Key findings from the “Out-of-School Time Survey” of superintendents include:

• 97% agree afterschool programs can improve student skills in reading
• 97% agree afterschool programs can improve student skills in math
• 95% agree afterschool programs improve academics
• 95% agree that afterschool programs are to offer a safe place for students
• 93% agree that afterschool programs can improve student skills in science
• 92% agree that afterschool programs increase social interactions, fun and/or engagement
• 82% agree that afterschool programs are to offer activities not present during the school day

These findings show afterschool programs are seen as a critical component to students’ academic achievement, safety and overall well-being.  This is very much in line with past surveys we have conducted and past surveys we have included in our fact sheets.  For instance, Afterschool Alliance’s 2012 election eve poll found that when presented with information that research shows afterschool programs can lead to increased attendance, improved behavior and grades, 89 percent of voters agree that afterschool programs are important.  If you’re interested in additional polling on afterschool, check out our Polling Data page.

Another noteworthy finding from the report is that the cost of child care has increased over time, although the average percentage of family income spent on child care stayed constant, hovering around 7 percent, between 1997 and 2011.  The average weekly cost of child care for families with employed mothers increased from $84 in 1985 (constant 2011 dollars) to $143 in 2011.  Looking specifically at school-age care costs, the report finds that the average cost for school-age care was $124 in 2011.  Among families living below the poverty line, the average weekly cost for school-age child care was $88, or nearly one-third of the family’s income.  Of particular concern is the fact that among families who paid for child care, those below the poverty line spent more than four times the percentage of their income on school-age child care as other families who were living at or above the poverty line (29 percent compared with 6 percent).

Based on these cost figures, it seems safe to assume that families are not getting much help with their child care costs.  In fact, only 5 percent of families report receiving help paying for school-age child care and just 3 percent report that they received help from the government. 

While there is some good news regarding self care in the report, it is troubling that there are 4.2 million kids, ages 5 to 14 and living with their mom, who didn’t have a regular child care arrangement.  Five percent of kids ages 5 to 11 were on their own in 2011 and 27 percent of kids ages 12 to 14 were on their own.  On average these kids spend 7 hours per week with no supervised care.  These numbers are in line with findings from our 2009 America After 3PM report that 4 percent of kids in kindergarten through 5^th grade and 30 percent of kids in 6^th through 8^th grade were on their own.   Given the findings regarding the high cost of school-age care and the lack of assistance in paying for care, it’s not surprising that the number of kids in self-care, while on the decline, still continues to be high.

We know that the hours between 3 and 6 p.m. are the peak hours for juvenile crime and experimentation with drugs, alcohol and other risky behaviors, which is why these numbers illustrate the need for increased investment in afterschool programs to ensure that more kids have the opportunity to participate in programs that will keep them safe, provide academic enrichment and support their working parents.   

How kids spend their time during the hours after school is a primary concern for the Afterschool Alliance.  I’m happy to share that we’re in the middle of planning for our next round of America After 3PM, the largest national household survey that looks at what kids are doing during the afternoon.  The survey provides incredibly useful and relevant data for parents, the afterschool field and policy makers.  I can’t wait to see what insights we gain from the survey this time around, especially taking into account the potential impact of sequestration on families, afterschool programs and communities.  Stay tuned.

Key findings from the report include:

• Students in grades 4 through 11 participating in the ACE program were less likely to have disciplinary incidents compared to non-participants.  Compared to non-participants, attending the ACE program for less than 30 days decreased the rate of disciplinary incidents by 6 percent, and attending the program for at least 60 days decreased the rate of disciplinary incidents by 11 percent.
• ACE program low attendees—students who participated in the program at least 30 days—in the 4^th through 11^th grades saw a 14 percent decrease in the rate of being absent and high attendees—students who participated in the program for at least 60 days—saw a 15 percent decrease in absences when compared to non-participants.  Both low- and high-attending students in the 9^th through 11^th grades saw a greater reduction in absences, 19 percent and 18 percent respectively.
• Both low and high attendees of the ACE program saw a significant increase in likelihood of being promoted to the next grade.  For grades 4-5 and 7-11, low attendees were 43 percent more likely to be promoted to the next grade compared to non-attendees, and high attendees were 47 percent more likely to be promoted to the next grade. 
• Among low attendees in 9^th grade through 11^th grade, the likelihood of being promoted to the next grade increased by 79 percent.  Among high-attending high school students, the likelihood of being promoted to the next grade increased by 97 percent when compared to students not participating in the program. 
• ACE programs characterized as having a high point of service (POS) quality had a greater effect in terms of supporting a decrease in disciplinary incidents and supporting student grade promotion.  

Another important aspect of the study is the discussion surrounding the types of instructional approaches associated with high-quality activities.  In addition to finding that high program quality was related to better student outcomes, the report outlined that a program’s clarity of purpose, the intentional use of time, and an active and interactive instructor were the three types of approaches associated with high-quality activities.  Quality improvement is an ongoing and iterative process, and these tools can help afterschool programs continue to provide the best programming and support to ensure their students’ future success.

Despite the evidence demonstrating that 21^st CCLC programs have a positive effect on children’s academics, behavior and school attendance, the House budget currently extends the 5 percent sequestration cuts, reducing funding for the 21^st CCLC program by approximately $57.9 million.  This cut will mean that close to 58,000 kids will lose the ability to participate in an afterschool or summer learning program.  If you’re interested in learning what you can do to help take action against these cuts, visit our Policy & Action Center.

Our recent report chronicles the development and evaluation of five EA units.  The pilot testing of EA confirmed that children in OST can engage in engineering practice and develop engineering skills.  Many of the skills necessary for success in engineering are also critical 21^st century skills (critical thinking, collaboration, creativity and communication).  Extensive observations of children piloting EA units and examination of the engineering journals in which they recorded their plans for designs provide evidence that children were actively using these engineering (and 21^st century) skills to complete design challenges.  Our report provides many examples of kids’ drawings and verbal explanations that exhibit deep understanding about how their designs work, careful consideration of the properties of materials, and solution-oriented reasons for improving their designs.

The drawings to the right, for example, show a child’s initial (top) and improved (bottom) designs for a small-bubble maker in EA’s Bubble Bonanza unit.  Based on testing the initial design and knowledge of the materials (both important in engineering), this child chose to improve the bubble maker by using a cup without holes and incorporating a screen, which was seen during materials exploration to produce lots of very tiny bubbles.  The comfort with which we saw children expressing their ideas in engineering was also observed by OST providers, who agreed that their kids had “increased confidence that they can design and improve technologies.”

Along with increased ability to apply engineering skills, EA children reported more positive attitudes toward STEM fields.  Kids participating in pilot testing of EA completed the “Engineering Attitudes” survey, which asks them to rate their agreement with several statements about science and engineering.  Because children completed this survey before and after experiencing an EA unit, we were able to see whether their attitudes about these statements improved.  Gains were significant for children participating in EA during the summer of 2012, particularly for the statements "I would enjoy being an engineer when I grow up” and “Engineers help make people’s lives better as part of their job.”  Providers agreed that, following EA, their kids “believe they could be engineers when they grow up” and “have a better understanding of what engineers do.”

Kids’ ability to apply engineering skills, their increased expressed interest in engineering careers and their understanding of engineers’ roles in society mirror some of the indicators of STEM learning outcomes described in the Afterschool Alliance report.  While it is promising that EA appears to bolster these outcomes for children, it is equally as exciting that the “Engineering Attitudes” instrument can be used to appropriately measure outcomes.  One of the key recommendations in the Afterschool Alliance report is that evaluation and assessment experts must begin designing measures that can assess these outcomes.  We are excited to offer the validity and reliability-tested “Engineering Attitudes” instrument as one of the first answers to that call.  The instrument is currently undergoing revision, and we will release the newest version to the public as soon as it has been tested for reliability.

Ultimately, the research surrounding Engineering Adventures supports the findings of the Afterschool Alliance report.  While outcomes in STEM content knowledge are not necessarily appropriate for OST settings, other extremely valuable outcomes are feasible, and even measurable.  Future Engineering Adventures research will focus on how EA can better support providers and programs as they pursue these outcomes for their kids in the context of engineering, including the development of additional effective instruments and methods for evaluating STEM activities in afterschool.

Read the full report here, check out the “Engineering Attitudes” survey, or try out Engineering Adventures for yourself.  The development and research of Engineering Adventures has been funded by the S.D. Bechtel Jr. Foundation and the Samueli Foundation.

Key findings from the survey include:

• Teacher job satisfaction is at 39%, five points lower than the 2011 survey and the lowest point in the past 25 years.
• More than half (51%) of teachers say they feel under great stress at least several days a week.
• More than 7 in 10 principals (72%) and teachers (73%) rate engaging parents and the community in improving the education of students as very challenging or challenging for school leadership.
• Approximately 4 in 5 principals (83%) and teachers (78%) report that addressing the individual needs of diverse learners at their schools is challenging for school leaders.
• A majority (56%) of teachers report that their school’s budget decreased during the past year.
• Principals in high-needs schools—schools serving a greater population of low-income students and schools that have fewer students performing at or above grade level in English language arts and math—are less likely to give their teachers an excellent rating.
• An overwhelming majority of principals and teachers say that they are knowledgeable about the Common Core State Standards (principals-93%; teachers-92%) and are confident that teachers have the ability to teach the Common Core State Standards (principals-90%; teachers-93%), but a majority of both groups believe that implementing the Common Core is very challenging or challenging for school leaders (principals-67%; teachers-59%).
• A strong majority of principals and teachers are confident that the Common Core will improve student achievement (principals-82%; teachers-69%) and better prepare students for college and the workforce (principals-81%; teachers-71%).
• Almost all teachers (96%) believe that real-world problems that students can solve would be helpful for teachers in implementing the Common Core State Standards.

The after-school community needs to reinforce the point that its role in STEM isn't an either-or proposition, particularly as Congress moves to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and considers where after-school programs fit into K-12 funding priorities. It takes both after-school and in-school STEM efforts, and their respective strengths, to move toward educating a STEM-savvy workforce that can compete in the global economy.

After-school programs are uniquely suited to engaging students in flexible, hands-on learning that can spark an interest in STEM. They also build real skills and help students appreciate the value of science, technology, engineering, and math for themselves and their communities. That's why such programs are often the home of robotics and rocketry teams and environmental education programs, and why after-school educators frequently work with STEM-related companies and university professors, among others, to give students a glimpse of future careers in the field.

Such experiences can make all the difference for some students and provide a critical complement to their in-school classroom time. Moreover, by broadening the base of students who are interested in STEM, after-school programs increase both the diversity and sheer numbers of students likely to succeed in science and math classrooms—and careers.

Another report, also released in January by the organizations My College Options and STEM connector and called "Where Are the STEM Students?," reveals that the number of high school seniors interested in pursuing STEM-related studies in college and beyond has increased 20 percent since 2004. After-school programs can support continued growth in that area, as well as help address an increasing gender gap noted in the study, since a fundamental strength of after-school programs is their ability to reach underserved and underrepresented populations.

Indeed, the after-school community has seen increased interest from philanthropies and the business community precisely because many funders recognize that progress will not happen without the kind of informal STEM education that is offered after school.

Conversations around major STEM learning outcomes (as well as a number of indicators and sub-indicators of progress outlined in the Afterschool Alliance's study) cannot wait. As the reauthorization of the ESEA progresses and states devise new assessment measures in line with the Common Core State Standards and the Next Generation Science Standards, policies that directly affect the funding and focus of many after-school programs will take effect.

At this crucial time, the outcomes and the associated indicators of learning identified here can, I hope, give the after-school community the clarity it needs to show what it does best and help policymakers understand that after-school programs are an essential partner without which STEM learning can't thrive.

Regardless of respondents’ role in their school’s afterschool programs, an overwhelming majority (94%) view the programs as key partners in providing additional STEM learning opportunities for their students.  Afterschool STEM supports school-day learning in a number of specific ways; respondents’ top five are listed below:

1. Provides additional time for students to engage with STEM in a different way (93%)
2. Provides hands-on engagement not always possible during the school day (89%)
3. Provides students with more opportunities to do engineering and technology (83%)
4. Teaches them 21^st century STEM-relevant skills such as team work, problem solving, communication, etc. (83%)
5. Exposes students to professionals and mentors in STEM fields (71%)

Additionally, more than 9 in 10 survey respondents agreed that afterschool has a role in helping schools think about the implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards.  It is clear that school-day staff recognize the synergies with afterschool, as it provides a unique learning environment that both complements and supplements school-day learning.  The urgent need to improve STEM education, address workforce issues and improve other educational outcomes is a big task.  As children spend less than 20% of their waking hours in school each year, schools can’t tackle these issues alone—the afterschool field is a willing partner!

To learn more about the outcomes of STEM learning in afterschool, check out the Afterschool Alliance's recently published report on what afterschool experts agree is appropriate and feasible for this space.  For several recommendations on how afterschool can grow to become an essential partner in STEM education reform, read this article from the new book, “Expanding Minds and Opportunities: Leveraging the Power of Afterschool and Summer Learning for Student Success.”