Evaluator: Huang, D. & Wang, J. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California, Los Angeles.

Evaluation Methods: This evaluation’s multi-method approach combined qualitative and quantitative research methodologies, including longitudinal administrative data and data collected by the evaluation team. The evaluation team administered surveys to students, parents and staff; organized principal, project director, and site coordinator interviews; held focus group for students and site staff; and collected academic assessments, including the Standardized Testing and Reporting Program (STAR), the California English Language Development Test (CELDT), and the California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE), as well as results from the California Physical Fitness Test. Data was collected for the 2007-08, 2008-09, and 2009-10 academic years. Propensity score matching was used to establish a control group of non-participants as the comparison group.

Evaluation Type: Quasi-experimental

Summary of Outcomes: Overall, the report found that students who frequently participated in the afterschool programs made greater academic and physical fitness gains than their non-participating peers. For the purposes of this evaluation, frequent participation was defined as attending the program at least three days per week for elementary students and attending at least two days per week for middle school students.

Examining the impact of afterschool program participation on students’ academic performance, the report found that elementary school aged students who frequently participated in the programs had higher California Standards Test (CST) math scores than non-participants, but no effect was seen on CST English language arts (ELA) test scores. Frequent middle school participants outperformed non-participants on the CST ELA, but there was no effect on their CST math tests. Frequent participants who had scored “far below basic” in previous year’s CST tests saw significant improvement in ELA and math test scores. However, comparing afterschool program participants overall (including frequent and non-frequent participants) to nonparticipants, no significant statistical difference was found on students’ CST ELA or math tests. (See Tables 159 and 160 on pgs. 241 and 242 in the full report to review the estimated effect of afterschool program participation.)

Among special student populations participating in the afterschool programs African-American students who were frequent afterschool participants performed better on academic measures than their non-participating peers. Similarly, students with special needs and disabilities who frequently participated in their afterschool program performed better on academic measures than their non-participating peers. However, no clear relationship was seen between participation in ASES programming and English language students’ California English Language Development Test (CELDT) performance. (See Tables 161 and 162 on pages 244 and 245 in the full report to review the estimated effect of afterschool program participation on CELDT scores). Looking at the impact of participation in afterschool programs on students’ health and physical fitness, across the three academic calendar years of the evaluation elementary students who frequently participated in afterschool were more likely to pass all six benchmarks—aerobic capacity, body composition, abdominal strength, trunk strength, upper body strength, and flexibility—for the Healthy Fitness Zones (HFZ) than matched non-participants. All middle school participants, regardless of participation frequency, were more likely of passing all benchmarks than the control students, with the exception of flexibility.

Findings related to community type include that although a majority of programs offered computer/Internet activities, rural programs were more likely to offer computer/Internet activities than urban or suburban programs, and less likely to have school safety or youth development activities. Urban and suburban programs outperformed rural programs in meeting goals related to increasing skill development of students, but rural programs outperformed both city and suburban programs in meeting goals related to behavioral changes. (See Table 38 on pg. 81 in the full report to review the percentage of grantees by community type that met or progressed toward meeting their goals.)

Associated Evaluation: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/ba/cp/uclaeval.asp

Date Added: November 3, 2016