 |
It started with a bus.
A few years back, kids in the small Central Oregon community of Prineville who were looking for something to do in the afternoon had no way to get from their school to the local recreation center. If their parents worked, as most parents do, carpooling wasn't an option. Public transportation wasn't available. Many young teens spent their late afternoons doing what comes naturally--hanging out with their buddies. "These aren't bad kids," stresses Dennis Kostelecky, curriculum coordinator for Crook County Schools, "but when some of our older residents see kids roaming downtown in a pack, they can seem threatening."
The district's first foray into after-school programming was as simple as providing a bus to the rec center. "And for this community," says Kostelecky, "that was a big step."
Around the same time, the county became involved in the School of the 21st Century initiative developed by Yale University Professor Edward Zigler. From this network, Crook County stakeholders learned that families in rural Oregon were facing stresses not unlike those felt in America's inner cities: unemployment or low wages in the service economy, alcohol use, lack of access to needed services, and not much emphasis on education within the local culture. Crook County decided to go after a federal grant to strengthen the connection between kids and school.
Three years later, Crook County's 21st Century Community Learning Center program has expanded to include a long menu of offerings for preschoolers through high school students. Vandalism is down; teachers report young children are developing readiness skills earlier in life; and students are forging stronger bonds with school. But participation didn't skyrocket overnight. It's taken time to win support from parents--not because they disapprove of the activities, but because they weren't accustomed to having such options available. "What you see in a community like this is rugged individualism," says Kostelecky. "People tend not to ask for help." At the same time, it's a small enough, tight enough place "that families get to know each other. It's a place where people do want to put their arms around kids."
What should a parent look for in a program designed for out-of-school time? The National PTA suggests parents consider the following questions:
Communities across the country are discovering the value of programs for out-of-school time, especially for children who are facing challenges. Many students, to be sure, spend their after-school time running a circuit of activities that would leave a marathoner winded. Their parents log endless miles driving from music lessons to soccer practices to private tutoring sessions, and roll up their sleeves to pitch in on complicated homework assignments. But many other children--especially those growing up in poverty--don't enjoy the same advantages. An estimated 7 million American children go home alone after school. The David and Lucille Packard Foundation reports that 30 million children--at least 12 percent of children ages five through 12--spend some time each week in "self-care," with no adult supervision. Among 12-year-olds, 35 percent are regularly left unsupervised while parents are working. For the working poor, TV is often the most affordable babysitter.
In After-School Programs: Good for Kids, Good for Communities (http://www.nwrel.org/request/jan99/index.html), authors Jed Schwendiman and Jennifer Fager from the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory caution that "after-school hours are becoming an increasingly dangerous time for many of our students." Research shows the hours from 3 to 8 p.m. as the most risky--when juveniles are most likely to engage in risk-taking or delinquent behaviors, or to be victimized by crime. Citing statistics from the U.S. Department of Education and Department of Justice, the authors caution that unsupervised teens are "far more likely to use alcohol, drugs, and tobacco, engage in criminal and other high-risk behaviors, receive poor grades, and drop out of school" than peers who have a chance to take part in constructive activities supervised by adults.
Transforming those risky hours into opportunities for learning and enrichment is a powerful idea, according to researchers who focus on youth development. Within the past decade, experts from fields including education, delinquency prevention, sociology, and mental health have been turning their attention to creating a system of care that responds to the needs of children--needs that don't stop when the final school bell rings.
The National Institute on Out-of-School Time (NIOST) has brought national attention to this area. Since its founding 20 years ago at Wellesley College, NIOST has helped to define out-of-school time as a field worthy of study and raised the professional standing of those who make their careers working with youth when school is not in session.
Researchers in the field of youth development have sharpened their focus on what children need to develop into competent adults. The Search Institute, 4-H, Boys and Girls Clubs, and other organizations have documented the importance of building on assets in the lives of children and teens. Research on resiliency underscores the importance of providing young people with positive attention from caring adults. As Dale Blyth, director of the University of Minnesota Extension Service's Center for 4-H Youth Development, explains in The Center (published by Minnesota Extension, fall 2000): "Healthy positive development is more likely to occur when young people experience a developmentally nutritious 'diet' of people, places, and opportunities over time... Research is helping us understand what these essential developmental nutrients are and how they operate."
And educators, pressed to close the achievement gap and to help all children succeed, are looking for new ways to help kids who are struggling academically keep learning after the regular school day ends. Free of grades or other performance standards, the after-school hours can open up more relaxed learning opportunities that build on kids' natural interests. Creative strategies and one-to-one tutoring can feel like fresh air to a student who's suffocating in the traditional classroom.
This attention from diverse viewpoints is translating into major investment in programs for out-of-school time. Federal funding for the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program swelled from $40 million in 1998 to $1 billion this year, expanding access to school-based extended-day programs to families in low-income urban and rural areas (see A Better Place to Be). Private sources also are focusing on the need for quality care after hours.
But while funding has never been greater for after-school programming, money alone won't provide all the answers for how best to engage and nurture kids when they aren't in class. Says Kostelecky of Crook County: "It's the sense you create in a community that will solve these problems over time."
Vocabulary Olympics. Folk dancing. Photography. Model rocketry. Improvisational acting. Jewelry making. When the regular school day ends at a Seattle middle school, kids can stick around to participate in any of these activities--or a laundry list of others--at no charge. Or they can head outside to a neighborhood stretch along MLK Jr. Way where poverty is high and most parents are more concerned with putting food on the table than lining up enrichment opportunities. No wonder nearly 85 percent of families sign up for after-school programs.
Although it's the promise of fun that lures kids to such programs--and the assurance of safety and supervision that appeals to parents--the benefits continue to accrue long after the end of the extended day. Beth Miller, senior research adviser at the National Institute on Out-of-School Time, tallies some of these gains in a recent issue of Educational Leadership (April 2001): "Growing evidence suggests that after-school program participation is associated with higher grades and test scores, especially for low-income children." She cites studies linking after-school participation with "improved attitudes toward school, higher expectations of school achievement, better work habits, and higher attendance rates."
Impressive enough, but that's not all. Kids also stand to gain in areas that go beyond academics. As Miller suggests, "The most impressive research... links participation to significantly lower involvement in risky behaviors, including lower incidence of drinking, smoking, using drugs, having sex, and becoming involved in violence, as well as increased positive behaviors--better social and behavioral adjustment, better relations with peers, more effective conflict resolution strategies, and increased parent involvement."
According to Safe and Smart: Making After-School Hours Work for Kids, a 1998 report from the U.S. Department of Education and Department of Justice, "children, families, and communities benefit in measurable ways from high-quality after-school and extended learning programs." Those measurable results include reductions in juvenile crime and risky behavior by participating youth, increased confidence and academic performance, and better social skills, including the ability to handle conflicts. The report describes such programs as "safe havens where children can learn, take part in supervised recreation, and build strong, positive relationships with responsible, caring adults and peers."
Afterschool Alliance, a nonprofit coalition, suggests that existing research supports three key arguments in favor of after-school programs: helping kids achieve in school, keeping kids safe, and helping parents balance work and family responsibilities.
One of the most significant studies in the after-school field examined 10 years of data from a program called LA's BEST (for Los Angeles's Better Educated Students for Tomorrow). Launched in 1988 as a partnership between the Los Angeles Unified School District, the city of Los Angeles, and the private sector, the program serves some 14,000 children ages five through 12 at more than 70 sites across sprawling Los Angeles. Poverty is pervasive in most children's lives, with 90 percent qualifying for free or reduced-priced lunch. Most are children of color.
The large-scale longitudinal study of LA's BEST, published in 2000 by the UCLA Center for the Study of Evaluation, found that, compared to nonparticipants, students who took part in the program regularly and for at least a year had fewer school absences; improved academic achievement on standardized tests of math, reading, and language arts; and better English proficiency (among students learning English as a second language). Afterschool Alliance calls these results "powerful evidence of the value of afterschool programming."
Paul Heckman, director of the Center for Educational Renewal and Research at the University of Washington and Carla Sanger, president of LA's BEST, writing in Educational Leadership (April 2001), note that participating students showed improvements that went beyond attendance, grades, and achievement test scores. LA's BEST students also participated more actively in school life, demonstrated positive changes in behavior, saw a future for themselves that included higher education, and reported liking school more since their involvement with the program, report Heckman and Sanger.
Reaching these results didn't happen because kids spent their afternoons doing drills and "filling blank spaces on handouts," the authors argue. Kids performed better on measurements such as standardized tests "because they had gained confidence in using what they already knew, in being mindful of their thoughts and ideas, and in pursuing their own interests," assert Heckman and Sanger. They also note that while specific activities vary from site to site, three fundamental strategies guide all LA's BEST programs: building on what students already know (rather than using a preset curriculum), helping students value their own ideas and experiences, and following students' interests when planning activities.
Sources: National Institute on Out-of-School Time, University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research
With extended-day programs cropping up in communities of all shapes and sizes, are there design principles that make sense in all settings? Both program staff and researchers will be looking for answers in a comprehensive evaluation of the 21st Century Community Learning Centers, due to be released later this year. Funded as a partnership by the federal government and the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, the study "is expected to provide definitive data that will shape programmatic and policy decisions for years to come," predicts the Afterschool Alliance in its publication, Afterschool Advocate.
But much is already known from both scientifically designed studies and years of anecdotal evidence about after-school programs. Safe and Smart, drawing on research by NIOST, highlights four desired outcomes for these programs: relationships with caring, competent, and consistent adults; access to enriching learning activities; access to safe and healthy environments; and partnerships with families, schools, and communities.
Drawing on a foundation in youth development, Blyth suggests that programs consider seven standards of quality (The Center, fall 2000). Programs should:
Safe and Smart also acknowledges that after-school programs will naturally differ from one neighborhood to the next. That's appropriate, the report acknowledges, because "successful programs respond to community needs." However, certain characteristics "are indicative of successful programs," reports Safe and Smart, including clear goals, strong leadership and effective managers, skilled and qualified staff who receive ongoing professional development, low adult-to-child ratios, varied activities, outreach to parents, and partnerships with the community.
If a program priority is to enhance students' academic skills, the report adds, "Coordinating what's learned during the regular school day with after-school activities and establishing linkages between school-day teachers and after-school personnel can go a long way toward helping students learn."
In addition, after-school programs offer an opportunity to strengthen connections between students' school and home lives. Miller, in Educational Leadership (April 2001), cites evidence that "after-school programs can link the values, attitudes, and norms of students' cultural communities with those of the school culture. In the more informal setting of an after-school program, students can connect with teachers and other adults as they explore an interest in hip-hop music, Mexican folk dancing, community service, or astronomy."
Even as support grows to historic levels for out-of-school programs, questions and concerns are emerging from some quarters about best use of kids' free time. Robert Halpern, of the Erickson Institute for Graduate Study in Child Development in Chicago, told Education Week ("After the Bell Rings," February 2, 2000): "Programs that drive too hard to accomplish more concrete goals could deprive youngsters of the 'chance to be a kid.' There needs to be a debate about this time in kids' lives and what we want it to be like. After-school programs should be kids' time and should not be used for some adult set of purposes."
Michelle Seligson, founder of NIOST and one of the earliest proponents of extended-day programs, argues in the same article for a "balanced approach" to programming. As she told Education Week, "After-school programs need to be environments for the expression of more than just academic skills." In an interview with the Harvard Family Research Project, Seligson made a case for looking at "the whole ecology of the program... not just the educational outcomes. The definition of desired outcomes should be broad so that one does not look only at test scores, but also the social and emotional development of the child, which is tantamount to doing well in school and in life." (Full text of the interview is available in the project's online newsletter, The Evaluation Exchange, http://gseweb.harvard.edu/~hfrp).
Indeed, discussion about "appropriate programming choices" and "accountability measures" makes some adults yearn for what we might call the barefoot hours--unscheduled time for children to "dawdle and daydream," as Halpern puts it. But nostalgia doesn't offer answers to the complex issues facing today's young people. "Many kids are not having the same childhoods we may remember," acknowledges a longtime educator in a rural Oregon school district.
How will today's kids remember their childhood? With any luck, they'll reminisce about spending delightful afternoons painting or learning yoga, making music or making friends, cracking the books or cracking jokes--all under the watchful gaze of adults who cared about them. "Good programs," suggests one experienced after-school coordinator, "just know how to make a place for a kid." 
|
This document's URL is: Home | Up & Coming | Programs & Projects: Northwest Education | People | Products & Publications | Topics © 2001 Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory Date of Last Update: 5/24/2002  |
