Implementation Quality and Positive Experiences in After-School Programs
- 997 Downloads
Data collected during an evaluation of a multi-site trial of an enhanced after-school program were used to relate quality of program implementation to student experiences after school. The enhanced after-school program incorporated a drug use and violence prevention component that was shown to be effective in previous research. Building on Durlak and Dupre’s (Am J Community Psychol 41:327–350, 2008) dimensions of implementation, we assessed the level of dosage, quality of management and climate, participant responsiveness, and staffing quality achieved at the five program sites. We evaluated how these characteristics co-varied with self-reported positive experiences after-school. The study illustrates how multiple dimensions of program implementation can be measured, and shows that some but not all dimensions of implementation are related to the quality of student after-school experiences. Measures of quality of management and climate, participant responsiveness, and staffing stability were most clearly associated with youth experiences. The importance of measuring multiple dimensions of program implementation in intervention research is discussed.
KeywordsAfter-school programs Implementation Evidence based practice
- Beckett, M., Hawken, A., & Jacknowitz, A. (2001). Accountability for after-school care: Devising standards and measuring adherence to them. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
- Durlak, J. A., & Weissberg, R. P. (2007). The impact of after-school programs that promote personal and social skills. Chicago, IL: Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. Retrieved February 12, 2007, from www.casel.org.
- Dynarski, M., James-Burdumy, S., Moore, M., Rosenberg, L., Deke, J., & Mansfield, W. (2003). When schools stay open late: The national evaluation of the 21st century community learning centers program: New findings: US Department of Education, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
- Fashola, O. (1998). Review of extended day and after school programs and their effectiveness. Retrieved January, 2008, from www.csos.jhu.edu/crespar/techReports/Report24.pdf.
- Finance Project. (2007). Estimated federal investment in out-of-school time. Retrieved April, 2008, from www.financeproject.org/publications/estimatedfederalOST_TFPflyer.pdf.
- Gerstenblith, S. A., Soulé, D. A., Gottfredson, D. C., Lu, S., Kellstrom, M. A., Womer, S. C., et al. (2005). ASPs, antisocial behavior, and positive youth development: An exploration of the relationship between program implementation and changes in youth development. In J. L. Mahoney, R. W. Larson, & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Organized activities as contexts of development: Extracurricular activities, after-school and community programs (pp. 457–478). Mahwah, NH: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.Google Scholar
- Gottfredson, D. C., Cross, A. B., & Soulé, D. A. (2007). Distinguishing characteristics of effective and ineffective after-school programs to prevention delinquency and victimization. Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 601–631.Google Scholar
- Gottfredson, D. C., Cross, A. B., Wilson, D. M., Rorie, M., & Connell, N. (in press). Effects of participation in after-school programs for middle school students: A randomized trial. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness.Google Scholar
- Granger, R. C. (2008). After-school programs and academics: Implications for policy, practice, and research. Social Policy Report, 22, 3–19.Google Scholar
- Granger, R. C., Durlak, J. A., Yohalem, N., & Reisner, E. (2007). Improving after-school program quality. The William T. Grant foundation working paper. Retrieved May, 2008, from www.wtgrantfoundation.org/usr_doc/Improving_After-School_Program_Quality.pdf.
- Grossman, J., Campbell, M., & Raley, B. (2007). Quality time after School: What instructors can do to enhance learning. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventures.Google Scholar
- Hansen, W. B., & Larson, R. (2005). The youth experiences survey 2.0: Instrument revisions and validity testing. Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois.Google Scholar
- Harrington, N. G., Giles, S. M., Hoyle, R. H., Feeney, G. J., & Youngbluth, S. C. (2001). Evaluation of the All Stars™ character education and problem behavior prevention program: Effects on mediator and outcome variables for middle school students. Health Education Research, 28, 533–546.Google Scholar
- Kane, T. J. (2004). The impact of after school programs: Interpreting the results of four recent evaluations. The William T. Grant foundation working paper. Retrieved May, 2008, from http://www.wtgrantfoundation.org/usr_doc/After-school_paper.pdf.
- Sickmund, M., Snyder, H. N., & Poe-Yamagata, E. (1997). Juvenile offenders and victims: 1997 update on violence. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.Google Scholar
- Simpkins-Chaput, S., Little, P. M. D., & Weiss, H. B. (2004). Understanding and measuring attendance in out-of-school time programs. Issues and opportunities in out-of-school time evaluation brief no. 7. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Family Research Project.Google Scholar
- Weisman, S. A., Womer, S. C., Kellstrom, M. A., Bryner, S. L., Kahler, A., Slocum, L., et al. (2002). Maryland after school community grant program, report on the 2001–2002 school year evaluation of the phase 3 after school programs. Technical report.Google Scholar
- Whitebook, M., Howes, C., & Phillips, D. (1998). Worthy work, unlivable wages: The national child care staffing study, 1988–1997. Washington, DC: National Center for the Early Childhood Work Force.Google Scholar