The problems we face today cannot be solved with the same level of thinking we were at when we created them.
--Albert Einstein

Isaac Newton, by applying the principles of reductionism, compartmentalization, and objective measurement, transformed how people understood the workings of the world in the 17th century. His theories gave rise to a sense that not only could we predict future outcomes using scientific methodologies, but also that we could gain control of objective reality. Four centuries later, however, prediction and control no longer define our goals. Margaret Wheatley notes that Newton's influence led us to believe that change

. . . occurs as a direct result of force exerted from one person to another . . . We broke knowledge into separate disciplines and subjects, built offices and schools with divided spaces, developed analytic techniques that focus on discrete factors, and even counseled ourselves to act in fragments, to use different "parts" of ourselves in different settings.

While the above is but a simple description of the impact of Newtonian physics, we can clearly see its impact on current theory and practice. Youth development pioneers have boldly pushed against Newtonian assumptions by focusing on development as evolutionary and attempting to address the intuitive need for holism and relationship. Yet, a close look at the language of the majority of youth development constructs reveals Newtonian influence. For example, it is common to hear prominent leaders describe youth development as a "front-end approach," something to be done before prevention, intervention, or treatment is needed. Or, that youth development is about youth being engaged in significant ways in communities, such as on mayor's advisory boards, in community service, and so forth. While both ideas are progressive, they remain rooted in a more fragmented and transactional view of the world.

Community Youth Development (CYD) is a holistic and dynamic approach to youth and community, which, because it is fundamentally rooted in the new sciences, moves well beyond most current thinking in this area. CYD is intentionally rooted in the sciences of the 20th and 21st centuries, quantum and chaos theory, as well as new understandings of biology and ecology. As these new sciences emerged through the study of atomic and subatomic particles, the common laws of Newtonian physics begin to deteriorate. Quantum theory essentially posits that everything exists in relationship to everything else and that these relationships are constantly changing.

Wheatley quotes K.C. Cole (Sympathetic Vibrations: Reflections on Physics As a Way of Life, 1985), who describes the impact of the discovery of quantum theory:

Most of the other giant steps in our understanding of nature were really evolutionary in that they sprang from previously established foundations: facts were reorganized, or connected in new ways, or seen in a different context. Quantum theory, however, broke away completely from those foundations; it dove right off the end. It could not (cannot) adequately be described in metaphors borrowed from our previous view of reality because many of those metaphors no longer apply. But the net result has not been to obscure reality or make the nature of things more elusive and murky. On the contrary, most physicists would agree that what quantum theory has brought to science is exactly the opposite--concreteness and clarity.

In fact, according to Wheatley, "quantum imagery challenges so many of our basic assumptions, including our understanding of relationships, connectedness, prediction, and control." While a Newtonian approach would argue for maintaining order, chaos theory establishes the need for disturbance of order to create new systems to deal better with current realities. In the terms of new science, systems essentially organize themselves around the new data using their own methods for surviving and growing. The result may be chaotic transformation, but the chaos is necessary for genuine realignment and embracing of the new. Through this process, bold new system structures form rather than permutations of what previously existed.

CYD, given its foundation in the new sciences, moves well beyond current approaches to youth development. The CYD Framework is intentionally designed to be as large and open as possible while still retaining integrity. Youth development is inextricably linked with family and community development, which are in turn linked to our connection to the earth. The relationship of the parts and the quality of the relationships are paramount.

Also fundamental to CYD is the notion of addressing underlying conditions above and beyond purely superficial situations. Examining the relationship of youth and adults in our society is one example. As long as youth are viewed and treated as objects, adults will continue to give them learning opportunities. The alternative--the opportunity--is to create a "practice field" with them, so adults and youth can learn together on a lifelong basis.

A body of research has been evolving over time, which endorses "appreciative inquiry"--i.e., engagement with people and projects in process as opposed to being set apart and therefore more "objective." This research is clearly more in line with a CYD approach. But how can it help us to learn more about the vast array of relationships and the influences they have on systems, particularly as this relates to the healthy development of youth, families, and communities?

As a large and open frame, CYD invites interaction. The attempt of CYD leaders is not to have everyone agree to a framework: that would be antithetical to a new science approach. Rather, CYD defines guiding principles that are congruent with new sciences and engage others in dialogue around how to make the principles come to life in a myriad of different situations. Given the impact we seek, the real conversation is about what strategies and actions work and why, what actions catalyze transformational change, and how we can optimize learning across fields like science, organizational development, community development, and youth development.

Despite the strides that have been made, some CYD practitioners, after several years of concerted effort, have become discouraged that the outcome of their work "merely" amounts to enhanced levels of youth participation. We see that as a reason to rejoice! Youth participation may be the easiest way for youth development to take hold. It will in an open environment lead to youth engagement, then eventually to youth/adult partnerships, then ultimately to larger manifestations. As a large frame, CYD is about intentional social change; what Native Americans describe as staying focused on the Seventh Generation. In other words, we gauge every action by what impact it will have on people seven generations from now. We do not have control but we do have influence. We understand that everything cannot be accomplished at once and consequently look for what actions have the most leverage in creating desired change.

Our understanding of CYD and its implications is constantly evolving. It will take all of the best thinkers and practitioners--CYD Journal readers among them--to analyze, translate, and disseminate CYD into readily accessible form. Because the whole is so much greater than the parts, we need each other to advance the important work of seeking quality relationships--and welcoming chaotic transformation! I extend a strong appeal to our readers and CYD thinkers to become engaged in the dialogue by sending your comments, thoughts, theories, and practices to CYD Journal.

Della M. Hughes is a Visiting Fellow at the Heller Graduate School, Brandeis University, and is the former executive director of the National Network of Youth.