Del Dicho al Hecho, Hay Mucho Trecho: Employing Testimonio in SBYD Research

Abstract

This conceptual paper advocates for the use of Testimonio as a critical methodological approach in sport-based youth development (SBYD) research, particularly with Latine youth. Recent scholarship has called for critical methodologies that center race, expose systemic inequities, and challenge entrenched power structures in SBYD research. Testimonio does precisely that. Rooted in Latine ways of knowing, Testimonio has long been used to document the injustices faced by Latine communities in both Latin America and the United States. Defined by its five pillars—(1) bearing witness, (2) denouncing injustices, (3) consciousness-raising, (4) social justice orientation, and (5) transformational power—Testimonio is widely used in the fields of education, psychology and sociology, yet it remains absent in SBYD research. This paper argues that Testimonio offers a powerful means of capturing the lived realities of Latine youth that traditional research methods often overlook or erase. Preliminary considerations and best practices are offered for scholars and practitioners seeking to employ Testimonio within SBYD contexts.

The Latine1 youth population in the United States continues to rise with no signs of slowing2. According to 2020 U.S. Census data, Latine youth now comprise one in four youngsters under the age of 18 (Peña et al., 2023). Alongside this demographic growth, Latine youth face a range of persistent challenges, including, but not limited to, socioeconomic and health disparities (Chang-Martinez et al., 2017; Santacrose et al., 2021), mental health conditions (Galván et al., 2024; Rodríguez & Smith, 2020), educational barriers (Canizales, 2021; Sánchez et al., 2020), experiences of racism or discrimination (Ortiz et al., 2024; Salcido & Stein, 2024), and limited access to out-of-school time activities (Meier et al., 2018; Simpkins et al., 2011).

Bates and O’Quinn (2024) argued that structural and interpersonal barriers (e.g., anti-immigration policies, limited program availability, lack of qualified personnel) constrain Latine youth participation in out-of-school time programs. If unaddressed, these challenges may have long-term consequences for both Latine youth and the broader U.S. society. Gennetian and Tienda (2022) emphasized that investing in Latine youth is essential for the future strength of the nation. They identified three key areas for investment: (1) college degree completion, (2) social and economic support for families, and (3) expanded access to healthcare services. Bates and O’Quinn (2024) suggested that sport can offer a promising pathway to support these outcomes. However, they also noted a significant gap in the methods used to achieve such aims:

Even with a growing body of literature highlighting disparities in access to out-of-school time activities, scholars have yet to identify multifaceted approaches that close gaps, advance educational equity, and promote social justice for Latine youth. Sport can serve as a cultural bridge; draw on youth’s passions, strengths, and interests; and break down access barriers to educational, social, and economic resources.

(p. 46)

While sport has the potential to benefit Latine youth, participation rates remain lower compared to their peers (McGovern, 2021a; Sabo & Veliz, 2008). This gap is especially stark for Latina girls (Erkut & Tracy, 2002; McGovern, 2021b; Simpkins et al., 2011). McGovern (2021a) found that Latine youth sport participation is impacted by gender, social class, ethnicity, and language. Hernández et al. (2023) further argued that cultural mismatch presents an additional barrier. Their study of Latine high school athletes and parents revealed a disconnect between Latine cultural values which emphasize family, racial and ethnic inclusion, and belonging. These values are in stark contrast to the U.S. youth sporting culture, which lacks diversity and often prioritizes exclusivity, high costs, specialization, and hyper-competitiveness.

Sport-based youth development (SBYD) offers an alternative to this dominant model. SBYD refers to out-of-school time initiatives that use sport to promote learning and the development of life skills among youth (Perkins & Noam, 2007). These programs often aim to foster personal and social development, particularly in community-based contexts (Jones et al., 2020; Whitley et al., 2019). While SBYD initiatives have generated positive outcomes (Bruening et al., 2015; Hemphill et al., 2019; Jacobs & Wright, 2018), the theories and frameworks that underpin youth development are frequently rooted in whiteness (McKenzie & Joseph, 2023), tied to colonialism (Gardam et al., 2017), and reinforce patriarchal values (Moura, 2022).

These domineering approaches are particularly problematic for Latine youth, and other racially and ethnically minoritized youth, since many SBYD programs are often implemented in low-income communities that target youth of color (Whitley et al., 2019). Yet, many of these programs lack culturally relevant programming (Fuller et al., 2013) and rely on Westernized models of youth development that leave little room for incorporating local values, beliefs and customs (Wegner et al., 2022). If sport is to truly serve as a cultural bridge for Latine youth, as Bates and O’Quinn (2024) envision, then researchers, practitioners, and community leaders must adopt critical frameworks and methodologies that center equity and social justice. Thus, the aim of this conceptual paper is to propose a critical methodological approach (i.e., Testimonio3) that centers Latine youth perspectives, disrupts dominant forms of knowledge production, and subverts the normalized white male identity in SBYD research.

1. Purpose and Structure of Paper

The purpose of this theoretical essay is to responed directly to the invitation extended by the editors of this special issue, who have called for theoretical frameworks and methodologies that offer critical approaches to youth development through sport. I argue that Testimonio is one such critical methodological approach that is capable of interrogating the perspectives of Latine youth in SBYD contexts. As a method grounded in Latine ways of knowing (Latina Feminist Group, 2001), Testimonio centers Latine experiences (Yúdice, 1991), denounces injustices (Booker, 2002), and serves as a tool for healing, empowerment, and advocacy (Pérez Huber, 2009).

Furthermore, Testimonio can offer insight into the gender-based inequities that Latina girls face in sport, directly responding to Bates and O’Quinn’s (2024) call for multifaceted approaches that close equity gaps, advance educational opportunity, and promote social justice for Latine youth through sport. To make this case, this essay is structured into four parts. First, I review the limited body of literature on Latine populations in SBYD research. Second, I situate this paper within broader calls to critically examine SBYD research. Third, I provide background on Testimonio as a methodology, including its origins, aims, and defining pillars. Finally, I close by offering preliminary considerations and best practices for employing Testimonio in SBYD research.

2. Where Are the Latines in SBYD Research?

Although Latines represent the largest racially and ethnically minoritized group in the U.S. (Krogstad et al., 2022), they remain largely absent in SBYD research. To date, I have identified six peer-reviewed journal articles that include Latines within SBYD studies (Arinze & McGarry, 2021; Bates & O’Quinn, 2024; Castillo-Montoya et al., 2021; Fuller et al., 2013; Mala et al., 2022; Robledo et al., 2022). Of these, only three4 address the experiences of Latines within SBYD contexts (Bates & O’Quinn, 2024; Castillo-Montoya et al., 2021; Robledo et al., 2022), and just two focus on Latine youth (Bates & O’Quinn, 2024; Robledo et al., 2022). Castillo-Montoya et al. (2021) examined a conceptual model of Latinx Critical Consciousness by analyzing written reflections produced by former Latine undergraduate students enrolled in a SBYD critical-service learning course. The authors identified five key domains (i.e., multiculturalism, multilingualism, educación, spirituality, lucha/critical action) that form this model. This framework presents a promising tool for evaluating levels of critical consciousness among both Latine youth participants and Latine leaders within SBYD organizations.

The two studies that focus on Latine youth (Bates & O’Quinn, 2024; Robledo et al., 2022) highlight how sport, family, community, and the intentional incorporation of Latine culture into SBYD program design can yield meaningful outcomes. Robledo et al. (2022) investigated two sport initiatives embedded within Juntos 4-H, a youth development program in North Carolina that targets Latine youth. At the microsystem level, Latine youth formed connections with older Latine college students and were inspired to pursue higher education. At the macrosystem level, a broader sense of community was cultivated through bilingual staff, cultural music, and food. The researchers concluded that, although soccer was not a central focus of the overall Juntos 4-H program, it became an effective mechanism to achieve programmatic goals and affirm Latine culture while addressing social barriers affecting Latine youth, families, and communities.

Likewise, Bates and O’Quinn (2024) examined how participation in the Los Angeles Football Club Youth Leadership Program influenced educational and employment outcomes for Latine participants, supported program alumni, and enhanced community outreach. Among the 35 alumni studied, all had graduated from high school, 27 were enrolled in bachelor’s degree programs, and 7 were employed full-time. Statistical analyses showed increased scores in all five social skill domains of the program (i.e., college and career readiness, social skills, emotional skills, teamwork, leadership). Furthermore, the program reached an additional 473 non-program participants through sport-based community outreach efforts. The authors emphasized the program’s equity-centered design (e.g., removal of proof-of-citizenship requirements, providing access to immigration legal support, hiring bilingual staff members, providing financial support for youth leaders, centering youth voices) as key factors in addressing systemic inequities.

While both initiatives exemplify the potential of culturally relevant SBYD programs to serve Latine youth, each study acknowledged that gender was a limitation, with girls underrepresented in program activities. This finding aligns with prior research showing low sport participation levels among Latina girls (Erkut & Tracy, 2002; McGovern, 2021b; Simpkins et al., 2011). Since sport participation among Latine youth is shaped by intersecting factors such as race, class, gender, ethnicity, language, and immigration status (Bates & O’Quinn, 2024; Hernández et al., 2023; McGovern, 2021a; Robledo et al., 2022), future SBYD research would benefit greatly from approaches that place these dimensions at the center. In the remainder of this paper, I argue that Testimonio, as a critical methodological approach, can illuminate how Latine youth experience power dynamics within SBYD settings, how social inequities are reproduced within SBYD initiatives, or how SBYD programming shapes the social identities of Latine youth. In doing so, Testimonio responds to ongoing calls for more critical approaches to SBYD research.

3. Calls to Critically Examine Sport-Based Youth Development Research

In recent years, several scholars have called for more critical approaches to SBYD research, particularly with racially and ethnically minoritized youth (Arinze & McGarry, 2021; McGarry et al., 2023; McKenzie & Joseph, 2023). These authors argue that to realize social justice goals within SBYD, researchers must directly grapple with race, a dimension that traditional SBYD scholarship has often ignored. Given the lack of research focused on Latines in SBYD, identifying critical theoretical frameworks and methodological approaches that centers Latinidad presents an ongoing challenge. Yet, these researchers have proposed critical research designs that, grounded in social justice, offer promising models for conducting SBYD studies with racially and ethnically minoritized youth. I contend that Testimonio aligns with and advances the tactics they propose.

Arinze and McGarry (2021) examined the developmental challenges facing Black and Latina adolescent girls in SBYD programs. While these programs provide important benefits (e.g., improved mental, physical, and social well-being), Black and Latina girls often encounter distinct barriers to participation, including physical inactivity and exclusionary sport norms. The authors introduced a conceptual framework that integrates intersectionality, peer experiences, and peer influence to better understand how race, ethnicity, gender, and social identity shape participation in SBYD programs. They urged scholars to adopt critical, participatory approaches that not only investigate disparities but also actively involve marginalized youth in developing solutions. They also emphasized that researchers must avoid simply adding young girls into existing gender-neutral frameworks and instead need to center their voices in shaping more inclusive and effective programming.

Similarly, McKenzie and Joseph (2023) argued that Black Canadians have been systematically excluded from dominant narratives surrounding Canadian hockey and national identity, despite their significant historical contributions to the sport. Drawing on counter-storytelling (Solórzano & Yosso, 2001), which is rooted in Critical Race Theory (CRT), the authors sought to disrupt this whitewashed history and resist what they term “Black social death” (p. 146), or the systematic marginalization and erasure of Black communities. Highlighting the Colored Hockey League and the St. Catharines [sic] Orioles team, they demonstrated how hockey was historically used as a tool for Black community empowerment, cultural pride, and resistance. The scholars advocated for CRT-informed approaches that center Black voices, adopt intersectional and anti-colonial frameworks, and use counter-narratives not only as scholarly method but as community praxis to resist erasure and reimagine sport history through a social justice-oriented lens.

McGarry et al. (2023) take this argument further by urging scholars to embrace anti-racist research methods (e.g., CRT, counter-storytelling, youth participatory action research) in SBYD. These methods, they argued, are essential to centering race, exposing racism, and disrupting the power imbalances between academic researchers and community members. The authors called on scholars to move beyond performative inclusion and commit to genuine power-sharing with racially and ethnically minoritized youth throughout the research process. They encouraged deep reflexivity, the centering of youth voices and racial realities, and the use of creative, culturally responsive methods (e.g., life mapping, counter-storytelling). Their vision demands not just methodological change but a fundamental reimagining of researcher positionality, knowledge production, and community partnership.

As these scholars demonstrate, critical approaches are essential to reimagining SBYD in ways that do not simply serve youth of color but actively engage them in transforming the field. Without such approaches, researchers risk reinforcing the racialized power dynamics between white individuals in positions of power (e.g., funders, organizational leaders, coaches) and the racially and ethnically minoritized youth that many SBYD programs aim to serve. Moreover, these critical approaches are necessary to uncover and respond to the cultural, communal, and structural needs of low-income (Fuller et al., 2013), disadvantaged (Wegner et al., 2022), and underserved communities (Whitley et al., 2019).

McGarry et al. (2023) further contend that SBYD research remains “race neutral,” noting that many SBYD organizations “make decisions that do not adequately incorporate the perspectives of Black and Latino/a youth” (p. 185). To move beyond such neutrality, researchers must reject dominant white, male-centered ideologies that plague SBYD, and adopt research designs rooted in justice, equity, and community knowledge. Testimonio is one such approach. Long used to center Latine voices in disciplines such as education (Mizell, 2022), psychology (Domínguez et al., 2020), sociology (Costa et al., 2020), and anthropology (Nájera, 2009), Testimonio offers a method for producing knowledge that pushes for social change (Pérez Huber, 2009). In the following section, I provide an overview of Testimonio as a methodology, its origins, purposes, and defining pillars, before exploring its potential for advancing SBYD research.

4. Testimonio as a Methodology

The origins of Testimonio are rooted in Latin American scholarship (Latina Feminist Group, 2001; Yúdice, 1991) with early examples emerging in the literary and political work of authors such as Barnet (1969), Bueno (1978), and Walsh (1957). Since its inception, Testimonio served as a means of documenting the lived experiences of Latine communities, both in the U.S. and across Latin America, and to speak out against the injustices they have endured (Booker, 2002; Pérez Huber, 2009). Perhaps the most notable account of Testimonio work is Rigoberta Menchú’s (1984) testimonio which chronicles how she, her family, and fellow Quiché people were economically exploited, brutally oppressed, and, in many cases, murdered by Guatemalan landowners, government officials, and military forces. Menchú’s narrative illustrates the power of Testimonio as a form of resistance that challenges dominant historical and political discourses.

While there is no singular, universally accepted definition of Testimonio, I draw from Pérez Huber’s (2009) articulation: “a verbal journey of a witness who speaks to reveal the racial, classed, gendered, and nativist injustices they have suffered as a means of healing, empowerment, and advocacy for a more humane present and future” (p. 644). This definition highlights Testimonio’s dual purpose of documenting lived experiences and denouncing injustice.

Since its emergence, Testimonio has taken on many forms (e.g., oral, written, artistic, embodied through dance) and has functioned as a vehicle for recording both personal and collective memory (Latina Feminist Group, 2001; Pérez Huber, 2009; Yúdice, 1991). It has also served as a means of speaking out against structural violence (Beverley, 2005; Booker, 2002) and as a method for collective resistance, cultural survival, and solidarity building (Brabeck, 2003). Through these functions, Testimonio challenges dominant narratives, fosters critical consciousness, and contributes to the pursuit of social justice for Latine communities (Latina Feminist Group, 2001; Pérez Huber, 2009).

Aligned with other critical methodological approaches (e.g., critical ethnography, participatory action research, critical discourse analysis), Testimonio seeks to disrupt dominant social norms and power structures to reveal the social inequalities that Latines sustain. In this sense, Testimonio also acts as a political strategy that “incorporates political, social, historical, and cultural histories that accompany one’s life experiences as a means to bring about change through consciousness-raising” (Delgado Bernal et al., 2012, p. 364). In the following section, I offer my interpretation of five core methodological pillars that define Testimonio, illustrating how they function and why they matter for research in SBYD contexts.

5. The Five Pillars of Testimonio

While Testimonio has a long and varied history, there is no singular handbook or text that explicitly outlines its core methodological pillars. What I offer here, then, should not be read as a definitive framework but, rather, as a working interpretation of the essential traits that have emerged across scholarly literature. Based on this synthesis, I propose five interrelated pillars that characterize Testimonio: (1) bearing witness, (2) denouncing injustices, (3) consciousness-raising, (4) social justice orientation, and (5) transformational power.

The first and most foundational pillar is bearing witness, a concept emphasized by numerous scholars (Beverley, 2005; Delgado Bernal et al., 2012; Latina Feminist Group, 2001; Pérez Huber, 2009). As Beverley (2005) noted, “the word testimonio carries the connotation in Spanish of the act of testifying or bearing witness” (p. 50). The Latina Feminist Group (2001) described this process as essential to documenting lived experiences that might otherwise be forgotten, erased, or excluded from historical record. Pérez Huber (2009) further argued that bearing witness connects human beings to experiences and struggles beyond one’s lived realities. In practice, this means sharing one’s testimonio so that the receiver, or what Yúdice (1991) and Beverley (2005) refer to as the interlocutor, can bear witness to it. In research contexts, scholars often serve as interlocutors when collecting and engaging with participants’ testimonios.

Denouncing injustices is the second pillar of Testimonio, which is closely intertwined with bearing witness. While related methodologies like personal narratives and oral history may speak to personal or communal struggles, they do not inherently demand a critique of structural oppression. In contrast, Testimonio is, by definition, a denunciation. From its earliest iterations, Testimonio has been employed to expose and contest the injustices faced by marginalized Latine communities (Booker, 2002). For example, the Latina Feminist Group (2001), a collective of racially and ethnically diverse Latina feminists from across the U.S., used Testimonio to denounce the institutional violence and personal assaults its members encountered in their personal trajectories through higher education. Similarly, Pérez Huber (2009) used Testimonio to document the experiences of undocumented and U.S.-born Chicana women as they navigated racist nativist discourses during their undergraduate education trajectories. By denouncing injustices, Testimonio becomes a vehicle for social critique and resistance.

The third pillar is consciousness-raising (Beverley, 2005; Pérez Huber, 2009; Yúdice, 1991), which connects closely to Freire’s (1970) concept of conscientização, or critical consciousness, a process by which individuals and communities develop a critical awareness of their social realities. Testimonio is deeply rooted in the liberationist movements of Latin America and mirrors Freire’s pedagogical emphasis on naming oppression in order to transform it. As Delgado Bernal et al. (2012) described, Testimonio “is a process that brings together critical consciousness and the will to take action to connect with others with love and compassion to bring collective healing” (p. 368). Thus, Testimonio does not merely record injustice. It provokes reflection, politicization, and a desire for transformation among both storytellers and listeners.

The fourth pillar is Testimonio’s social justice orientation, which builds directly upon its consciousness-raising purpose. Yúdice (1991) explained that within the Liberation Movement, Testimonio was not used by elites to speak on behalf of the poor, but by oppressed individuals themselves to advocate for their own liberation. The method aims to position marginalized people as active agents in the struggle for justice, instead of passive victims. As such, Testimonio is a liberatory tool that enables individuals and communities to speak truth to power and mobilize for change.

The fifth and final pillar is transformational power. Pérez Huber (2010) reflected on this power when she wrote that Testimonio “in all its uncertainty, pain, and messiness, becomes something beautifully powerful” (p. 851). Yúdice (1991), in his analysis of Menchú’s testimonio, noted that Menchú’s text transforms into an embodiment of solidarity projecting the “absence of domination […] and the general practice of love” (p. 27). For the Latina Feminist Group, Testimonio was not only a way to share stories but also a method of transforming the academic disciplines that have historically devalued and subjugated Latine knowledge. As a transformative project (Beverley, 2005), Testimonio works to dismantle structural injustices in society, academia, and in other aspects of Latine culture (Pérez Huber, 2009). It also offers a way to reclaim Latine history, epistemology, and identity (Latina Feminist Group, 2001). Together, these five pillars provide a methodological foundation for employing Testimonio as a critical, justice-oriented, methodological approach to SBYD research. In the final section, I explore how Testimonio might be employed within the field of SBYD.

6. Employing Testimonio in Sport-Based Youth Development Research

In Mexican culture, dichos (sayings) are powerful expressions of wisdom, life lessons, and cultural reflections. I use the saying “del dicho al hecho, hay mucho trecho” as a partial title for this paper to signify the challenge of employing Testimonio in SBYD research. This dicho loosely translates to “from what is said to what is done, there is a long way,” akin to the idiom “easier said than done.” While the English version could have served as an appropriate title, I intentionally center the dicho mexicano to draw upon my cultural upbringing, or what Delgado Bernal (2001) calls the pedagogies of the home. In doing so, I situate my scholarship en mi idioma natal (my native language), mis raices mexicanas (my Mexican roots), and pay homage to mis profesores de la vida (my professors of life)—mis padres (my parents), Marta y Arturo Morales.

This title, then, is more than a phrase. It is an act of resistance against the epistemological violence embedded in knowledge production that routinely dismisses or delegitimizes non-English languages5 (Maleku, 2025). I am also intentional in disrupting institutional formatting practices—such as those in APA, MLA, and Chicago styles—that require Spanish text to be italicized, thereby rendering non-English text as foreign or other (Balcárcel, 2018). Inverting this norm, I italicize the English translations instead. These small but meaningful acts of opposition bring my cultural knowledge, bilingual communication style, and familial learning practices into the foreground as the foundation of this work.

At the same time, I recognize that an apartheid of knowledge (Delgado Bernal & Villalpando, 2002) exists in SBYD research concerning Latine youth. Dominant research paradigms continue to marginalize Latine epistemologies, rendering them invisible or illegitimate. Challenging this status quo is not only difficult; it is also a deeply political and often an isolating endeavor. As I’ve emphasized throughout this paper, the literature on Latines in SBYD remains disturbingly limited. This dearth of representation, combined with the dominance of Western frameworks, poses a serious challenge to the development of inclusive, equity-driven, and culturally grounded SBYD programs. Without critical and culturally responsive methods like Testimonio, the lived realities, values, and worldviews of Latine youth are easily overlooked or reduced to simplistic tropes. In this context, adopting Testimonio is both a methodological choice and a political and epistemological commitment. In the next section, I offer key considerations and best practices for scholars, practitioners, and SBYD leaders who wish to engage with Testimonio in a way that is both ethical and impactful.

7. Preliminary Considerations for Scholars, Practitioners, and SBYD Leaders

In her seminal work on Testimonio, Pérez Huber (2009) offered a principal, and essential consideration: Testimonio is a “tool for the oppressed, and not the oppressor. Testimonio should not function as a tool for elite academics to ‘diversify’ their research agendas or document their personal stories” (p. 650). While technically anyone can employ Testimonio, Pérez Huber warned that scholars who lack a critical orientation should refrain from using this methodology. Likewise, Tierney (2000) cautioned that Testimonio is vulnerable to appropriation when individuals from privileged social positions adopt narratives of struggle or adversity, thereby undermining its critical and emancipatory aims.

This is not to suggest that privileged, white, or critical scholars with some marginalized identities (e.g., gender, sexual orientation, ability) are inherently excluded from engaging with Testimonio. The point is that those who choose to employ it must do so with an intentional commitment to its purpose: to document and denounce the injustices experienced by oppressed and marginalized communities. This chief consideration is consistent with other critical race frameworks and methodologies, such as intersectionality and counter-storytelling, which seek to challenge dominant perspectives by centering the voices and viewpoints of marginalized groups (Crenshaw, 1991; Solórzano & Yosso, 2001).

A second important consideration in employing Testimonio is the question of authenticity. Several scholars (Garcia-Hills, 2021; Pérez Huber, 2009; Yúdice, 1991) have forewarned other researchers that both the methodology itself and the testimonios of participants have long been subject to critique for allegedly lacking authenticity. A prominent example is Stoll’s (1999) critique of Menchú’s testimonio, which sought to discredit her lived experiences and delegitimize her account. Such critiques are rooted in Eurocentric and colonial understandings of truth, which often function to contest or suppress subaltern voices.

Scholars like Pérez Huber (2009) and Garcia-Hills (2021) reject these critiques, arguing that authenticity, when framed through a colonial lens, becomes a tool of epistemological control. Instead, they assert that the value of Testimonio lies in its ability to center Latine voices and realities without deference to the white gaze. Similarly, López et al. (2022) defended Testimonio as a methodology that refuses to justify its knowledge claims on terms defined by whiteness or academic gatekeeping. As a political strategy, Testimonio works to resist epistemological inequality by affirming the legitimacy of Latine knowledge systems and refusing to seek validation through dominant paradigms (Delgado Bernal & Villalpando, 2002). Taken together, these considerations emphasize that employing Testimonio in SBYD contexts requires more than methodological interest; it demands a deep ethical and political commitment to honoring the experiences of Latine youth and confronting the systems that marginalize them.

8. Ethical Research Considerations and Best Practices

Additionally, utilizing Testimonio within SBYD contexts involves the ethical complexities of conducting research with Latine youth. One of the foundational myths underpinning many SBYD frameworks is what Coakley (2015) called the Great Sport Myth—the belief that sport is inherently good, pure, and developmental. This myth assumes that sport participation naturally leads to personal growth, which is an underlying characteristic of SBYD frameworks. However, sport is also a site where racism, exclusion, prejudice, and imbalanced power dynamics are enacted and reproduced (Carter-Francique & Flowers, 2013; Singer, 2005). The call for this special issue underscores the need to move beyond such myths and engage youth development through sport from a critical perspective.

Consequently, any critical approach to SBYD research, particularly one that incorporates Testimonio, must take seriously the emotional, cultural, and political stakes involved. Asking Latine youth to reflect on their sport experiences may mean inviting them to revisit environments that caused them harm. Researchers must approach this work with intentional care and responsibility. I conclude my case for employing Testimonio in SBYD research by offering six best practices for developing an ethical research framework.

(1).

Relational Ethics and Positionality in Sport Contexts. Sport environments, including SBYD programs, are often structured by hierarchical relationships (e.g., coach/player, adult/youth, institution/family), which can make it difficult for Latine youth to safely voice their experiences of injustice. Researchers should therefore adopt a stance of acompañamiento (accompaniment; Sepúlveda, 2011), walking alongside youth not only as researchers but as critical listeners and advocates. Relational ethics in this context must prioritize trust, mutual respect, and accountability between researcher and participant (Denzin, 2018; Delgado Bernal & Villalpando, 2002). Researchers should also engage in reflexive positionality (Fine, 2018) and ethical self-location (Grande, 2004), especially if they have personal or professional experience in sport, in order to critically interrogate how institutional power dynamics and dominant sport discourses shape the research relationship and context. These dynamics in SBYD settings often reproduce dominant sport discourses and diminish youth knowledge systems (Delgado Bernal & Villalpando, 2002; Gillborn, 2005).

(2).

Informed and Ongoing Consent in Competitive or Institutional Contexts. Consent must be understood as a dynamic, ongoing process, not a one-time formality (Trainor & Bouchard, 2013). In keeping with youth participatory frameworks (Cammarota & Fine, 2008), participants should receive clear, age-appropriate information about the study’s purpose, procedures, and risks. Given that Latine youth often participate in sport under institutional authority–via schools, clubs, leagues, or SBYD organizations–they may not always feel free to decline participation. Extra care should be taken to communicate that participation is voluntary and will not affect their standing in school, sports teams, or SBYD programs. Latine youth must also be empowered to define the boundaries of their own storytelling and to pause, revise, or withdraw their testimonio at any time. This consideration respects their autonomy and guards against coercion, especially in settings structured by adult or institutional power.

(3).

Emotional Safety and Trauma-Informed Practice. Since Testimonio can elicit sport-based trauma that is linked to structural violence—including experiences of racial exclusion, language discrimination, ethnic stereotyping, and cultural silencing—it must be approached through a trauma-informed lens (Ginwright, 2018; Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Administration, 2014). This includes creating emotionally safe spaces, offering alternative forms of expression (e.g., storytelling, visual art, photographs), and providing time for youth to process their experiences. If needed, culturally affirming mental health support should be made available before, during, and after the Testimonio process to ensure youth are not retraumatized.

(4).

Confidentiality, Anonymity, and Narrative Ownership. While Testimonio often values visibility as a political act (Beverley, 2005), sport is a highly public space where athletes, teams, and programs are visible and subject to surveillance. Researchers should honor participants’ agency in choosing whether they wish to remain anonymous or be named. Narrative ownership must remain with the youth. Participants should have the opportunity to review and co-edit their testimonios, aligning with a relational, not merely procedural, form of member checking (Smith, 2012). This consideration ensures that youth feel respected and safe in how their stories are represented and disseminated.

(5).

Safeguarding Cultural and Community Integrity. Testimonios often reflect broader community and cultural dynamics, implicating family, neighborhood, and communal histories. When youth speak about racism, exclusion, or marginalization, researchers must carefully balance the call to expose injustice with the need to uphold participant dignity and community integrity. To avoid misrepresentation or harm, interpretive practices should be grounded in Latino Critical Theory or culturally sustaining pedagogies (Delgado Bernal & Alemán, 2017). Doing so ensures that youth narratives are not reduced to trauma but instead are uplifted as stories of resilience, resistance, and knowledge-making.

(6).

Reciprocity and Advocacy Beyond the Field. In line with the activist and liberatory nature of Testimonio (Pérez Huber, 2009), research dissemination must be grounded in reciprocity and advocacy. Youth should be consulted about how and where their stories are shared. Dissemination should not be limited to academic spaces. Youth and community stakeholders can co-develop formats for sharing testimonios, from school-based workshops and SBYD training materials to digital zines, community art exhibits, or multimedia storytelling projects. Wherever appropriate, youth should be invited to co-author or co-present findings. This practice aligns with the principles of youth participatory action research and justice-centered scholarship (Cammarota & Fine, 2008; Smith, 2012) and ensures that the research has material impact beyond publication.

9. Concluding Thoughts

The special issue on “Critical Approaches to Youth Development through Sport” invites stakeholders to move beyond traditional, normative perspectives that often position racial and ethnically minoritized youth through deficit lenses. In response to this call, I have presented Testimonio as a critical methodological approach for centering the experiences of Latine youth in sport-based youth development (SBYD) research contexts.

This conceptual paper has highlighted key factors that influence Latine youth participation in both out-of-school time programs and organized sport. I have also situated this work alongside broader scholarly calls to conduct critical SBYD research with racially and ethnically minoritized youth. In doing so, I introduced the origins and purposes of Testimonio, outlined by five core methodological pillars: (1) bearing witness, (2) denouncing injustices, (3) consciousness-raising, (4) social justice orientation, and (5) transformational power. Finally, I have proposed how this methodology might be employed within SBYD settings. For this purpose, I included three essential considerations for scholars, practitioners, and SBYD leaders engaging in Testimonio work, along with six best practices for developing an ethical research framework with Latine youth.

Testimonio is a critical methodological approach that is grounded in Latine epistemologies. It affirms relational practices, fosters cultural accountability, and maintains a deep commitment to social justice. When thoughtfully and ethically employed, Testimonio has the potential to not only illuminate the lived experiences of Latine youth in sport but also advance equity, transform knowledge production, and reimagine how youth development through sport can look.

While Testimonio can provide Latine youth with a powerful platform to articulate their lived realities and challenge dominant narratives in SBYD or other sporting contexts, it also requires a rigorous, culturally responsive, and ethical research design. The aim of this paper is addressed at Latine youth. However, to further examine SBYD organization structures, future research should also consider the use of Testimonio with adults (e.g., college students, program personnel, organizational leaders) who actively engage in SBYD programming as volunteers or paid staff members. Additionally, the testimonios of parents or caregivers of Latine youth would provide a rich perspective that can incorporate the pedagogies of the home (Delgado Bernal, 2001) into the design of SBYD programming.

Since Latine youth do not participate in sports as much as their peers, and because there is an apartheid of knowledge on Latines in SBYD contexts, employing Testimonio in SBYD research can prove to be an arduous endeavor yet to be done. To alleviate some of the burden, future research should rely on methodological texts to offer specific methods or procedures for collecting testimonios of research participants. Though some books provide some insights on these processes, they are either outdated (Randall, 1985), centered on adult women (Latina Feminist Group, 2001), based in literature (Beverley, 2005), or a compilation of essays of a journal’s special issue (Delgado Bernal & Alemán, 2017). Thus, future research should address providing guidance on the methods and procedures of employing Testimonio with Latine youth. In sum, employing Testimonio as a critical methodological approach in SBYD can be a fruitful endeavor in centering the experiences of Latine youth and contributing to the transformation of the field. However, there is much work to be done in this trailblazing effort or, as the partial title indicates, “del dicho al hecho, hay mucho trecho.”