1. 1 Baseline research for the development of the Rialto Learning Community Dr Michelle Share Children’s Research Centre Trinity College Dublin 1 December 2009

2. 2 Presentation purpose provide stakeholders with an overview of the research outline key findings & issues for consideration for future development of RLC

3. 3 Overview 1.study background and purpose 2.how the research was carried out/who was involved 3.key findings from: students parents OST staff teachers 4.conclusion: issues for consideration for development of RLC

4. 4 Background: development of the Rialto Learning Community merger of clubs areas undergoing regeneration evidence and experience about benefit of the Arts evidence on educational need alignment with social policy evidence on the effectiveness of school- community OST interventions

5. 5 Study purpose baseline data on the provision of out of school time activities in the Rialto area - inform development - evaluation strategy young people at Fatima and Dolphin Homework Clubs aged 11-14 and a comparison group well-being (personal, relational and educational) level of engagement with and attitudes to OST services

6. 6 Other stakeholders’ views on OST services parents teachers homework club and youth project staff data collection November 2008 to March 2009

7. 7 Overview of methods and participants Student survey (n = 142) (73: RLC; 69: CG) Focus groups young people (n = 15) Parent survey (n = 40)Focus groups parents (n = 6) Pilot observation of 2 OST settings Interviews teachers (n = 11) School level data collection (n = 122) Interviews with OST project leaders (n = 3) Focus groups OST project staff (n = 13)

8. 8 key findings: students student characteristics level of participation in OST activities attitudes to school and learning school data –attendance –results in standardised tests –learning support

9. 9 Student characteristics 58% girls; 42% boys 10-15 years; 81% 11-14 yrs; mean 12.1 years 52% primary school 48% secondary school 99% study group v 81% comparison group born in Ireland 47% study group v 59% comparison group living in 2 parent households

10. 10 Participation in OST activities majority positive about their after school clubs social rather than educational benefits positive attitudes toward staff study group very busy with extracurricular activities prefer community-based clubs non-participation: not interested in activities/ friends don’t attend

11. 11 Participation in spare time activities 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 watch tvcomputerssport/gamesmusicdanceart and craftsreadingmathsdramatrips away activity % Study ( n=73 ) comparison (n=69)

12. 12 Attitudes to school and learning vast majority happy at school positive attitudes to learning vast majority received homework and got it done on time just over half asked for help with their homework study group more likely to display negative attitudes to school

13. 13 School data attendance standardised test results learning support school behaviour 122 students (86%) in 8 schools 50% primary; 50% secondary

14. 14 School attendance (primary) average number of days missed 17 missed a higher percentage of school days than national population (9% v 6%) similar to rates of absenteeism for DEIS schools absenteeism greater among boys higher rates among study group children absence of 20 days or more less positive attitudes to school

15. 15 Number of days missed in primary school during the year 2007/8 (n = 58) 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 0-4 days5-9 days10-14 days15-19 days20-29 days30 days or more

16. 16 Number of days missed in primary school 2007/8 study/comparison group (n = 58) 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 0-4 days5-9 days10-14 days15-19 days20 days or more Study group Comparison group

17. 17 School attendance (secondary) missed a higher percentage of school days than national population (13% v 8%) higher rates of serious absence (21% v 16%) (20 days+) but in line with DEIS schools no differences by gender little difference between study and comparison groups

18. 18 Percentage of secondary school days missed 2008/9 by study/comparison group (n = 61) 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35 % 0-4%5-9%10-14%15-19 % 20% or more % of days missed Study Comparison

19. 19 Standardised test results (reading literacy) Primary (Micra-T/ Drumcondra) 32% ‘average’ score for reading ability 29% ‘below average’ 27% ‘well below average’ over represented in ‘below average’ and under represented in ‘above average’

20. 20 Primary school students’ Micra-T Sten scores compared to expected scores in the national population (n = 56) 0% 5% 10 % 15% 20 % 25% 30% 35% well above averageabove averageaveragebelow averagewell below average Young people in study National population

21. 21 Numeracy Primary Sigma-T 23% ‘average’ 39% ‘well-below average’ 20% ‘below average’ 13% ‘well-above average’ study group more likely to score below average than comparison group (78% v 41%)

22. 22 Primary Students’ Sigma-T sten scores compared to expected scores in the national population (n = 56) 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25 % 30% 35% 40% 45% well above averageabove averageaveragebelow averagewell below average Young people in studyNational population

23. 23 Secondary students’ standardised test results majority had reading age below their chronological age at time of sitting school entrance exam (2.3 years below actual age) 84% ‘below average’ when they sat school entrance exam no gender or comparison group differences

24. 24 Educational progress and aspirations majority expected to sit the LC exam twice as many ‘Don’t know’ in study group (18% v 7%) students with literacy difficulties in secondary school less likely to expect to sit the LC those with literacy difficulties in the study group less likely to have expectations for further education 4 out of 10 of study group expect to go on to further education no relationship between educational progress and self- esteem

25. 25 School behaviour and learning support School behaviour 8 out of 122 had received suspensions but higher rate of suspensions than those in the national population primary (7% v 0.3%); secondary (7% v 5%) boys more likely to be suspended than girls Learning support 43% had received some form of learning support more likely for boys than girls little difference between primary and secondary one third - Junior Certificate Schools Programme

26. 26 Key findings: parents high level of satisfaction with hw clubs important in helping children get their homework done children attend for the activities boosted confidence helped with subjects in which parents could not assist one third of parents unable to get involved parents reported positive attitudes towards school – connected and comfortable just over half felt that the club connected them with the school changes to space, hours of operation and staffing levels

27. 27 He loves it…. and they have the patience and the time and all, well that’ s what I think, and they put it into the kids. (Parent 2) I think that they feel at home. They’ve always felt at home in the homework club. (Parent 1) I think the homework club is just more real. It meets the child where the child’s at I think. Whereas school, like, they don’t have the time to do that, even if they’d like to do it, whereas here the time is prioritised. As everyone is saying [other parents in the focus group], it’s not just looking at doing their homework, it’s all the other bits that fits in a child’s life, do you know that way? So, it’s built around that. (Parent 6) I find it brilliant for the kids and my child – they have different education from us – it really helps. I would be lost and he would be lost without the homework club (Parent survey comment)

28. 28 Key findings: OST practitioners importance of establishing a routine of doing homework provision of additional support - exam time strong focus on creative arts more than just homework support – safety, listening ear, positive relationships limited involvement with parents systems within schools as barriers to progression need for better connections between school and community OST services

29. 29 Believe it or not, there’s actually a lot available…now, the quality of which I would question, but there is a lot available. It’s ridiculous when you’re trying to organise something because there is majorettes on a Monday, Tuesday, Friday and Saturday. There’s hip hop on Wednesday, Saturday and then there are competitions on Sunday. There is training every Tuesday and Thursday, literally for 9 months of the year. There is Ferrini Youth Club on Friday. There is the church drop in on Tuesday. And that’s not mentioning anything that the homework club or the youth project do. (OST leader 1) I would say the very serious kids, that we haven’t got the resources to, you’re talking that are 4 to 5 years behind their reading age. None of us would say that we can get that child back up with the resources that we have now, can get that child at her reading age in 12 months. (OST leader 1) They’ve been streamed into all ordinary or foundation subjects, by the time they even get to secondary school. So, the decisions about their future have already been made for them. So, you’re dealing then with young people who are saying that they would like to go onto further education and that the road is very long for that because they don’t have in school what they need to have to do that. (OST staff 14)

30. 30 Key findings: teachers (1) some awareness of what children did after school social benefits limited knowledge of the operation of the homework clubs links with clubs mainly related to student difficulties issues of overlap and differing methodologies

31. 31 Key findings teachers (2) numerous factors influence educational outcomes parents key parents’ past educational experiences low level expectations difficulties of engaging parents generally HSCL teachers and JCSP link with parents overlap of community and school-based parent programmes

32. 32 Issues for consideration for the future RLC links with schools and parents RLC target group complementary methodologies actions to improve school attendance curriculum alignment innovative work with literacy and numeracy through the creative arts

33. 33 Acknowledgements Co-authors Fiona Daly, Sinéad Shannon, Prof Sheila Greene Expert Advisory Committee Rialto Learning Community Management Committee Teachers and Principals in local schools Staff of Dolphin and Fatima Home work Clubs and Rialto Youth Project Young people and parent participants