The concerns by non-profit organizations over the growing emphasis on academics in afterschool programming is not lost on schools or state and local governments. Legislators have listened to the growing voice of afterschool educators and is trying to involve more stakeholders into the afterschool conversation. "Until relatively recently, little research existed on best practices in afterschool and OST (out of school time) programs." (Noams, 2008). But that is slowly changing with non-profit organizations like the Wallace Foundation and the Charles M. Mott Foundation not only conducting studies and publishing papers, but collaborating with state and local governments to address some of the barriers to providing and assessing quality afterschool programming.
In 2003, the Wallace Foundation sponsored an initiative to help five cities develop better coordinating mechanisms to reduce OST fragmentation, redundancy, and inefficiency and to increase OST access and quality. One of the cities participating in the initiative was New York City.
New York City had a sprawling array of providers under a large number of city agencies that did little to coordinate with each other…The mayor, who was a strong advocate for better, more efficient government and a supporter of better youth programming, began an initiative to improve after-school services through better use of management systems and forced interagency coordination. The city’s interest was in improving the effectiveness and efficiency of vast number of community-based providers with which it contracted for services. (Bodilly, S. J., et. al., 2010)
The goal of studies like this is to bring the many organizations and agencies who have a stake in the success of afterschool programs to the table and assist in creating a structure where by resources and expertise are not duplicated but shared. The ultimate goal is to provide a platform upon which a standard of quality service can be established. This push toward centralization and coordination has implications for the nature of of afterschool programming. Initiatives like that funded by the Wallace Foundation have take root in other cities across the country. In Seattle, inspired by the work done by the Harlem Children's Zone, Seattle University is seeking to condense, connect, and facilitate collaboration between the various service providers who work with youth in a three mile zone around the campus. They have pledged to:
- form and/or expand upon partnerships with the public schools, preK/Head Start programs, and community organizations within the Bailey Gatzert neighborhood in order to create a seamless network of academic support for neighborhood children.
- strengthen existing partnerships and create new partnerships with community organizations to support youth and their families with a range of services in order to enhance student success, assist families in meeting their basic needs, and support continued family involvement in the academic process.
- provide consultation and research support to community organizations in order for them to become more effective and efficient in the delivery of service to youth and families living in the Bailey Gatzert neighborhood. (http://www.seattleu.edu/uploadedFiles/SUYI/SUYI_Action%20Plan_January.pdf)
What will participation in this youth initiative mean for non-profit providers of afterschool programming? Some will undoubtedly find that their services are duplicated by another organization who works with students in the same three mile radius. Some will not be able to compete with the funding and staff expertise of the University. It is my hope that the expertise of small afterschool programs will not be overlooked by the bureaucratic machine that could result from a project this large. And just as in the conversation over academic content in afterschool programs, small service providers have to find a way to maintain a voice.
Gayl, C. L., (2004). After-School Programs: Expanding Access and Ensuring Quality. Washington, DC: Progressive Policy Institute.
Mccombs, J.,Orr, N., et. al. (2010). Hours of opportunity, Volume II: The Power of Data to Improve After-School Programs Citywide. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corp.
Seattle Youth Initiative Action Plan. (2011). http://www.seattleu.edu/uploadedFiles/SUYI/SUYI_Action%20Plan_January.pdf
Shumow, L. (2001). Academic Effects of After-School Programs. ERIC Digest. ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education, Children's Research Center, University of Illinois, Champaign, IL.
U.S. Department of Education. 21st Century Community Learning Centers. http://www2.ed.gov/programs/21stcclc/performance.html
U.S. Department of Education. DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM GRANTEES, 2003.
http://wdcrobcolp01.ed.gov/CFAPPS/CCLC/allstate_cclc1.cfm
Working Families and Afterschool : A Special Report from America After 3 PM, Afterschool Alliance and J.C. Penney Co., Inc (May 2004).
No comments:
Post a Comment