Inside the Black Box: Assessing and Improving Quality in Youth Programs

Original Paper

Abstract

Over the past decade, structured programming for children and youth during the non-school hours has expanded exponentially. A confluence of recent research studies and program evaluations backs the publicly perceived notion that after-school programs can positively influence important developmental and learning outcomes. The rapid expansion of the field and the potential of programs to contribute to child and youth development have made defining what high quality programs look like and learning how to improve program quality key challenges facing the field. This paper describes what is known about the relation between youth program quality and youth developmental outcomes, summarizes different quality assessment tools being used in the field, and discusses how such tools are being used to drive systemic quality improvement efforts.

Keywords

Youth programs Quality Assessment 

References

  1. Afterschool Alliance. (2004). America after 3 PM: A household survey on afterschool in America. Washington, DC: Afterschool Alliance.Google Scholar
  2. Benson, P. L., & Saito, R. N. (2001). The scientific foundations of youth development. In P. L. Benson & K. J. Pittman (Eds.), Trends in youth development: Visions, realities and challenges (pp. 135–154). Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  3. Blazevski, J., & Smith, C. (2007). Inter-rater reliability on the youth program quality assessment. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Educational Research Foundation.Google Scholar
  4. Connell, J., & Gambone, M. A. (2002). Youth development in community settings: A community action framework. Philadelphia, PA: Youth Development Strategies Inc.Google Scholar
  5. 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.Google Scholar
  6. Forum for Youth Investment. (2003). Quality counts. Forum Focus, 1, 1–4.Google Scholar
  7. Granger, R., Durlak, J. A., Yohalem, N., & Reisner, E. (2007). Improving after-school program quality. New York, NY: William T. Grant Foundation.Google Scholar
  8. Grossman, J., Campbell, M., & Raley, B. (2007). Quality time after school: What instructors can do to enhance learning. Philadelphia, PA: Public/Private Ventures.Google Scholar
  9. Harms, T., Jacobs, E. V., & White, D. R. (1996). School-age care environment scale. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  10. High/Scope Educational Research Foundation. (2005). Youth program quality assessment. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.Google Scholar
  11. Intercultural Center for Research in Education & National Institute on Out-of-School Time. (2005). Pathways to success for youth: What works in afterschool: A report of the Massachusetts Afterschool Research Study. Boston, MA: United Way of Mass Bay.Google Scholar
  12. Lauer, P. A., Akiba, M., Wilkerson, S. B., Apthorp, H. S., Snow, D., & Martin-Glenn, M. L. (2006). Out-of-school time programs: A meta-analysis of effects for at-risk students. Review of Educational Research, 76, 275–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. McLaughlin, M. (2000). Community counts: How youth organizations matter for youth development. Washington, DC: Public Education Network.Google Scholar
  14. Miller, B., & Surr, W. (2005). The assessment of afterschool program practices tool. Wellesley, MA: National Institute on Out-of-School Time.Google Scholar
  15. National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, Committee on Community-level Programs for Youth. (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  16. National School-Age Care Alliance. (2001). NSACA program observation tool. Charlestown, MA: National School-Age Care Alliance.Google Scholar
  17. New York State Afterschool Network. (n.d.). Program quality self-assessment tool. New York, NY: New York State Afterschool Network.Google Scholar
  18. Padgette, H. C. (2003). Finding funding: A guide to federal sources for out-of-school time and community school initiatives. Washington, DC: The Finance Project.Google Scholar
  19. Pittman, K. J., & Irby, M. (1996). Preventing problems or promoting development: Competing priorities or inseparable goals?. Takoma Park, MD: International Youth Foundation—US.Google Scholar
  20. Policy Studies Associates, Inc. (2005). Out-of-school time observation tool (2nd ed.). Washington D.C.: Policy Studies Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  21. Reisner, E. R., White, R. N., Russell, C. A., & Birmingham, J. (2004). Building quality, scale, and effectiveness in after-school programs: Summary report of the TASC evaluation. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  22. Smith, C., Akiva, T., Blazevski, J. & Pelle, L. (2008). Final report on the Palm Beach quality improvement system pilot. Ypsilanti, MI: David P. Weikart Center for Youth Program Quality.Google Scholar
  23. Smith, C., & Hohmann, C. (2005). Full findings from the youth program quality assessment validation study. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Educational Research Foundation.Google Scholar
  24. Vandell, D. L., & Pierce, K. M. (2001). Experiences in after-school programs and child well-being. In J. L. Mahoney (Chair), Protective aspects of after-school activities: Processes and mechanisms. Paper symposium conducted at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  25. Vandell, D. L., Reisner, E. R., & Pierce, K. M. (2007). Outcomes linked to high-quality afterschool programs: Longitudinal findings from the study of promising afterschool programs. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates.Google Scholar
  26. Vandell, D. L., Shumow, L., & Posner, J. (2004). After-school programs for low-income children: Differences in program quality. In J. Mahoney, J. Eccles, & R. Larson (Eds.), Organized activities as contexts for development: Extracurricular activities, after-school, and community programs. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  27. Westmoreland, H., & Little, P. (2006). Exploring quality standards for middle school after school programs: What we know and what we need to know. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Family Research Project.Google Scholar
  28. Wilson-Ahlstrom, A., & Yohalem, N. (2007). Building quality improvement systems: Lessons from three emerging efforts in the youth-serving sector. Washington, DC: The Forum for Youth Investment.Google Scholar
  29. Wisconsin Center for Education Research & Policy Studies Associates, Inc. (2005). Study of promising afterschool programs: Observation manual for site verification visits. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research & Policy Studies Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  30. Yohalem, N., Wilson-Ahlstrom, A., Fischer, S., & Shinn, M. (2007). Measuring youth program quality. Washington, DC: The Forum for Youth Investment.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Community Research and Action 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Forum for Youth InvestmentWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations