1. Evidence-based Evaluation for Afterschool Programs Denise Huang CRESST/UCLA 1/22/07

2. In the Beginning….  after school programs were available to students at a much smaller scale  The purpose is mainly to provide monitoring  The opportunities for students to engage in enrichment activities  In the 90s, the concepts of safe haven for at-risk youths

3. No Child Left Behind Act (2002):  An emphasis is placed on schools to improve academic achievement, particularly for students at risk  Schools that are not performing well can use after school programs as supplemental services to improve student performance  More funding becomes available, both from the government and private sector  For the last 3 years, the 21st Community Learning Center is working with a budget of over $1 billion

4. The Formation of Afterschool Alliance  A partnership between DOE and Mott Foundation  A coalition of public and private organizations  Dedicated to raise awareness of the importance of ASP and advocating on their behalf  The goal is to make quality ASP available to all children by 2010

5. The Need of Evidences to Support Expansions Do afterschool programs contribute to positive youth development? What aspects of the program functioning contribute to these positive outcomes?

6. Indicators for program effectiveness Student attendance in regular school Performance measures (achievement tests, homework completion, classroom grades, language re-designation, school retention, future aspirations, etc.) Non-cognitive measures (safety, attitudes towards school, relationships with adults, social competence, conflict resolution skills, self-esteem, and self-efficacy etc.) Parent involvement Professional development Long-term effects (drop out rate, life satisfaction, etc)

7. What is known about the impacts of ASP? Tutoring and academic  Inconclusive

8. Personal and Social Outcomes Findings in general positive :  concerns about safety  conflict resolution  academic self-efficacy  study habits  family involvement  future aspirations

9. Long-term Outcomes  Long-term effect study  Dropout study  DOJ study

10. Who Benefited Most :  Students who attended more regularly  Female students  LEP students  Students who scored low initially on attitudinal surveys (self-efficacy, work habits, conflict resolution skills)  Students with low performance in test scores

11. Summary of Effects from Current Meta- analyses  Youth who participated in quality ASP improved significantly in feelings and attitudes towards self and learning  Positive social behaviors  Academic improvements  Reduce gang participation and criminal behavior

12. What practices are effective in producing student outcomes?  Moving away from a deficit model  Emphasizing social capital, setting features, networking, collaboration, cooperation…  Purposeful staff development  Active learning and student participation

13. Ecological Model Afterschool programs are social organizations embedded with cultural values coming from families, school, and neighborhood climate and norms. Community/Neighborhood School LA’s BEST Family Child Space / Community / Culture (structure/resources) (networks) (social, norms, sanctions)

14. Provisional Features of Positive Developmental Settings (Larson et. al)  Physical and Psychological Safety  Clear and consistent structure  Supportive relationships  Opportunities to belong  Positive social norms  Support for efficacy and mattering  Opportunities for skill building  Integration of family, school, and community efforts

15. Developmental Assets (Search Institute ) AssetIn Practice SupportSchool and other activities provide caring, encouraging environments for children EmpowermentChildren are given useful roles at home and in the community Boundaries and ExpectationsSchools provide clear rules and consequences Constructive Use of TimeChildren participate in music, art and other creative activities at least three hours a week Commitment to LearningTeachers encourage children to explore and engage in stimulating activities Positive ValuesChildren are encouraged to help others Social CompetenciesChildren begin to learn how to make choices at appropriate developmental levels Positive IdentityChildren are hopeful about their personal future

16. High Scope Educational Research Foundation “Points of service assessments” Safe Environment Supportive Environment Interaction Engagement

17. Evidence –based training approach (CASEL )  Sequenced - a sequenced set of activities to achieve skill objectives  Active - the use of active forms of learning  Focused – program component to be focused on specific skills  Explicit – the targeting of specific skills

18. Evidence Based Evaluation Model Staff Practices Critical voice Classroom structure Staff Philosophy Shared control Use of materials Personal relevance Interaction style Student choices Interaction Positive Social Norm & Supportive Relationship & Opportunity to belong Networks Integration of school, family & community efforts Climate Psychological Safety Clear & Consistence Structure Active participants Shared control Lifelong learning Autonomy Oriented Settings Student negotiation