Review of the Literature-Concerns About Government Control of Quality

"...there is growing evidence that participation in afterschool programs can result in positive outcomes in youth " (Noam, 2008). However there is debate over just what constitutes quality afterschool programming. The increasing involvement of the Department of Education in defining what afterschool programming should look like has some in the field worried about being left out of the conversation. The infusion of state and federal dollars in funding afterschool programs has resulted in an increase in assessments of programs and required a demonstration of effectiveness. (Noam, 2008). This in an of itself is a positive step and one that has increased awareness of the importance of quality staffing for afterschool activities and programs. However, in agreeing to meet the standards set for them by state and federal governments afterschool programs are asked to evaluate their programs using tools and assessments in which they had no part in developing. Non-profit education organizations have been working with students after school for many years and yet their expertise is often disregarded.

One concern is that accountability measures put in place in-order to receive federal dollars are redefining afterschool goals to emphasize academics. For example, the performance indicators for the 21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st Century CLCs), which contributes approx. $2.5 billion in federal dollars annually to 2000 school based afterschool programs, heavily relies on academic results as indicators of quality performance.

Performance Indicator 1: Participants in 21st Century Community Learning Center programs will demonstrate educational and social benefits and exhibit positive behavioral changes.

• The percentage of middle or high school 21st Century regular program participants whose mathematics grades improved from fall to spring.
• The percentage of middle or high school 21st Century regular program participants whose English grades improved from fall to spring.
• The percentage of middle/high school 21st Century regular program participants who improve from not proficient to proficient or above in mathematics on state assessments.
• The percentage of middle/high school 21st Century regular program participants who improve from not proficient to proficient or above in reading on state assessments.
• The percentage of middle and high school 21st Century program participants with teacher-reported improvement in homework completion and class participation.
• The percentage of middle and high school 21st Century participants with teacher-reported improvements in student behavior.

Though the performance indicator above states that programs are to measure both academic and behavioral growth, the measures used are focused mainly on academic performance and measured by in-school classroom teachers. This cuts the afterschool staff out of the loop and shifts the focus of the program from student-centered growth to school-centered, measureable, academic improvement.

While acknowledging the need for afterschool programs that focus on homework as well as supplemental reading and math classes. Non-profit afterschool staff worry that there is little difference between in-school classes and the afterschool classes. This means that students effectively have an extra hour and a half of school each day instead of having time for their brains to rest. Experts caution that the goal of improving children's school performance will not necessarily be attained by extending the school day with traditional classroom lessons and routines. Some research suggests that giving children activity choices, engaging them in enrichment activities, and supporting socialization with peers will pay academic dividends. (Shumow, 2001) And the research on the academic gains made by students enrolled in afterschool programs is inconclusive. The Bush administration actually cited a lack of academic growth by students as an excuse to cut $40 million from the 21st Century CLC budget in 2003. (Gayl, 2004) However though the evidence of student academic improvement in afterschool programs is thin, there is a belief that evidence of other kinds of growth will in the long run support academic achievement.

Unless time spent in an afterschool program is extraordinarily more beneficial than time spent in the classroom, dramatic impact is unlikely. Because afterschool programs have demonstrated effects on conditions that contribute to student achievement, however, participation in these programs can support improvements in student achievement even if the programs themselves have limited academic impacts. (Gayle, 2004)

These conclusions are no surprise to afterschool program staff and directors. They know that pushing students too hard can lead to burn out and can negatively affect the productivity of their in-school time. They also understand that in lean economic times afterschool programs fill in the programming gaps left by schools when they have elected to cut the "non-essential" classes that contribute to students becoming enriched and well rounded individuals. Afterschool program directors are not opposed to increased scrutiny of afterschool practices, they too are interested in creating standards for assessing quality programming. They however are skeptical of evaluation tools that are academic based and instead would like to see assessments that take into account the myriad of skills developed by youth in afterschool programs.

References

Gayl, C. L., (2004). After-School Programs: Expanding Access and Ensuring Quality. Washington, DC: Progressive Policy Institute.

Noam, Gil. (2008). A New Day for Youth:Creating Sustainable Quality in Out of School Time. New York, NY:Wallace Foundation

Phillips, S.F., A system that works: Highlights of Effective Intervention Strategies
in Quality Improvement. Afterschool Matters. September 2010, Issue 12, p 37-44.

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.

Steen, Sam; Noguera, P. A Broader and Bolder Approach to School Reform: Expanded Partnership Roles for School Counselors. Professional School Counseling. Oct2010, Vol. 14, Issue 1, p42-52, 11p.

Tab, E.D. (2006). National Household Education Surveys Program of 2005 After-School Programs and Activities: 2005. U.S. Department of Education NCES 2006-076.