This article is a review of the 2011 book "Better Together: A Model University-Community Partnership for Urban Youth" by Barbara Jentleson. Better Together examines in depth the first decade of the Duke-Durham Neighborhood Partnership (DDNP), focusing on its involvement with six community-based afterschool programs sponsored by Duke’s Project HOPE (Holistic Opportunities Plan for Enrichment). The primary aim of Project HOPE was to provide academic support to Durham’s low-income minority youth.
This article examines the literature on best practices in content-specific professional development and then aligns this work with the practices of a citywide afterschool chess program run by After School Activities Partnerships (ASAP) in Philadelphia. This analysis shows that implementing content-specific professional development based on best practices can lead to long-lasting and content-rich OST programming.
Community technology centers (CTCs) help bridge the digital divide for immigrant youth in disadvantaged neighborhoods. A study of six CTCs in California shows that these centers also promote positive youth development for young people who are challenged to straddle two cultures.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Rebecca LondonManuel PastorRachel Rosner
Our study looks at how participation in a continuous quality improvement initiative produces higher-quality practice in Rhode Island’s afterschool community by fostering change in program management practices. Among other findings, we discovered that quality improvement begins with program managers, who then lead the process of change.
Community-based arts education serves the best of youth development practices and principles. In an era when school-based outcomes drive much afterschool programming, the value of the arts in building young people’s skills and abilities deserves wide support.
Building on—ratherthan trying to overcome—the unique characteristics of early adolescence, Vermont’s 21st Century Community Learning Centers are using the “five Rs of program design” to improve middle schoolers’ attendance and youth development outcomes.
This article discusses competing models of afterschool programming. It points out the weaknesses of the additive model and concludes that the contextual model is advantageous in fostering STEM learning environments. It encourages cross-setting approaches in the design, development, and documentation of out-of-school activities.
Analysis of the Harvard Family Research Project’s database of program evaluations suggests ways community-based afterschool programs can negotiate with schools to share financial, physical, social, and intellectual resources.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Christopher WimerMargaret PostPriscilla Little
Independent, Community-Based Organizations are threatened by the recent movement, supported by government money, to place after school programs in the same schools children attend all day. This article emphasizes the difference between community-based and school-centric afterschool programming.
By designing accountability systems that fully embrace the notion of afterschool programs as learning organizations and by using research from organizational development, education, and youth development to create effective learning environments, funders and sponsors can help programs to improve quality—and therefore, to succeed in their goal of achieving better outcomes for young people.
This study investigated the ways in which the Science Mentoring Project, an afterschool program with a youth development focus and mentoring component, helped fifth-grade participants develop key competencies in five areas: personal, social, cognitive, creative, and civic competencies. Development of these competencies, in turn, positively affected participants’ school experiences. Using program observations, teacher interviews, student surveys, a student focus group, and mentor feedback forms, researchers studied how—not just whether—the project’s youth development activities affected school
This article examines afterschool science in light of the National Research Council’s comprehensive synthesis report on promoting science learning in informal environments (NRC, 2009). We present the results of our analysis of qualitative case studies of nine state-funded afterschool sites in California, discussing the strengths of these programs against the background of three key site-based constraints—time available for science, staff’s science backgrounds, and instructional materials—as well as the importance of partnerships with outside organizations to support sites in overcoming these