Although studies have examined character virtues among youth, few have explored the perspectives of young people who move from disconnection with social structures to reconnection and engagement—often referred to as “opportunity youth”—through the lens of positive youth development.
This qualitative study explores gratitude, generosity and hope from the experience of youth receiving social services to support stability in the transition to adulthood and the observations of their caseworkers.
Focus groups with 23 opportunity youth and individual interviews with 10 caseworkers reveal that youth connected gratitude to spirituality for the help they had received and viewed helping peers as a chance to give back and pay it forward. Caseworkers’ accounts concurred. Despite having limited resources, opportunity youth reflected on and valued generosity as contributing to positive outcomes for themselves and their peers. Some caseworkers expressed concerns about opportunity youth’s generosity being exploited. Most opportunity youth saw hope as a guiding philosophy, while some noted that experiences of hopelessness also shaped their understanding of hope. Some caseworkers were concerned about the hesitancy of opportunity youth to hope due to fear of disappointment.
The views of opportunity youth on integrating character education into youth services are discussed.
Findings have implications for character education from the voices of opportunity youth and their caseworkers through strength perspectives relative to a deficit-centered lens.
1. Introduction
Youth who experience homelessness or transitioning from foster care navigate multiple challenges (Chassman et al., 2020; Roche, Barker, & Turton, 2017) to attain stability in transitioning to adulthood (Mendelson, Mmari, Blum, Catalano, & Brindis, 2018). Youth who move from disconnection with social structures to reconnection and engagement are known as “opportunity youth” (Allen, Miles, & Steinberg, 2014; Mendelson et al., 2018). Opportunity youth interacting with social agencies while receiving help from caseworkers can inadvertently adopt a deficit-centered narrative of their history, own identity and sense of self (Belfield, Levin, & Rosen, 2012; McAdams & McLean, 2013). When internalized, such negative master narratives can undermine the self-confidence and motivation of youth to succeed as adults (Ungar, 2015). As such, the concept opportunity youth is preferred to disadvantaged youth. In contrast, a positive personal narrative (Schnitker, King, & Houltberg, 2019), focused on internal strengths (Karabanow, 2008) or gifts (Ma, Tunney, & Ferguson, 2017), may support youths’ resilience resulting in the attainment of stability (Lerner & Callina, 2014; Ungar, 2015). Moreover, studies show that character virtues can function as a means of adaptation to the social and physical ecology of youth in ways that promote coping and thriving (Schnitker et al., 2019; Ungar, 2015).
Research shows the connection between character virtues and positive outcomes in youth. For example, Shoshani and Slone (2013) reported an association between character virtues and better school adjustment, higher levels of education, a heightened sense of well-being and expressions of empathy, in a sample of 417 students and 13 teachers from four public middle schools in Israel. However, most research on character virtues among adolescents has focused on middle income populations (Jeynes, 2019; Toner, Haslam, Robinson, & Williams, 2012). This study aims to fill this gap and contribute to the literature by focusing on how opportunity youth and their caseworkers experience character virtues during the transition to adulthood. It also highlights strategies that social service interventions can use to better integrate and inform character education.
We chose to focus specifically on three-character virtues – gratitude, generosity and hope – and the ways in which character virtues shape and are shaped within the contexts of scarcity, trauma and helping. Hussong, Samuelson, Richards and Mullane (2024) described the character strengths gratitude, generosity and hope as key components of positive youth development, helping young people to positively assess their lives and capabilities. Gratitude can emerge when youth reflect on their own gifts and talents, leading to the realization that they not only possess these strengths but can also develop and use them. Generosity requires youth to consider the needs of others and to recognize that sharing their gifts can help address those needs. Hope results when youth realize they have something meaningful to share and that they possess the agency to make a difference in the world (Hussong et al., 2024).
Moreover, these virtues provide positive outcomes for youth. The pro-social behavior exhibited in generosity is related to better school outcomes (Ma, Kibler, & Sly, 2013). Participating in positive activities such as acts of generosity also serves as a protective factor for youth, giving them positive patterns of emotions, thoughts and behaviors that may serve them over the course of their lifetimes (Layous, Chancellor, & Lyubomirsky, 2014). Practicing gratitude and generosity can also lead to a greater sense of purpose in life for adolescents and gives them hope for the future (Malin, Liauw, & Damon, 2017).
1.1 Character virtues
Character virtues, also referred to as character strengths, are stable personal qualities that are shaped in part by the individual context and, as such, can grow and change (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). This includes strengths such as hope, persistence, gratitude and self-esteem (Padilla-Walker, Millett, & Memmott-Elison, 2020). Studies conducted with youth found that virtues impact resilience (Allen et al., 2014) and increase self-confidence and motivation (Ungar, 2015). Yet, gaps remain in the literature about how character virtues influence the lives of opportunity youth as they deal with issues of instability and interact with their caseworkers.
Most of the research on character virtues among adolescents focuses on middle-class populations. Research found an association between character virtues and positive outcomes such as better school adjustment, higher levels of education, heightened sense of well-being and expressions of empathy (Gillham et al., 2011; Jeynes, 2019; Shoshani & Slone, 2013; Toner et al., 2012). However, studies suggest that culture and socio-economic status shape the way gratitude is conceived and expressed. For example, Hussong et al. (2019) found that the socio-economic status of high-income families was related to greater gratitude toward peers.
1.1.1 Gratitude
Gratitude is conceptualized as an emotional state or mood, life orientation, virtue or personality trait (Wood, Froh, & Geraghty, 2010). It involves noticing and appreciating positive characteristics in the actions of self and others (Halberstadt et al., 2016). Bronk et al. (2019) surmised that gratitude requires adolescents to have two developmental skills: (1) perspective taking, the cognitive ability to understand another’s thoughts and intentions, and (2) empathy, the capacity to understand how another feels. Beyond this, gratitude requires a moment of reflection which can occur naturally through the regular experience of a positive emotion, such as upon the receipt of a gift (Froh, Bono, & Emmons, 2010). Expressing gratitude also is common after receiving help (Froh et al., 2014).
Research on gratitude among opportunity youth has largely taken place outside the United States (e.g. Hescox, Bono, & Palacios, 2023; Ng & Chan, 2015; Poelker, Gibbons, Maxwell, & Elizondo-Quintanilla, 2017), shaped by contextual factors. One US-based study among Latino adolescents living in low-income households found that gratitude had a positive effect on mental health as a moderator between positive parenting and depressive symptoms (Duprey, McKee, O’Neal, Algoe, & Campos, 2020). Further, Lee (1993) reported that among families who live in disadvantaged neighborhoods, youth expressed gratitude for living with a grandmother, surviving another year and staying out of jail. Within families who have middle-class incomes, parents reported that their school-aged children developed gratitude over time for intangible as well as tangible gifts (Halberstadt et al., 2016). Hussong et al. (2019) showed that children in families with high income scored higher than those from families with middle and lower incomes on a raising grateful children (RGC) behavior task measure when children left a desirable gift for a peer in a lab setting.
Hescox et al. (2023) in their review of gratitude research concluded: “Gratitude studies and interventions should be designed and implemented with a conscientious consideration of how different sociocultural factors, predispose youth to experience and express gratitude differently” (p. 75). This insight can be applied to the other virtues as well.
1.1.2 Generosity
Generosity is a broad construct with various meanings. The Greater Good Science Center defines generosity as “the virtue of giving good things to others freely and abundantly” (Allen, 2018, p. 7). Personal characteristics that engender generosity include moral values encompassing a principle of care (Bekkers & Ottoni-Wilhelm, 2016). Sociocultural factors that reflect the values of group affiliation (Levine, Prosser, Evans, & Reicher, 2005) and parenting practices were found to model generosity (Ottoni-Wilhelm, Estell, & Perdue, 2014). Furthermore, Kuperminc, Holditch and Allen (2001) in a systematic review found that adolescents who participate in community service display generosity, including gains in well-being, empathy and prosocial attitudes. However, these studies have limited descriptions of factors that motivate generosity among youth, especially youth with limited resources.
Although generosity has been identified as a key character strength in positive youth development from a theoretical standpoint (Steinebach, Schaer, & Knafla, 2019), our review of the literature revealed no empirical studies examining attitudes toward generosity among opportunity youth.
1.1.3 Hope
Hope involves a strong, positive future orientation. As a dimension of resilience (Ahmed, Seedat, Van Niekerk, & Bulbulia, 2004), it is a combination of motivational thoughts and feelings about personal capacity to achieve goals, wishes and expectations (Marques & Lopez, 2018). It involves a sense of agency, to establish and achieve future goals (Jiang, Otis, Huebner, & Weber, 2018; Marques & Lopez, 2018). Hope is essential in the helping process. Relative to the internal healing process that focuses on an individual’s emotions (Clarke & Yellow Bird, 2021), human-service professionals follow a six-step helping process: engagement, assessment, planning, intervention, evaluation and termination (Mitchell, 2022). This structured approach supports positive outcomes by helping individuals overcome barriers and build resilience (Touza & Kaitlin, 2021). On the other hand, hopelessness is linked to depression, suicidal ideation (Joe, Romer, & Jamieson, 2007) and an environment that lacks support (Snyder, 2002).
The research on hope in youth using qualitative methods reflects the importance of context. Abadía-Barrero (2004) explored hope in Brazilian youth who were homeless and diagnosed with HIV/AIDS. Despite their challenges, these youth expressed a positive outlook for their future compared to street children that were not infected. Abadía-Barrero (2004) concluded that the services received by youth with HIV/AIDS resulted in a sense of inclusion in society and a sense of hope, in contrast to the uninfected street youth who have only experienced exclusion. In a later study with a sample of homeless youth from Tanzania, Nalkur (2009) found that those living in unstable environments shunned hope and pointed to luck in achieving success, whereas those in a stable environment acknowledged their internal resources and personal agency. Those youth expressing hope pointed to other people as important resources. In the United States, indigenous youth living on a reservation with high rates of poverty and social inequity expressed hope for their future and a narrative of a desire to achieve (Wood, Kamper, & Swanson, 2018). They chose to emphasize the positive aspects of life on the reservation and their attachment to it (Wood et al., 2018). Overall, these studies that include youth experiencing multiple challenges suggest that hope may play an important role in opportunity youths’ achievement of stability in adulthood. What remains unclear is the context of interactions with caseworkers in the helping process.
This study expects that by illuminating how gratitude, generosity and hope are experienced among opportunity youth in the context of the United States, it will contribute both to filling the gap in the literature and to informing the design of character virtues interventions sensitive to the sociocultural factors of opportunity youth.
1.2 Current study
This qualitative study is part of a larger study aimed at designing a character virtues curriculum among youth who are enrolled in social service agency programs. The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of youth who aged out of foster care, and/or had experienced homelessness, and caseworkers who provide direct services to them. We used a phenomenological perspective design (Creswell, 2013) to explore three research questions: (1) How do youth and caseworkers understand generosity, gratitude and hope? (2) What are the roles of these character virtues in the lives of opportunity youth? (3) How do opportunity youth envision incorporating the three-character virtues into programing focused on character education?
2. Methods
2.1 Research site
To conduct the study, researchers collaborated with a social service agency serving youth and young adults in a Midwestern state. The agency was selected based on its operations as spanning across multiple counties, comprehensive programs, professional relationship with researchers and offering of programs across six sites. The agency is a nonprofit organization that offers independent living skill (ILS) and transitional living program (TLP) services to youth and young adults with diverse needs such as homeless, runaway, transitioning and aging out. The ILS program includes attaining and maintaining housing, healthy transitioning to adulthood, seeking and attaining employment, goal setting and educational attainment. The TLP provides youth aged 18–24 with an apartment and the social service supports to maintain that apartment during and beyond the 18-month program.
2.2 Researchers, recruitment and study participants
2.2.1 Researchers
The research team has direct practical experience serving youth in various settings. The first author is a social work instructor who provided direct social services to vulnerable youth and families in an international setting and was a doctoral student in the US. The second author has extensive experience working with youth as a pastor, participated in the evaluation of direct services to youth in therapeutic settings and conducted research on character virtues in multiple settings. The third author is a social work professor emeritus who has extensive practice and qualitative research experience with youth and families in multiple settings.
2.2.2 Recruitment and participants
Following Institutional Review Board approval for this study by Midwestern University, recruitment procedures were implemented in collaboration with administrators from the social services agency and the research team. From August 2019 to March 2020, researchers and caseworkers recruited participants. Caseworkers recruited youth by sharing the flyers supplied by university researchers. Youth were invited to contact the research team by email or telephone for further information if interested. The flyers explained the study purpose and procedures. A university researcher screened all participants via telephone. Caseworkers were recruited by an administrator at the agency’s main office who nominated those who are knowledgeable about youth programs and provided direct social services to youth across each site.
The total sample of 33 consisted of 23 youth and 10 professionals (see Table 1). We obtained verbal consent on audio record as well as in writing prior to interviews. Participants were asked to complete a consent form either in-person or digitally depending on the location of the interview. In-person interviews took place in private rooms provided by the agency to ensure confidentiality for the participants. Telephone interviews took place at a convenient time identified by caseworker participants. Youth participated in one of six focus groups that was held in a private room to insure confidential from agency staff. They were compensated with a $25 gift card at the end of the interview and caseworkers received no compensation.
2.3 Procedures and materials
All interviews were audio recorded and facilitated by the research team following written consent.
2.3.1 Personal history questionnaire
The personal history questionnaire was designed to describe the diverse characteristics of the participants. Youth were asked about their age, race/ethnicity, education and living arrangements. Caseworkers were asked about their age, race/ethnicity, education and number of years they have worked with youth.
2.3.2 Interview guides
Table 2 shows the two different interview guides administered for participants depending on status (youth or caseworker). The interview questions were developed based on literature, meetings with administrators and staff. Researchers conducted 40–60-min semi-structured focus group interviews with youth and 30–90 minute individual interviews with caseworkers.
A total of six focus group interviews, one at each site, were conducted in private rooms provided by the agency. In each group, there were two to six participants. After providing informed consent, youth were asked to complete the personal history questionnaire. Next, the interviewer read definitions of each of the three virtues and invited youth to provide examples of each virtue in their lives. Youth were then invited to discuss the qualities and contexts associated with their character virtues. Demand characteristics, which may influence the participants’ response behavior, were mitigated by the shared experience of all participants being homeless and/or aging out of foster care.
2.4 Data analysis
To conduct an inductive analysis, recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim and de-identified. Members of the research team trained and supervised by the senior researcher proceeded with open coding to induce emic codes (Schwandt, 2001). The codes consist of the participants’ words and phrases to discern group patterns that emerge and label themes through repeated readings of the transcripts and listening to recorded interviews independently. The researchers then reviewed the transcripts to ensure representation of the results. One researcher used the qualitative data analysis computer software, QSR International NVivo 12 Software, to manage the data analyses process (QSR International, 2022).
As in qualitative research, this study employed three trustworthiness criteria to assess the analysis and interpretation of results: dependability, credibility and transferability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). First, to ensure dependability, a coding framework was created through discussion and revised as needed for consistency with the data and to maintain an audit trail. At least two team members then independently coded all interviews. Any disagreements were resolved through discussion and memoing methodological decisions. Second, to strengthen the credibility of our subsequent interpretations, a member check was conducted with participants during a local conference in March 2020 to clarify or elaborate our understanding of responses. During the member check session, two researchers read the extracted themes with descriptions and asked youth from whom the data were originally collected to provide feedback if the interpretations represented their realities (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). These comments were used by researchers to review the results of the study. Peer debriefings (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) occurred in weekly meetings of the research team throughout the academic year. Third, transferability of the results was ensured by providing thick descriptions using direct quotes and excerpts representative of the themes (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
3. Results
The results of the study are presented under each research question, according to the appropriate virtue, followed by the theme that is closely linked to the words of the participants (see Table 3). Themes were identified as most salient when participants repeatedly mentioned them, described events illustrating virtues or emphasized certain examples with intensity. Each theme is supported by direct quotes from youth and caseworker accordingly.
3.1 How do youth and caseworkers understand generosity, gratitude and hope?
3.1.1 Gratitude: engagement with higher power
Youth. Some opportunity youth revealed gratitude as connected to a higher power and appreciation for their possessions and achievements, especially their progress toward stability:
I practice it (gratitude). Just saying like in my head to a higher power what I’m grateful for and appreciate. Then a couple years ago, my pastor actually got me like a gratitude book to journal about. I make a list like every night either when I wake up or when I go to bed. Sometime during the day, I’ll make a list of 10 things I appreciate in my life, and I try not to repeat them … yeah then you’re always thinking about what you can be grateful for even if it’s the smallest thing like water…. I like to say, “I’m grateful…” They (peers) say that someone does something for them, I tell them write. They’re like, “I appreciate that. I’m grateful”.
Just because of their life experience. Sometimes they have more compassion for other people as well.
Other youth shared how gratitude had influenced their treatment of others, attitude and worldview:
I like to consider it as the golden rule, like gratitude is like the golden rule. Treat others how you like to be treated. You give them gratitude; they’re going to be as willing to give it back to you as you were to them. So, the more you give, the more they’re going to give back…. Like when you’re grateful, it affects your entire attitude. It makes you happier in your own self and if you, if somebody smiles at you on the bus or whatever, then you’re gonna be more prone to smile at somebody else or just, like, things like holding the door open or just little things go a long way, like asking how somebody’s day is.
Some youth described that the treatment experienced from caseworkers during social service delivery increased their capacity to be an adult:
I’m grateful for when I lived up in [town], I was actually part of the [program] and they actually taught me, you know, how to be an adult because in the system (foster care) half the time you don’t get taught that … you don’t want to say it but some of the places you go to, they’re just in it for the money and don’t care about you. They don’t care about what happens after you turn 18, but with the [program], they take the time out and help you to become … A human.
Caseworkers. Some caseworkers agreed that youth’s gratitude is shaped by spirituality, childhood experiences and compassion:
I think it goes back to the spirit of practice. Because once these kids or anybody has some sort of spiritual practice, you give thanks for what the Creator is giving you today, or if you believe, it’s God -or Allah – spiritual practice can have a lot to do with gratitude. One thing that I’ve always found, these kids are super resilient and often they see other kids and other situations even being worse, and they want to give, and they want to help.
Caseworkers, in turn, described that youth expressed gratitude when workers recognize and affirm their strengths. For example:
I think they (youth) experience gratitude through hearing that they can do things. That they are not the sum of past bad experiences. Again, identifying those strengths and building on those--- that they are doing the work of building a life and building a home, building those skills that are going to be key.
Caseworkers also connected the youth’s expression of gratitude with the healing process from past traumatic experiences that shape their adulthood:
I think it (gratitude) just kind of depends, it’s kind of situational. If they’ve (youth) had bad childhoods, and stuff like that. It depends on their stage of healing. Some individuals look back on their life, and they’re not happy about it. There’s others who are kind of thankful that stuff happened because it turned them into or helped shape who they are today.
Some caseworkers had no expectation for youth to demonstrate gratitude but explained that a caring attitude toward youth exposed their gratitude for the services received:
Molly (a colleague) was talking about one of her kids (clients) who said, “Thank you so much for putting up with me all these years.” Molly said, “I don’t put up with you. I care about you, and you’re important.” Sometimes, it’s hard to recognize gratitude because we’re (caseworkers) not always looking for it. Right? We don’t expect it from the kids, at least not toward us anyway. We often hear so much negative about all my social workers, my foster parents. So, when they (youth) are able to figure out things that they are grateful for, that’s pretty awesome.
3.1.2 Generosity: underlying motivation and youth culture
Youth. Opportunity youth acknowledged that generosity was difficult to accept depending on the underlying motivation, saying:
So, I’m learning to accept generosity when it’s given to me. That’s very difficult at times because it’s like, “I got it, I can do it by myself,” or “You don’t need to do that,” or maybe I feel like people feel obligated to be generous to me or to care about me. I think kind of taking things at face value. Like, generosity at face value for exactly what it is. It’s something that I’m learning to do and it is a struggle, but I’m working on it.
Some youth were vocal about their experience of helping others with whatever means they possessed and sharing with them as caseworkers had helped them. They use the term “help” in describing their generosity.
And it’s like whenever I can, I usually help them (other youths) out. Like I’ll go and buy them food. A couple of days ago, I actually went and bought my friend an entire outfit and took him out to eat. He actually he doesn’t say much when I’m with him, but he actually told me, he’s like, “I really appreciate you as a friend because I know you didn’t have to do that.”
Some described generosity as pay-it-forward in general:
I guess it’s called the “pass it on”, “pass it forward”, “pay-it-forward,” or whatever. You know, if you have extra money, you’re feeling like helping someone out, you could pay for the person (the food they have ordered) behind and hopefully it’s not like $50 or whatever. And then it might influence them to pay for the person behind them, and like continue that.
Caseworkers. Some caseworkers discussed their observation of generosity among opportunity youth as reciprocal due to their shared struggle and connected to the helping process.
When I look at generosity, gratitude and hope, I think generosity is the most established of those three in the homeless youth that I see. That’s because they have a kinship and a brotherhood even though it’s short and it’s quick. They have learned to be able to ask for what they need from a friend – a bus pass or some food or whatever just to get by – and also are able to give that when needed. And I think part of that is a deep understanding of that shared struggle and a deep understanding of what it’s like to be hungry and hurting and need something. So, the generosity exists, but it exists on like in a quick, short-term scale. It isn’t something that builds on a greater space and time.
Another caseworker emphasized generosity as an aspect of youth culture that is related to their personal experience of being homeless and empathy for peers, explaining:
The generosity piece really comes out when they’re helping each other. You know part of the street culture is you have each other’s back, and we see that play out. I would categorize that as generosity. We have kids who might get an apartment, and they’re housed and they’re taking people in – letting people stay there – because they know what that feels like. They want to help. They’re finally in a position to be able to help someone and so they do that.
3.1.3 Generosity: awareness of being taken advantage and limitations
Youth. Yet, some opportunity youth identified barriers to generosity, such as others’ lack of sharing, negative attitudes and being taken advantage of. They reported:
There’re just some people that take advantage of your generosity and sometimes help. Like personally, some people like to take advantage and I just, I tell myself, I don’t want to help, but then, no, because it’s just that person. It’s not like it’s gonna be the next person that you help out that’s gonna do the same thing that somebody else does.
Also, some youth realized the limits of helping and sharing which influenced their self-awareness about the need to be cautious and focus on their own mental wellbeing saying:
Sometimes I just need time to take care of myself, and … realizing that is difficult. Realizing that I have to step back and be generous to myself and give myself some love so that can’t get in the way of my mental health sometimes. And just needing some time to step back and sometimes I need to be on that receiving end of generosity more than what I can give.
Caseworkers. Caseworkers recognized the complex nature and limitations of generosity that may have potential detrimental consequences specifically among opportunity youth who volunteered in community programs, explaining:
I think things that we were doing with the youth leadership councils is providing opportunities to learn, for youth to go in there and then on their own terms do what makes you feel good. You know it’s volunteering, its helping other people, it’s mentoring, it’s changing laws. I think doing those kinds of things, they feel good, and they feel like they’re giving [something] as opposed to giving up your entire EBT [Electronic Benefit Transfer] card because your next-door neighbor doesn’t have any food. Or if you’re hungry yourself … kids [in the independent living program] are in constant food crisis … and they help each other out, which is wonderful but then they don’t have their own needs met. I think finding other ways to get them to see that, how you can be generous and helpful without detriment of your own needs.
3.1.4 Hope: guide in life and achieving goals
Youth. Opportunity youth internalized hope as a guide in their lives. For example, one described the connection between achieving goals and hope:
Because I set goals all the time. I’m always setting new goals to achieve and I’m always saying, “Well, I hope this works out,” normally in life you set things. You set the rules, and you set how your day is gonna be. You can’t say well this person made me mad because nobody makes you mad. You make yourself mad. You choose how to react to people, and I think with being hopeful, if you’re setting goals and you’re hopeful that you’re gonna achieve them, it motivates you more to get them done and want to be more hopeful cause you’re like, “Wow, okay, I believed in myself. Now I can do another thing.” And, you know, going a step further every single day, every minute of every single day.
Some youth used hope in their thinking to approach adversities, saying:
Whenever I’m like at my lowest. I don’t know how I’m going to continue anymore. Sometimes I’m like, “Well let’s say 10 years from now, like the thing you wanted to happen happened and you’re not around here to see it. You gotta stick around for that.” Just kinda an extra energy boost for like dealing with stuff in the meantime and hope the outcome will happen.
Caseworkers. Other caseworkers agreed that having hope was important to youth achieving their goals. Some participants instilled hope by acknowledging and encouraging youth to celebrate their successes, for example:
I think they [youth] experience hope by the dreams that they share, the goals they set, succeeding in the things that they want to accomplish. I think that’s really important with what the young people that we work with are doing, and we focus on that all the time … I mean, if it’s “Hey, you made it … you made it to school every single day this week! You got up on time!” It’s really celebrating the little things. And I know that’s kind of a sore spot nowadays with the millennial generation. A lot of people talk about kids having to celebrate every little thing, but I’m not talking about everybody gets a trophy for everything. I’m talking kids that already have major disparities…. So, I think the more we can help support that and celebrate these things, “You’ve accomplished this … this is great, you’ve got a job! You’ve been at it for six months! You love what you’re doing,” that inspires hope. Then you can think about a future. If you can’t think about the future, I don’t know how you have hope.
3.1.5 Hope: hopelessness and survival – precursor to hope
Youth. Paradoxically, some opportunity youth were critical about the concept of hope and explained using hopelessness as a precursor to hope:
For me, hope, sometimes is very basic. But I think of it not as hope, but as the opposite of hopeless. So then, I’m able to be like, “I know exactly how hopeless feels.” It’s devastating to be hopeless. So, if I think of hope as the opposite of hopelessness, that means I have motivation. That means I have some outlook for my future for everything. I’m not just sitting there like nothing’s ever going to happen in my life. I’m a failure, you know, whatever. I have that to keep me going.
Caseworkers. Like youth, some caseworkers were concerned that survival needs deterred some opportunity youth from thinking about hope, explaining:
I don’t even think they quantify it (hope) because it’s just getting by. It’s getting through tomorrow or the next hour or making it work somehow, and the hope is something that I don’t think they even have had time to consider. And if you were to ask a lot of my kids (clients) what gives you hope – because we do ask that – they struggle with a response as well. Often times they will say talking with friends, but again that’s a short quick conversation: “What you need? What do I have that you could you use?” And “Do you have any quick advice to help me kind of survive?”
3.2 What are the roles of these character virtues in the lives of opportunity youth?
3.2.1 Meaning-making of past experiences
Youth. In reflecting on their circumstances, some opportunity youth recognized that the three virtues enable reflections:
Lately, I kind of had some time to step back and look at some parts of my past that were difficult. I think it was very hard to have gratitude when everything seemed to be going wrong, but looking back on it, there are so many little things that I can be grateful for. Like, okay, so I got a meal to eat that day. It’s the small things, really.
Reflections about childhood experiences enabled meaning-making of hope and self-confidence:
For me, I learned to hope when I got taken away and put in the system (foster care). I learned that even though I wasn’t in the best placements, I was in a better situation than what I was in. All of my workers have always said, “You can do anything you put your mind to”, which is why I believe it so much in my heart that anybody can do anything they want to do no matter where they come from or who they are, and I truly believe that anyone who has hope can go so far.
Caseworkers. Caseworkers also recognized that the presence of hope in youth enables perseverance:
I would say that for a lot of the youth, hope really keeps them going. The hope that they can improve their situation, what is possible, I would say that a lot of youth really operate from a base of hope in these situations. I think when youth experience hopelessness, kind of the opposite, it’s really a great barrier for their mental health – for their activities – all of that.
3.2.2 Prosocial engagement and life goals
Youth. Some youth acted as a helper in various ways, but inherently under the philosophy of giving back, saying:
I really like to give back to kids who are in foster care. I’m very crazy about the kids in foster care. I love to volunteer at [agency for children] because I’m Native American. I just like to go visit them just because I remember how it felt not to have visitors and not to have anybody to talk to besides social workers
Caseworkers. Some caseworkers suggested teaching youth gratitude by connecting character virtues education to self-identified goals:
I think that our youth, in particular the youth that have been in the system, they didn’t choose to be there. Hope is big. They are grateful and have gratitude that somebody helped them, but they don’t know that they have that skill within themselves. So, teaching it, I don’t know how we would do that, but teaching them and showing them that they have it, that it is a magical thing. And gratitude isn’t, “You be thankful, kid”. It’s different than that – [we need to] change the dialogue around the definition of that word.
3.3 How do opportunity youth envision incorporating the three-character virtues into programing focused on character education?
3.3.1 Diversity of instructors’ background
Opportunity youth centered their advice to develop character virtues education programs on the diversity of instructors, personal growth and empathy. These youth endorsed the idea of a program with caseworkers who had diverse personal characteristics:
I would say, if it’s possible, maybe having like different people come in. Like diversity in age group, ethnicity, sexuality, background, things like class and things like that so that people can get different perspectives from like what to be grateful for.
3.3.2 Recognize youths’ personal growth and involve them
Some youth wanted caseworkers to recognize the youth’s personal-growth and work with them guided by current functioning and behavior instead of relying on past case files. Saying:
Oh, I hate that so much. I’ve gone through so many workers and therapists because they read that stuff off my file, and they just apply it to me like I could have done something 12 years ago and they’ll still think I do it today. You gotta be open-minded.
In addition, some opportunity youth not only wanted caseworkers who were flexible and approachable but also those who are ready to listen, extend empathy and involve youth in planning:
There’s a lot of social workers who haven’t like been through the foster care system. So they’re not really able to empathize with what they’re putting people through and a lot of times, Kids don’t know what’s best for them, but sometimes they do. And I feel like sometimes people don’t listen to children because they’re just children, but at the end of the day, children are innocent and youth or not, so maybe they do have a little something in their brains.
4. Discussion
This study explored the experiences of gratitude, generosity and hope in the lived experience of opportunity youth who were receiving social services and observation of their caseworkers for the possibility of incorporating the virtues into character education programming. Our findings revealed that participants concurred that character virtues were essential, influential factors in shaping youth’s thoughts and behaviors related to their survival skills, contributing to the development of a narrative around attaining social stability. They reflected on them. Consistent with existing research (Nalkur, 2009; Payir et al., 2017), youth described the interactions within the social environment in which they live as contributing to how they exhibited their virtues. It was instructive how youth easily provided examples on how they incorporate these virtues into their daily interactions with others. Caseworkers and youth viewed the virtues as supporting youth’s journeys to stability. Yet they were aware that the virtues also posed challenges for youth to maintain stability. Thus, there is a need to discuss the cost and benefits of the virtues as part of character education.
The degree to which the three virtues were displayed and acknowledged differed between youth and caseworkers. Our results showed that opportunity youth used language that suggests action and thinking (e.g. “giving back” and “paying it forward” to describe generosity; and “philosophy” and “motivation” to describe hope) in the context of scarcity of resources relative to caseworkers who used the concepts generosity, gratitude and hope. Consistent with the findings by Wood et al. (2018) on strengths, opportunity youth in our study used language such as “I have motivation” and “You gotta stick around” to employ a narrative of hope.
Youth suggested an ideal intervention program would be congruent with and inform their current experiences. They wanted to learn practical life skills which could be immediately applied, including problem-solving. Presumably, the skills would provide opportunities for more practice in virtues, especially hope, thus increasing its presence in the lives of youth. The structure of the program needed to be staffed by a diverse team of people who have similar life experiences and were willing to share their experiences, which may be an indication that the youth valued peer role modeling. They also wanted an interactive program that would include volunteer activities, an indication of giving back (generosity) and taking action (hope). As noted by Bronk et al. (2019), gratitude interventions that fail to understand and respond to cultural and socioeconomic variability may be harmful to youth who are lacking basic needs or facing life’s challenges alone.
4.1 Limitations
Our findings add to the literature on gratitude, generosity and hope and their role in attaining and maintaining social and economic stability for youth along with clear implications for character education. Yet some limitations exist. Using the focus group method may have deterred opportunity youth from sharing content about adverse childhood experiences. Instead, conducting personal interviews may promote open sharing of negative experiences with peers and caseworkers. Conducting group interviews at the sites where youth receive services may have also lessened disclosure of conflictual interactions with caseworkers. This study could have included questions about youth’s stability and their rationale for seeking services, whether foster care or homelessness to provide a comprehensive perspective of their past and current circumstances. The agency’s programs offered an array of services, and it would have been illuminating to describe services received along with the youth’s direct quotes. Although caseworkers were selected due to their involvement with youth programs, this study centered the views of opportunity youth to fill a gap in literature. Future studies could purposively sample caseworkers who are identified by opportunity youth as mentors of character education.
4.2 Implications for character education
What can we learn about interventions to shape character virtues among young adults from the perspective of opportunity youth who are involved in social services and their caseworkers? Our findings suggest that character educators and social service providers bear some responsibility to promote character strength that may subsequently support social and economic stability (Belfield et al., 2012; Ungar, 2015).
First, social service providers ought to be aware that opportunity youth inherently incorporate character virtues in their daily lives, interactions with their peers and with their caseworkers during service delivery. During the interview processes, youth were able to not only describe the three-character virtues but also to provide examples of them. Across themes, youth provided descriptions of the virtues consistent with positive youth development literature (Allen, 2018; Bronk et al., 2019; Halberstadt et al., 2016; Hussong et al., 2024; Jiang et al., 2018; Marques & Lopez, 2018; Ungar, 2015). For example, within the engagement with a higher power theme, youth described practicing gratitude as “Faith some good is coming”, “what I'm grateful for and appreciate.” The theme underlying motivation and youth culture described generosity as “outlook for my future”, “helping other youths as their caseworker had helped them” or “I got it, I can do it by myself.” Under the awareness of being taken advantage and limitation theme, generosity was illustrated by “I need to be on that receiving end of generosity more than what I can give.” Within the theme guide in life and achieving goals, hope was represented by words like “you choose how to react” and “at my lowest … I'm like … You gotta stick around for that”. Finally, youth used words like “devastating”, “I'm a failure” and “I wasn't in the best placements, I was in a better situation than what I was in” to describe the theme hopelessness and survival – precursor to hope.
Although the youth were apt at identifying and providing examples of how they incorporated the virtues, caseworkers who had provided direct services emphasized that youth possessed limited understanding consistent with literature (McAdams & McLean, 2013). The descriptions by caseworkers emphasized the cost and benefits of overextending virtues that negatively influence case planning and movement toward stability. Some caseworkers in this study expressed concerns about the appropriate use of the virtues as in the quote, “kids [in the independent living program] are in constant food crisis … and they help each other out, which is wonderful but then they don't have their own needs met”. To increase the recognition of appropriate boundaries in demonstrating character virtues specifically among opportunity youth who are seeking stability, more efforts should be directed to support caseworkers in strengthening appropriate boundaries and character building among opportunity youth.
Second, in enhancing character virtues, it is critical that character educators use descriptions that make sense for young adults with multiple experiences. When the three virtues occurred, opportunity youth referred to actions (Bronk et al., 2019), helping peers (Bekkers & Ottoni-Wilhelm, 2016) and capacity to survive (Ahmed et al., 2004). Yet, their examples were shaped by a myriad of contextual factors (Nalkur, 2009) in specific scarcity of basic needs, trusted and stable relationships. One strategy is for curriculum developers to adopt properties such as pay-it-forward to define generosity and gratitude. For example, youth used words such as: “I guess it’s called the ‘pass it on’, ‘pass it forward’, ‘pay-it-forward’ or whatever. You know, if you have extra money, you’re feeling like helping someone out, you could pay for the person [the food they have ordered] … and hopefully it’s not like $50 or whatever”. Another example is defining hope as in the following quote, “if you’re setting goals and you’re hopeful that you’re gonna achieve them, it motivates you more to get them done”. Research is needed to implement and evaluate such interventions.
Third, social services agencies should recruit and educate providers who can relate to the lived experiences of opportunity youth in addressing deficit-centered narratives (Belfield et al., 2012) by collaborating with institutions that are already doing the work. Opportunity youth were clear that they want instructors who are empathetic, who listen and who see them as individuals who have evolved can provide insight and are open-minded for example, “…So they’re not really able to empathize with what they’re putting people through and a lot of times, Kids don’t know what’s best for them, but sometimes they do. And I feel like sometimes people don’t listen….”
4.3 Conclusions
Although these recommendations provide opportunity to those interested in character education to structure and format content that is context-sensitive to the lives of opportunity youth, we do not claim that they are generalizable to all young adults. Rather, these recommendations provide the beginning pathways to character education from the voices of opportunity youth and their caseworkers through strength’s perspective relative to a deficit-centered lens. Our participants possess a level of awareness of what the three virtues of generosity, gratitude and hope look like in the context of receiving social services. Surprisingly, opportunity youth and caseworkers also recognize the interrelationship among the three virtues and the boundaries that may be required for young adults to attain social and economic stability. These new insights can inform socioecological resilience theories (Ungar, 2015) and positive youth development interventions (Hussong et al., 2024) that guide character education.
