pay for there next meal. Some of the parents that are not working do get the care for free, but they have to be enrolling in school or they have to be trying to find a job. So this program has its perks. The website you can go to to get more information is www.durhamcountyehs.com or you can google  Durham early headstart  program to get more information. Th research chart is very helpful and helps us to see how to go step by step to see how to do the research and gives examples of how to site the journal or article. So if there are any resource that you might want to share with me feel free to do so.