Chapter 6: Education
Provide Guidelines for After-School and Summer Programs Intended To Help
Students at
Risk of Academic Failure
Summary
In Texas, federal, state, and local funds are used to support after-school
and summer programs intended for students at risk of academic failure. However,
Texas has no consistent guidelines or quality measures to ensure that these
funds are achieving results. This makes it difficult for after-school program
administrators to seek new or continued funding from private and public sources.
Texas should prepare statewide guidelines and quality evaluation instruments for
these programs, and publicize them through the Internet.
Background
The Legislature’s stated intent of ending “social
promotion”—the practice of passing children to the next grade even
when they have not met state promotion requirements—will require
additional efforts to ensure that all students can succeed
academically.[1] Students at risk of academic
failure or dropping out particularly need additional support.
After-school and summer programs can provide such students with valuable
additional time to develop basic academic skills, work on classroom assignments,
and participate in educational enrichment activities. In addition, these
programs offer a constructive alternative for children who might otherwise spend
their after school hours in unproductive or even criminal activities. (Research
from the US Department of Justice indicates that violent juvenile crime rates
are highest between 3:00 pm and 4:00 pm—the period directly after the end
of most school days—and in many cases remain high until parents return
home from work.)[2] Properly organized
after-school and summer programs, then, can help reduce juvenile crime and
delinquency by offering positive role models and structured learning activities
outside of the regular school day.
After-school programs that are not closely tied to a school district may face
difficulties in obtaining funding due to a basic lack of student data
demonstrating their success. Such initiatives would benefit from state-level
guidelines for effective after-school and summer programs and quality evaluation
instruments.
Funding for After-School and Summer Programs
The United States spends more than $5 billion annually in public and private
funds on after-school and summer programs.[3]
Current government resources for these programs include federal funding
allocated under the
21st Century Community Learning Centers Initiative
[http://www.ed.gov/21stcclc/], which provided $450 million nationwide in
fiscal 2000.[4] Thirteen programs in 11 Texas
school districts (Blanco, Brownsville, Corpus Christi, Hurst-Euless-Bedford,
Irving, Lockhart, Mission, Nixon-Smiley, Progresso, San Antonio, and Waco) have
received more than $9 million from this program to serve 275,000
students.[5]
In 1999, the Texas Legislature authorized a
franchise tax credit
for businesses that provide funding for before- and after-school programs and
summer school initiatives.[6] In addition, the
Legislature authorized $25 million for the 2000-2001 biennium to support
after-school programs for middle school students.
This grant program targets students at risk of academic failure and juvenile
delinquency. The state’s Optional Extended Year Program, which provides
funds for after-school, Saturday, or summer programs for K-8 students at risk of
being held back in grade level, distributed $59,197,791 to 708 school districts
in the 1999-2000 school year. These state and federal grant programs represent
only a fraction of the total public and private funds spent in Texas on
after-school and summer programs, but no total is
available.[7]
Many local communities have invested in the development of after-school and
summer initiatives using some combination of general funds, federal Community
Development Block Grant funds, school district funds, and money supplied through
local parks and recreation departments.[8] In
most cases, applicants for these various funds are required to propose a method
for evaluating their success. In such instances, after-school and summer
programs that do not have access to student achievement data may be at a
distinct disadvantage when competing for resources.
In summary, the private sector as well as local, state, and federal
governments are investing substantial amounts of money in after-school and
summer programs for at-risk students, yet there are few consistent guidelines or
quality evaluation instruments to assist program administrators in achieving
their goals. To ensure that public and private resources for after-school and
summer programs actually support academic achievement and decrease juvenile
crime and delinquency, several issues must be considered: program design,
implementation, and evaluation.
Program Design
Effective programs should include strong partnerships with local school
districts, parents, public and private organizations, and the community at
large. Such collaboration can help after-school and summer programs develop and
maintain a strong academic focus with appropriate educational activities.
Program designs should also incorporate supplemental health and human
services to address nonacademic barriers to student achievement. For many
at-risk students, factors such as poverty, illness, or parental abuse and
neglect may represent significant obstacles to success in
school.[9] In addition, after-school and summer
program designs should include positive role models that can offer support for
the improvement not only of academics, but of self-discipline and good
citizenship.
Program Implementation
State and federal agencies generally require quarterly or annual progress
reports to demonstrate that their funds are being used in compliance with
applicable law. Effective after-school and summer programs collect and report
reliable information on student academic progress to comply with such funding
requirements and, if possible, expand their funding opportunities.
Moreover, the program’s managers should explore options for additional
program providers or sites. School districts that lack the staff or facilities
for after-school and summer programs, for instance, should seek opportunities to
contract with public agencies, nonprofit organizations, or the private sector to
expand their offerings for at-risk students.
Program Evaluation
After-school and summer programs should have clearly defined program goals
tied to specific activities designed to achieve them. The goals, too, should be
specific and measurable.[10]
Meaningful program evaluation provides data that local administrators can use
to make continual improvements to their programs and demonstrate results to
state and federal agencies, parents, and local communities. Evaluation data also
can be used to replicate successes in other areas.
Eastside Story After-School and Summer Program
The
Eastside Story
nonprofit foundation in Austin, Texas provides after-school and summer
enrichment programs for at-risk students from several area school districts.
Funding is furnished primarily by the City of Austin and Travis County. This
program has an energetic and dedicated staff who would like to increase their
funding to serve more children, as well as to guarantee consistent, high-quality
services for the students and families already involved in the program.
Eastside Story’s teachers are paid through outside grants, an
arrangement that creates uncertainty about program continuity and makes
long-term planning difficult. To address these issues, Eastside Story is working
with Texas A&M University and the Comptroller’s office to quantify and
measure its successes.[11] This effort has not
been easy; it has proven difficult, for instance, to obtain individual student
test scores and academic records from school
districts.[12]
Marilyn Bostick of the Eastside Story has said that, “People assume
that parents in this community don’t want to educate their children, but
that’s not true. They have the same dreams as everyone else, theirs’
just take a lot more work.”[13] Eastside
Story administrators believe they offer an outstanding program. To prove this,
Eastside Story and many other after-school and summer programs need consistent
guidelines and methods to evaluate the quality of their results.
Recommendations
A. The Texas Education Agency (TEA), in
collaboration with the appropriate federal, state, and local funding sources and
program administrators, should develop guidelines for the effective use of
public and private funds in after-school and summer programs for students at
risk of academic failure.
TEA could use data from current educational research on effective
after-school programs as well as its own After-School Initiative for Middle
Schools to develop these guidelines. In developing the guidelines, TEA should
consult with other state agencies, local parks and recreation departments,
colleges and universities and other interested parties. The guidelines should be
made available for review on the Internet.
B. TEA should research and disseminate information
on effective evaluation instruments for after-school and summer
programs.
Information on effective evaluation instruments should be made available to
local program administrators, parents, and other interested parties via the
Internet.
Fiscal Impact
The guidelines could be developed and disseminated as part of existing TEA
initiatives, such as the After-School Initiative for Middle Schools. Research on
quality evaluation instruments also could be added to the
Texas Education Agency’s research and evaluation agenda
for the coming biennium. No additional state funds would be needed.
[1] V.T.C.A., Education Code,
§28.0211.
[2] US Department of Justice,
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Programs, Juvenile Offenders and
Victims: 1999 National Report
(http://www.ncjrs.org/html/ojjdp/nationalreport99).
(Internet document.)
[3] Jodi Wilgoren, “The
Bell Rings, but the Students Stay, and Stay,” New York Times,
January 24, 2000, Section A, p. 1.
[4] US Department of Education,
“21st Century Community Learning Centers,”
(http://www.ed.gov/21stcclc/).
(Internet document.)
[5] Texas Association of School
Administrators, “Thirteen Texas Programs Receive After-School
Grants,” June 6, 2000
(http://www.tasanet.org/ednews/news_briefs.html#13).
(Internet document.)
[6] V.T.C.A., Tax Code,
§171.831-836.
[7] Telephone interview with
Elizabeth Beckworth, program administrator, Division of Curriculum and
Professional Development, Texas Education Agency, September 6, 2000; e-mail from
Carol McDaniel, program specialist, Child Care Management, Texas Workforce
Commission, September 7, 2000; and e-mail from Susan Burkhardt, National Child
Care Information Center, September 7, 2000.
[8] US Department of Housing
and Urban Development, “Community Development Block Grant Program,”
(http://www.hud.gov/cpd/cdbg/deskguid.html).
(Internet document.)
[9] Olatokunbo Fashola and
Robert Slavin, “Schoolwide Reform Models: What Works?” Phi Delta
Kappan, January 1998.
[10] Peter Witt and John
Crompton, “A Paradigm of the Times: Parks and Recreation in the
1990s,” Parks and Recreation, December 1, 1999.
[11] Texas A&M University
and the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Evaluation of the Eastside
Story After-School Program, by Dr. Peter Witt, College Station, Texas,
August 2000. (Consultant’s report.)
[12] E-mail communications
from Dr. Peter Witt, professor, Texas A&M University, June 13 and June 26,
2000.
[13] Texas Comptroller of
Public Accounts, “Eastside Story,” Fiscal Notes, April 2000,
pp. 10-11.
|
