After‐school Program Effects on Behavior: Results From the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program National Evaluation

Abstract

"This paper presents evidence on after-school programs' effects on behavior from the national evaluation of the U.S. Department of Education's 21st Century Community Learning Centers after-school program. Findings come from both of the study's components: (1) an elementary school component based on random assignment of 2,308 students in 12 school districts and (2) a middle school component based on a matched comparison design including 4,264 students in 32 districts. Key findings include higher levels of negative behavior for elementary students and some evidence of higher levels of negative behaviors for middle school students". ("JEL "I21) Copyright (c) 2008 Western Economic Association International.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluation of an After-School Prosocial Behavior Program in an Area of Socioeconomic Disadvantage

“…Similarly, the meta-analysis by Zief et al (2006) showed that 84% of the outcomes measured in behavioral after-school programs showed no effects. Also, the resultant negative effects observed in the current study, are consistent with the findings presented in recent, large-scale studies of afterschool programs (James-Burdumy et al, 2008;Linden et al, 2011). However, the evaluation of a prosocial behavior program ⅐ 21 findings in this study deviate from the findings by Durlak et al (2010) in relation to the effectiveness of SAFE social and emotional learning after-school programs as the Mate-Tricks program followed SAFE practices in that it was sequenced (builds on concepts over the sessions), involved active learning (e.g., role-plays), included a focus on skill development (such as conflict resolution and emotional skills), and the children, facilitators, and parents were explicitly made aware of the program outcomes.…”

“…In summary, it appears that after-school programs are a challenging context in which to improve personal and social outcomes. This is evidenced by prior studies with null or negative effects (James-Burdumy et al, 2008;Zief et al, 2006), reduced effects of non-SAFE programs (Durlak et al, 2010), and an identified disparity between the effectiveness of SEL programs delivered in and out of school (Durlak et al, 2011).…”

“…Within these reviews, personal and social outcomes were occasionally assessed, and some significant adverse program effects were found. Furthermore, recent large, high-quality studies of after-school programs by James-Burdumy, Dynarski, and Deke (2008) and Linden, Herrera, and Grossman (2011) also found some negative effects on child-reported personal and social outcomes. One recent major meta-analysis investigating after-school SEL programs, however, presented evidence to the contrary.…”

“…James- Burdumy et al (2008) argued that after-school behavior programs may be influenced by increased fatigue at the end of the school day that may cause "acting-out" behaviors from the children, different disciplinary standards between in-school and after-school contexts, and the potentially negative influences of a child's peers attending a referral-based program. Little et al (2008) highlight three factors that they argue are crucial for success in after-school programs.…”

Factors Influencing the Implementation of Organized Physical Activity and Fruit and Vegetable Snacks in the HOP'N After-School Obesity Prevention Program

“…It is likely that because continued funding was not tied to PA and FV, these objectives were not a high priority. 26,27 Third, after-school programs may need to develop PA specialists who are responsible for delivering activity to all the after-school age groups. In the first intervention year, one site developed stations where one GL's entire job was to implement organized PA.…”