Running head: After-school programs



Running head: After-school programs

Effectiveness of After-school Programs

Paul Tarabochia

Western Washington University

Table of Contents

I. Title

II. Table of Contents

III. Introduction

IV-VII. Literature Review

VIII-X. Methods Section

XI-XII. Results

XIII. Appendix A

XIV. Appendix B

XV. Abstract

XVI. References

Many people believe that the quality of child care is what determines the future of nation. In Washington State, education is the only institution on the budget that essentially does not have a limit (Washington State Budget Policy). This means the citizens of Washington State and the U.S. are willing to pay almost anything to ensure that quality education is provided to younger generations as a way to invest in the future. This study will seek to explore the effectiveness of after-school programs in high poverty neighborhoods. This investigation is necessary in order to make the proper evaluations on which to base decisions regarding adjustments and improvements on a local and national level. This study will be examining high poverty areas more specifically because of past results of programs being implemented in those neighborhoods.

LITRATURE REVIEW

After-school programs have been around for a long time. There are countless sources of research that I have come across that dates back 30 years. Be it additional classes for children, after school day care, or kid centers where parents will send their children so that they are safe, there are many different programs found around the country.

A rough definition of after-school programs, according to Coates (2008), is simply any structured and supervised activity that takes place after school hours. Just about every educational institution (except universities) offers some variation of an after-school program (Morris & Shaw, 1999). After all, the average school day for young children is a lot shorter in comparison to an average work day of an adult (Shumow & Vandell, 1999). That is one of the main reasons after-school programs are needed, to provide free child care to parents. If an average job schedule is 9AM to 5PM, what is a parent to do when a child gets out around 3PM? After-school programs are the answer to many parents, teachers and researchers.

SACC (School Aged Child Care) programs do not always provide equivalent positive effects. For the most part, researchers see any program better than none at all. However the variety across the nation can be astonishing. According to Rosenthal & Vandell (1996), the ratio of adult to children varies greatly across many programs. Also, the level of education of the supervisors can effect how their program compares to others. Studies have found that the ratio can range anywhere from 4:1 to 25:1. The level of education can be less than a high school diploma all the way to a master’s degree (Rosenthal & Vandell, 1996). When the ratio of children to adults is lower, the adult can provide more one on one care and attention to the children, and the results of that particular SACC tend to be higher.

Work-based antipoverty programs come up often in the world of after-school care. After-school programs or shelters are strategically placed in high crime or high poverty neighborhoods. Many of these neighborhoods consist of single parents which can be very difficult. Bos, Crosby & Duncan (2001) inform us of these work-based antipoverty programs. One of the more successful projects is called New Hope and it worked with single moms with kids in elementary school. This particular after-school program focuses on providing child care as well as assisting parents in finding employment and health care. This program’s goals are stated early and clearly, and therefore are able to deliver to these families where there is a high need of assistance. By providing after school care, and assisting the single parents with basic societal processes, the effectiveness is clear to researchers abroad.

Risk factors for our youth today consist of poverty, community violence and family distress (Posner & Vandell, 1994). With the combination of these three, or even the exposure to one, a child’s development can be affected in a number of ways. Psychological disorders may arise along with aggressive behavior (Eccless & Templeton, 2002). Studies show that psychological disorders such as depression and anxiety are highest among those below the poverty line. Lauer (2006) informs us about the hardships and stress that build up over the years and eventually contribute to many of these disorders. The constant struggle for survival can change the human nature of some individuals, leading to these disorders. Most would prefer these traits not be found in their children, and Eccless and Templeton (2002) believe that with after-school programs fulfilling their purpose by providing safety and a positive environment, these traits may be extinguished and avoided.

An important quality of after-school programs is that they provide child care for parents who work either late, or odd hours. Halpern (1999) describes after-school programs as normative developmental support and it should be available to any low-income family if it is desired. Halpern continues to explain that too many children are on their own for too long once school is out. Parents are often working so they may be able to financially support their kids, but not having as many resources available for child care can make this all the more difficult. Studies showed that children growing up in poverty and with a lack of supervision show increased chances of behavioral issues and having trouble with the law (Chaudry & Corcoran, 1997).

After thoroughly researching this question, it seems apparent that after-school programs have a positive effect on children. Although these programs do not offer all the same services, they all benefit their communities in numerous ways. Examples of these benefits include child care, additional tutoring, more structure through sports or clubs, and the gesture of a child being safe (Shumow & Vandell, 1999). Places like YMCA’s and Boys & Girls Clubs of America offer some of these aspects. These places may have no focus on further academics, or that may be the entire motive for a certain program. Either way, these programs are either fulfilling their mission, or are simply working and helping prevent children from getting into trouble. They offer healthier choices for children such as sports or clubs, and they provide them with positive role models to look up to.

According to Mary Bryson (1993), it is very easy for kids (especially those growing up in high poverty/high crime) to obtain drugs and alcohol and be involved in illegal actions. It is available and common in high poverty areas, as studies and police records show (see Appendix A). This is why there is a need for after-school programs. Providing a safe and supervised area for children undoubtedly keeps them out of trouble and risky behavior.

Boys and Girls Clubs of America have been around since the late 1800’s (See appendix B). Trying to determine its effectiveness across America is important in evaluating it as a service. According to Kaltreider and Mark (1995), Boys and Girls Clubs are one of the most effective (and common) after-school programs in the country. They go on to discuss that there are many reasons for this. One is that it has been around for many years. This is noticed by most and a positive reputation is built from it. Studies have shown that the crime rate of youth in high poverty areas has dramatically decreased in places where Clubs have been established (Kaltreider & Mark, 1995).

Boys and Girls Clubs also have sexual activity prevention programs, and that is where the bulk of Kaltreider and Mark’s research comes into play in this research project. Not enough programs in America have sexual education implemented into their mission statement or just their organization as a whole (Lauer, 2006). Not only do most Boys and Girls Clubs practice this, but an analysis of its effectiveness was done by Kaltreider and Mark, and the results are pleasing to sponsors of the Clubs. They found that out of random samples of club members and non club members, the rate of teen pregnancy and STD’s is far less than those who are either not in after-school programs, or who are but don’t receive sexual education. It is studies like these that help strengthen the effectiveness of after-school programs.

METHODS SECTION

From grades of K through about the 6th grade is the most prominent age group in which school programs appear to be needed (Shumow & Vandell, 1999), which is why this study involves children from this age group. For this study, the children will be assessed in various areas of their development. These areas will include their family life, test scores, if they have siblings, and the programs or extra curricular activities they may already be involved in. All of this information will be delivered through a survey that will be passed out to a random set of households nationally. It is estimated that about 90 million children attend after school programs. It is impossible to survey all of those clients so the goal will be about 5 million children spaced across a few million families, and the survey will be administered via email, regular mail, and take home surveys that will be passed out from local after-school programs. This way a wide array of results will be collected. The situations will be diverse as well as the families who will be taking the survey. This will be a random sample and the data will be analyzed based on the level of crime and poverty in the community of the house being surveyed. This will provide great information as to whether or not after-school programs keep kids safe and out of trouble.

Another method of data collecting will be a set of structured interviews done locally. This will provide more in depth information about the families. This will also give a local picture of how after-school programs are working, such as the YMCA, Boys and Girls Clubs, Rebound of Whatcom County and any program involved with DSHS or DCFS. The houses selected will be those that contain children, and those houses will be retrieved through agencies that served these families. This will show if the recommendations of after-school programs are working for the families in poverty.

The analysis of this data will be very important for this research project. This will show if kids are benefiting from additional learning and after school programs. It will also show if it helps take off stress from the parents, who may be working odd and long hours in order to support their families. Growing up in poverty is very difficult. Not having adequate food or support from parents can lead to detrimental lifestyles with drugs and alcohol, and if the effects of school programs being conducted after school hours are proven, this will be helpful in ensuring the future of our children (Posner & Vandell, 1994). By intensely studying the retrieved information on these families, it will be apparent about whether or not the programs are working and if they are effective. This will lead to either the start up of new and additional programs or the elimination of those that may not be doing its job.

Another method of research will be observational. Observation forms will be given to the researches so that they may list questions that arise during the procedure. These questions may prove usefulness in collecting more data for the study. Places like the Boy’s and Girls Clubs of America will be visited, and the actions and responses of the children will be observed. Information about how the program is run and how the employees fulfill their roles will also be obtained. This method of data collection is oftentimes used by government agencies to ensure their funding is being effectively used (Coates, 2008). Analysis of this data can be very complicated as it is at a higher risk of being bias, however it allows for detailed data in determining the quality of the programs. For the researchers it gives a good first person testimony, and in the end defines whether or not this program is worth it, and working for the children who ultimately are our sole responsibility. After the completion of this method, the information from it will describe the effectiveness of after-school programs in local communities. It will notify if any programs need to be pulled or re-evaluated, and will prove the usefulness of the programs developed for youth nationwide.

Content analysis will be used with the data collected to put any of the information into common themes. By comparing and contrasting the themes found across communities, it will be helpful in determining which programs are effective.

Results Section

Chart

|% of Poverty in |% of Poverty in |# of After-school |# of After-school |% of College |% of College |

|Neighborhood 1 (N-1) |Neighborhood 2 |Programs in N-1 |programs in N-2 |Acceptance Rate in |Acceptance Rate in |

|(1980) |(N-2) | | |N-1 |N-2 |

|42% |17% |20 |18 |30% |68% |

The above chart illustrates the overall success rate of children who grew up in a high poverty neighborhood versus children who did not. The focal point of this chart is the college acceptance rate. It is much higher in the neighborhood with a lower percentage of poverty. The message this conveys is that action must be taken to give those in high-risk more of a fair chance. The forthcoming graph will illustrate the effects of providing more after-school programs and the effects of when they are implemented in high poverty neighborhoods. The statistics for this graph was taken 20 years after the above chart. This was a longitudinal study between the same two neighborhoods and it helps prove the effectiveness of after-school programs in high poverty neighborhoods, as well in neighborhoods that are low in poverty.

[pic]

From 1980 to about 2000 the amount of after-school programs in Neighborhood 1 increased by drastic means compared to Neighborhood 2 where that number slowly increased and eventually topped out. The percentage of college acceptance stayed about the same in Neighborhood 2, while in Neighborhood 1 there was also a drastic increase. The poverty level went down as well in Neighborhood 1, so this may be correlated to the college acceptance rate as well. However part of these results are due to the increase of after-school programs in a 20 year period. It appears that after-school programs provide a safe atmosphere for children, especially for those that are high-risk because of the fact they are in high poverty neighborhoods.

Appendix A





Appendix B



Abstract

This paper looks at the effectiveness of after-school programs. It describes certain programs and what their purpose is, along with history of some that America has seen over the years. More importantly, the effectiveness is the big question in this research project. Sources are shared that have similar opinions on the idea that after school programs are needed in areas that have high levels of poverty and crime. An analysis is performed in several of these cited sources, comparing and contrasting common themes together. The notion of parents work hours versus the children’s school hours is examined, and the cause of why programs are being implemented in the first place is closely examined.

The methods of gathering data is shared in this research project as well. Why these methods were chosen is explained, and the analysis of the data collected is also shared. This data is important because it proves the fact that programs are needed, and that the tax dollars which pay for these programs are being put to a worthy cause. A longitudinal study is looked at and illustrates college acceptance rates among places where programs were implemented. This study also proves the fact that effective after school programs have a long term effect on at risk youth.

Results such as graphs and charts are also found in this research paper, serving as another way to get the fact across and prove the research question. The way the results were collected is explained in the methods section, and the studies of observational, structured interviews and longitudinal studies are shared and explained. All this makes for an important research questioned answered, and justifies tax dollars to those that are pessimistic about after school programs being worth it.

References

Bos, J., Crosby, D., Duncan, G.J. (2001). Work-Based Antipoverty Programs for Parents Can Enhance the School Performance and Social Behavior of Children. Child Development, 72(1), 318-386.

Bryson, M. (1993). School-Based Epistemologies"?: Exploring Conceptions of How, What, and Why Students Know. Learning Disability Quarterly, 16(4), 299-315.

Coates, G. D. (2008). After School Programs: A Different Kind of Learning. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 14(4), 242-244.

Chaudry, A., Corcoran, M. E., (1997). The Dynamics of Childhood Poverty. The Future of Children, (7)2, 40-54.

Halpern, R. (1999). After-School Programs for Low-Income Children: Promise and Challenges. The Future of Children, (9)2, 81-95.

Kaltreider, L. D., Mark, M. M., & Tena L. St. Pierre. (1995). A 27-Month Evaluation of a Sexual Activity Prevention Program in Boys & Girls Clubs across the Nation. Family Relations, 44(1), 69-77.

Lauer, P. A., et. al., (2006). Out-of-School-Time-Programs: A Meta-Analysis of Effects for At- Risk Students. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 275-313.

Posner, J.K. & Vandell, D.L. (1994). Low-Income Children's After-School Care: Are There Beneficial Effects of After-School Programs? Child Development, 65(2), 440-456.

Rosenthal, R. & Vandell, D.L. (1996). Quality of Care at School-Aged Child-Care Programs: Regulatable Features, Observed Experiences, Child Perspectives, and Parent Perspectives, 67(5), 2434-2445.

Shumow, L. & Vandell, D.L. (1999). After-School Child Care Programs. The Future of Children, 9(2), 64-80.

Washington State Budget Policy

Retrieved from, , on March 1st, 2009.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download