Applied Sciences Individual Assignment: Journal Article Review

After-school programs emerged in the United States in the latter part of the 19th cen- tury. These programs often had humble begin- nings in church basements, storefronts, and settlement houses. Over time, the programs proliferated and built themselves into major national organizations, such as the Boys & Girls Clubs of America, 4-H clubs, and the YMCA/YWCA. The 40 largest national youth organizations today have a total membership of about 40 million youths.

Over the past 15 years, there has been an ex- plosion of interest in after-school programs. Many major cities, such as Chicago (After School Matters), Los Angeles (LA’s Best), and New York (The After School Corporation), have ramped up their after-school programs so that they are increasingly part of their education and youth services infrastructure. During the Clinton Ad- ministration, after-school programs began to re- ceive dedicated funding in the federal budget un- der the 21st-Century Community Learning Centers Act. With the advent of No Child Left Behind, programs have increasingly emphasized academic support services. This has been con- troversial in the after-school community, resur- facing long-standing tensions between the goals of positive youth development, academic sup- port, and problem prevention.

On balance, participation in after-school programs has been associated with improved academic performance (grade point average, test scores) and psychosocial development (Durlak, Weissberg, and Pachan 2010; Ma- honey, Vandell, Simpkins, and Zarrett 2009). Recent years have witnessed an increase in evaluation studies, but few of these evaluations have featured rigorous designs and fewer still address the integration of after-school pro- grams with schools.

How, then, do after-school programs ad- dress academic learning? How can schools and

after-school programs work together for mu- tual benefit?

Types of After-School Programs

Education practitioners and researchers should have little trouble understanding after- school programs that emphasize academic tu- toring. Those programs that have a positive youth development orientation, however, may seem mysterious. Nevertheless, there is often considerable overlap in the objectives of these apparently different sorts of programs and, sometimes, even in their methods.

After-school programs that emphasize aca- demic support services map very well to tradi- tional academic activities found in schools. Ac- tivities range from relatively unstructured study halls, in which youths seek assistance on a specific question from the adult supervisor, to regular tutoring sessions, to immersion in structured curricula (Noam, Biancarosa, and Dechausay 2003).

R&D

Learning and Development in After-School Programs

BARTON J. HIRSCH

Educators need to learn how best

to work with after- school programs

and use their contributions to

young people.

R&D appears in each issue of Kappan with the assistance of the Deans’ Alliance, which is composed of the deans of the education schools/colleges at the following universities: Harvard University, Michigan State University, Northwestern University, Stanford University, Teachers College Columbia University, University of California Berkeley, University of California Los Angeles, University of Michigan, University of Pennsylvania, and University of Wisconsin.

66 Kappan February 2011 kappanmagazine.org

BARTON J. HIRSCH is a professor of human develop- ment and social policy in the School of Education and So- cial Policy, Northwestern University, Evanston, Ill.

Th in

ks to

ck /C

re at

as

Th in

ks to

ck /P

ho to

d is

c

Moving a bit away from pure support activ- ities, but still firmly within a well-understood educational framework, would be STEM pro- grams, such as the Intel computer clubhouses (Kafai, Peppler, and Chapman 2009). These tend to attract a wider range of students than enroll in traditional K-12 computer program- ming classes. Populated mostly by middle school students, the clubs offer a wide range of design experiences, rather than the math and science curricula found in school classes. Stu- dents use high-end software to pursue projects that have considerable personal meaning. The computer comes to be seen as a medium of ex- pression that students can use to achieve cre- ative ends. Programming activities range from constructing robotic inventions to orchestrat- ing virtual dancers to creating animated stories or even customizing virtual cars. Some club- houses incorporate literacy practices by using specially designed software that supports crit- ical reflection and communication among youths. College students are often the instruc- tors or leaders of these clubhouse activities. However, rather than functioning exclusively as experts, instructors are often learners them- selves, lending a certain mutuality to clubhouse engagement.

At still another remove are after-school pro- grams that bear a closer resemblance to school- based extracurricular activities than to tradi- tional academic subjects. After School Matters in Chicago, which our research group recently evaluated, is a good example of this type of pro- gram and is probably the best known after- school program for high school students in the country (Hirsch, Hedges, Stawicki, and Mekinda 2011). ASM is similar to many edu- cation reform curricula in emphasizing proj- ect-based learning. Although some ASM pro- grams feature a science or technology theme, such as computer web design, many emphasize artistic activities or learning how to teach younger children how to improve their skills in sports. The programs are labeled as appren- ticeships because they include payment of a stipend to each student and are designed to teach marketable job skills.

Each program is led by two co-instructors who have expertise in that particular subject and often make their living using those skills. The programs are designed to have a final product or performance, but not all of them do. Students learn specialized skills, technical terminology, how problems are understood and approached, and the goals, values, and pri-

orities relevant to that particular craft or line of work. As part of this process, they learn im- portant soft skills, such as teamwork and com- munication. Sessions are spent practicing these skills, using previously learned skills as the ba- sis for developing new ones, as part of work on specific projects or artistic tasks.

The country’s largest national youth pro- gram, 4-H clubs, also has a project-based learning orientation, with youths either plan- ning events or completing projects for entry at state fairs or similar competitions. Many proj- ects are scientifically oriented, combining li- brary research with experimental or other studies. Clubs are led by volunteers rather than paid staff. There is active parental involvement and a strong emphasis on youth leadership. Considering all phases of project development, from formulation of the initial idea through re- search and presentation of findings, youths learn skills in project management, time man- agement, goal setting, teamwork, problem solving, and communication, in addition to content knowledge relevant to the subject of their project.

Finally, still further removed from tradi- tional educational activities would be such youth organizations as the Boys & Girls Clubs of America (BGCA), whose primary focus is on positive youth development rather than aca- demics (Hirsch, Deutsch, and DuBois forth-

How do after-school programs address academic learning? How can schools and after-school programs work together for mutual benefit?

kappanmagazine.org V92 N5 Kappan 67

Th in

ks to

ck /B

ra nd

X P

ho to

s

coming). The BGCA clubs are comprehensive after-school centers that include a wide range of activities, including sports, such enrichment activities as art or dance, field trips to cultural institutions, leadership activities that involve the design and implementation of special ac- tivities, exposure to business practices through operation of a club store, and so on. BGCA clubs include an hour set aside for academic support, which mostly functions as an old-fash- ioned study hall. In addition, it is not unusual for clubs to offer structured programs to pre- vent problem behavior, such as Smart Girls, which are similar to socio-emotional programs in schools.

The heart and soul of the BGCA clubs are in the mentoring relationships that club staff form with the youths at the site (Hirsch 2005). The mentoring is not typically based in a for- mal mentoring program, but arises naturally out of interactions between youths and staff. Staff provide information, guidance, and emo- tional support regarding a wide range of issues that youths face in often high-risk neighbor- hoods. The mentoring and close affective ties help youths cope with myriad stressors, de- velop positive identities oriented to prosocial activities, and steer them away from risky, problem behaviors. A number of the older youths, who are recipients of mentoring from adult club staff, in turn mentor younger club members (Deutsch 2008).

One of the strongest draws of the clubs is that they’re a place where young people can have fun with their friends. This is a funda- mental feature of youth culture. Schools, of course, do their best to keep social interactions among friends limited so as to keep students on task with academic activities. In the danger- ous neighborhoods in which many BGCA clubs are located, young people can’t congre- gate in the streets or in the parks for fear of be- ing targeted by gangs or other unsafe elements. So, the clubs provide a safe environment where young people can enjoy being with friends. Many youths attend the clubs regularly for years and come to describe the club as “a sec- ond home.” In this way, the social and rela- tional environment of the clubs is experienced as similar to what they find in the homes of kin and is a clear contrast to the more confining atmosphere that they report at school. This is not a meager accomplishment insofar as these are often young people who have difficulty be- coming attached to adult-run organizations, such as schools. Indeed, we’ve come to see the

clubs as providing a transitional environment, similar enough in important ways to what they find among their (extended) family, but staffed by adults who aren’t, in fact, kin. In this way, the clubs provide support in becoming com- fortable and competent in the nonfamilial world, a critical developmental task.

After-School’s “Value-Added”

What, then, are the advantages of after- school programs as compared to schools? One set of advantages relates to opportunities for project-based learning, which is a staple of many education reform efforts. After-school programs are more open to experimentation than are schools. Schools are bound by curric- ular requirements set by policy makers at the district or state level; no such mandates exist for after-school programs. A clear benefit of this less structured policy context is a much greater block of time available for young peo- ple to work on a project. They may work on a project for several hours a day and continue to work on a project over several months. Youths also are typically allowed much greater auton- omy in choosing their project than is allowed in school. This often results in selecting top- ics that, at least from the perspective of youths, are seen as more authentic. Thus, after-school programs can provide opportunities for more ambitious and personally meaningful project- based learning experiences.

Furthermore, after-school programs or centers that have a positive youth development mission provide settings that allow the positive aspects of youth culture to flourish, while con- straining more negative tendencies. The pos- itive aspects include strong relationships, spontaneity, creativity, expressiveness, engage- ment with music, knowing how to have fun, and idealism.

Many after-school programs focus on socio- emotional development. The staff typically come from the same or similar neighborhoods, providing them firsthand experience and un- derstanding of the stressors that youths face. The programs see it as part of their mission to help young people cope with those stressors and develop the knowledge, attitudes, and skills that will enable them to grow toward pos- itive adulthoods. By contrast, many school- based educators don’t believe they have the ex- perience or training to help students cope with life outside of school. There have been many complaints that schools are burdened by hav- ing to take on these additional responsibilities.

68 Kappan February 2011 kappanmagazine.org

After-school programs are more open to

experimentation than are schools.

Th in

ks to

ck /C

om st

oc k

As after-school programs grow, they’ll provide increased supports for young people in nonacademic realms. There are, accordingly, a variety of ways in which after-school programs complement and extend the efforts of school to help young people learn and develop.

Linking School and After-School

There are numerous ways in which schools and after-school programs can exchange infor- mation and coordinate activities so as to ben- efit young people.

First, a professional can work with youths in both school and after-school settings. For exam- ple, a program developed by faculty at the Har- vard Graduate School of Education and McLean Hospital focuses on prevention work in mental health (Noam, Biancarosa, and Dechausay 2003). Practitioners work in classrooms pro- viding academic and behavioral support serv- ices, with special attention to at-risk students. The practitioners continue to work with stu- dents in an onsite, after-school program using additional methods. This kind of approach might appeal to teachers — whatever their sub- ject — who feel constrained in what they can do in their regular classrooms and want to ex- periment with new methods. In the after- school setting, teachers aren’t bound by formal curriculum requirements and can pursue addi- tional topics or allot more time to them or have relationships with young people in ways that aren’t typical in school.

Second, a liaison position can be created for linking school with after-school programs. This position, which tends to be more admin- istrative than direct service, focuses on ex- changing information and coordinating activ- ities.

A third approach to transferring knowledge and practices between school and after-school programs involves researchers who cross boundaries and cross-fertilize. This has been the approach of our research group at North- western University. As part of our evaluation of After School Matters in Chicago, we devel- oped a mock job interview for high school stu- dents that was administered by human re- source professionals. Extensive debriefing of the human resource interviewers revealed that many youths had experiences and skills that would be valued by employers, but the youths often had no idea this was true and didn’t al- ways successfully communicate their creden- tials in the interview. We discussed those find- ings with Chicago Public Schools administra-

tors, who invited us to develop a curriculum to teach high school students how to do well in interviews for internships and jobs. We’re cur- rently in the midst of evaluation and further development of this curriculum and hope to scale it up both in Chicago and elsewhere. Of course, this curriculum could also be imple- mented in after-school programs.

After-school programs have only recently emerged in the national consciousness. Edu- cators need to learn how best to work with these programs and use their contributions to young people as the education system broad- ens and evolves. K

REFERENCES

Deutsch, Nancy L. Pride in the Projects: Teens Building

Identities in Urban Contexts. New York: New York

University Press, 2008.

Durlak, Joseph A., Roger P. Weissberg, and Molly A.

Pachan. “Meta-Analysis of After-School Programs That

Seek to Promote Personal and Social Skills in Children

and Adolescents.” American Journal of Community

Psychology 46 (2010): 294-309.

Hirsch, Barton J. A Place to Call Home: After-School

Programs for Urban Youth. Washington, D.C.: American

Psychological Association and New York: Teachers

College Press, 2005.

Hirsch, Barton J., Nancy L. Deutsch, and David L.

DuBois. After-School Centers and Youth Development:

Case Studies of Success and Failure. New York:

Cambridge University Press, forthcoming.

Hirsch, Barton J., Larry V. Hedges, Julieann Stawicki,

and Megan A. Mekinda. “After-School Programs for

High School Students: An Evaluation of After-School

Matters.” Manuscript, Northwestern University, 2011

Kafai, Yasmin B., Kylie A. Peppler, and Robbin N.

Chapman, eds. The Computer Clubhouse:

Constructionism and Creativity In Youth Communities.

New York: Teachers College Press, 2009.

Mahoney, Joseph L., Deborah L. Vandell, Sandra D.

Simpkins, and Nicole R. Zarrett. “Adolescent Out-of-

School Activities.” In Handbook of Adolescent

Psychology, 3rd ed., Vol. 2: Contextual Influences on

Adolescent Development, ed. Richard M. Lerner and

Lauren Steinberg: 228-267. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley and

Sons, 2009.

Noam, Gil G., Gina Biancarosa, and Nadine Dechausay.

After-School Education: Approaches to an Emerging

Field. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Education Press,

2003.

kappanmagazine.org V92 N5 Kappan 69

Copyright of Phi Delta Kappan is the property of Phi Delta Kappa International and its content may not be

copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written

permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.