 (1) Understand why activity quality is important for children’s development  (2) Differentiate between structural and process quality parameters and give examples of each  (3) Be able to identify, describe, and evaluate several features of process quality

 Developmental Consequences  All the activity-related outcomes we have discussed depend on quality…  …school achievement, attendance, school dropout, college, substance use, antisocial behaviors, criminal offending, peer acceptance, depression, anxiety, self-esteem, aspirations for the future, child obesity.

 Poor Quality Programs  Do not confer physical, cognitive, or social benefits  May contribute to the development of problem behaviors  Quality is often mediocre

 Evaluation  It is essential to assess quality for purposes of program assessment and improvement

Think-Pair-Share You are designing an after-school program to serve children ages What components or features would you want to include to make the program high quality so that it promotes positive developmental outcomes?

Come to the front and write some of your quality features or components on the black board.

(1) STRUCTURAL or institutional features. Elements that establish the setting and context for positive relationships and high-quality activities.

(2) PROCESS and content features. Practices that participating children experience directly.

 Education and training of staff  Planning time and assistance  Group size and child-to-staff ratios  Space and materials  Partnerships with schools, parents, community

 Positive relations with staff and peers  Mix of academic and non-academic skill-building activities  Opportunities for cognitive growth  Physical activities and recreation  Encouragement of student engagement  Opportunities for autonomy and choice  Mastery orientation

 Negative/hostile staff-child interactions  aggression, depression, less learning  This is process quality  Structural quality  process quality  Higher child:staff ratios predicts of drop in emotional support from staff.  Staff who were less educated were more negative. Sources: Rosenthal & Vandell; Grossman et al.

 Study of children at YMCAs, Girls Inc., Boys & Girls Clubs  Many programs fail to meet the participants’ needs – physical, psychological, and social.  36% felt less safe at the program than elsewhere  39% felt never or almost never valued  35% felt there were no adults at the program to whom they could turn  40% reported never or almost never having input in program activities Source: Gambone and Arbreton

 Appropriate Structure  Supportive Relationships  Opportunities for Belonging  Physical and Psychological Safety  Positive Social Norms  Support for Efficacy and Mattering  Opportunity for Skill Building  Integration of Family, School, & Community Source: National Research Council & Institute of Medicine (2002)

 1. Afterschool Program Assessment System (National Institute on Out - of - School Time, 2008 )  2. Out - of - School Time Observation (Policy Studies Associates, 2005 )  3. Program Observation Tool (National Afterschool Association)  4. Program Quality Observation (Vandell & Pierce, 1998 )  5. Promising Practices Rating Scale (Vandell, Reisner, Brown, Dadisman, Pierce, Lee, & Pechman, 2005 )  6. Quality Assurance System (Foundations Inc., 2007 )  7. Program Quality Self - Assessment (New York State Afterschool Network, 2005 )  8. School - Age Care Environment Rating Scale (Harms, Jacobs, & White, 1996 )  9. Youth Program Quality Assessment (Smith & Hohmann, 2005 )

The Study of Promising After-School Programs Promising Practices Rating System Observation Manual – Revised 2012

1 = negative exemplars are evident – where staff are intrusive, bored or distant, yell at or embarrass students 2 = neutral – no clear message either way 3 = some indicators of supportive relationships with adults 4 = evidence of many positive indicators: E.g., students are comfortable initiating interactions with staff, staff use positive behavior management, staff are engaged with children, are positive role models

1 = students do not work well together; may harass, intimidate or threaten each other 2 = students are not negative with each other or do not hassle each other, but have few positive interactions 3 = some indicators of supportive peer relations 4 = evidence of many positive indicators and no evidence of negative indicators: negotiate situations effectively, relaxed interactions, work well together, share

1 = most students are not engaged appropriately (off task), may appear bored 2 = students are participating in activities but do not appear to be concentrating or affectively involved 3 = students are focused on activities with some evidence of affect involvement or sustained concentration 4 = students are concentrating on activities, focused, interacting pleasantly when appropriate, and are affectively involved in the activity

1 = little or no opportunity for cognitive growth 2 = opportunities occur primarily in the context of homework; use of other activities for cognitive growth is limited; staff ask few or no questions requiring elaboration 3 = some opportunities within some activities 4 = variety of opportunities and staff are highly effective in facilitating students’ learning experiences; many opportunities for planning, synthesis, problem solving

1 = staff are unprepared; poor materials; long transitions; environment is unsafe 2 = a few indicators of appropriate structure 3 = some indicators of appropriate structure 4 = staff support each other; activities run smoothly; staff are well prepared; students have a clear understanding of rules; transitions are smooth

1 = level of staff control is appropriate to the activity; students are free to make choices 2 = level of staff control is appropriate to the activity; students may have some opportunities for choice, but not many; most activities are staff-directed 3 = staff are somewhat controlling 4 = staff are highly controlling; activities are staff-directed, students do not have opportunities for choice

1= no evidence of disorder or chaos 2 = students are engaged in productive level of talk; may be some brief instances of disruptive noise or talking; staff control techniques are effective 3 = some evidence of chaos 4 = students are out of control throughout observation; youth are not redirected; staff control techniques are ineffective

1 = no evidence of skill building or mastery orientation 2 = a few activities focus on skill building or mastery, although not in an optimal way; staff may demonstrate some concepts or skills; activities may offer challenge to some, but not all, students 3 = some activities encourage skill building or mastery 4 = many activities encourage skill building or mastery; staff explain and show techniques, give directions, etc.; encourage students to try new activities, help students go beyond their current abilities, make progress toward a goal

 After observing the following after-school program activity, rate each of the 8 practices from 1-4  Include a justification for your answer  After you rate all the categories, score the overall quality of the activity  1 = Low quality activity  2 = Moderate quality activity  3 = High quality activity

 Supportive Relations with Adults  Supportive Relations with Peers  Level of Engagement  Opportunities for Cognitive Growth  Appropriate Structure  Over-Control  Chaos  Master Orientation  Overall Quality

PA USES THE KEYSTONE STARS RATING TO ASSESS QUALITY =Programs_STARS