Background: Summer camps can promote positive youth development. Unfortunately, racial, ethnic, and economic disparities contribute to inequities in camp participation and related research on marginalized youth. Consequently, it is not clear what types of camping programs work best for marginalized youth. Purpose: To conduct a quasi-experimental comparison of three summer camps described as experiential education camp (EEC), recreational camp (RC), and integrated didactic and experiential camp (IC). Methodology/Approach: Black and Latinx middle schoolers completed summer camps with the support of a community organization that also provided social-emotional learning classes during the school year. Findings/Conclusions: Dependent sample t tests and effect size comparisons on self-report collected before and after the camp showed that the EEC had small negative effects, the RC had neutral or mixed effects, and IC had positive effects. Implications: Overnight summer camp interventions can have a range of effects based on the type of activities and procedures. Outcomes may be improved by integrating didactic lessons with experiential education. Other explanations, such as positive behavioral supports and relationships with adults on the trip, could also account for differences in outcomes. Further research is needed to establish best practices for overnight camps to support the positive development of marginalized youth.

背景：夏令营可以促进积极的青年发展。不幸的是，种族、民族和经济差异导致营地参与和边缘化青年相关研究的不平等。因此，尚不清楚哪种类型的露营计划最适合边缘化青年。目的：对被描述为体验式教育营 (EEC)、休闲营 (RC) 和综合教学和体验营 (IC) 的三个夏令营进行准实验比较。方法/方法：黑人和拉丁裔中学生在社区组织的支持下完成了夏令营，该组织还在学年期间提供社会情感学习课程。结果/结论：相关样本对集中营前后收集的自我报告的t检验和效应大小比较表明，EEC具有较小的负面影响，RC具有中性或混合效应，IC具有积极影响。影响：过夜夏令营干预可以根据活动和程序的类型产生一系列影响。通过将教学课程与体验式教育相结合，可以改善结果。其他解释，例如积极的行为支持和旅行中与成年人的关系，也可以解释结果的差异。需要进一步研究以建立过夜营的最佳做法，以支持边缘化青年的积极发展。