The Harvard Family Research Project separated from the Harvard Graduate School of Education to become the Global Family Research Project as of January 1, 2017. It is no longer affiliated with Harvard University.
Volume VII, Number 2, Spring 2001
Issue Topic: Out-of-School Time Issue #2
From the Director's Desk
 |
| Heather Weiss |
The conversation continues…
As many of you know, our Fall 2000 (Volume 6, Number 1) issue of The Evaluation Exchange focused on after school programs and out-of-school time. So, you might be wondering, why publish another issue on the same topic so soon after the first? Well, with so much activity in the after school field—programmatically, academically, and philanthropically—we think there is more to talk about than one issue can hold. We are interested not just in continuing the conversation, but in engaging in dialogue that broadens the scope of discussions that help to shape the future of after school programs and out-of-school time.
In the first out-of-school time issue, we outlined some of the challenges facing the after school field: building evaluation capacity, incorporating continuous improvement as a component of good practice, selecting appropriate outcomes, and strengthening the connection between outcomes and theory. As we confront these challenges, we uncover opportunities for creativity and innovation that serve as springboards for new investment in the out-of-school time field. Examples of this creativity include involving youth in research and evaluation, connecting developmental theory to after school program practice and evaluation, and including communities as agents in positive youth development.
However, the greatest opportunity that arises from confronting the challenges that face the field is that of learning through dialogue. To share and build the knowledge base for the field of out-of-school time, conversations need to cut across position and place and involve theorists, practitioners, evaluators and funders, in various locations, with wide ranging skills and backgrounds. These conversations must happen in many different venues—in person, in print, and online—and address the important ways in which program development, data collection and performance management and program evaluation can be connected to program improvement and field development.
This conversation can begin by understanding the role that developmental research plays in setting the stage for understanding the most important element of after school programs—the youth themselves. What are the developmental benchmarks for middle childhood? For adolescence? What are the important supports that after school programs can offer to help youth through these critical years?
Evaluations of large initiatives contribute to building the out-of-school time field. These investments document and demonstrate the practices and outcomes that help smaller, local programs argue for local investment in programs and policies. In addition to informing policy on a national level, these large initiatives help to strengthen local capacity for evaluation by testing instruments that can be adapted and used by local evaluators.
This understanding in place, the conversation then incorporates local-level initiatives and evaluators. These stakeholders offer new perspectives and valuable feedback to buttress the knowledge built at the national level. Their on-the-ground, local knowledge brings to the more general, national discussion a new context for conversation.
However fruitful this discussion may be, it is incomplete without the support of funders. Investing in building evaluation capacity at the local level and building the infrastructure for information sharing and dissemination are important contributions funders can make.
We see this conversation as a form of continuous improvement for the field of after school and out-of-school time as a whole. Information gathered by one program to meet its funders accountability needs or to satisfy evaluation requirements is rich with lessons that can inform a broader audience of after school stakeholders. Lessons learned in other education and human service fields can inform the development of practice and evaluation in the field of out-of-school time. Investments in after school programs can be reconceptualized as investing in youth, in communities, and in the knowledge base that informs after school programs across the country. Building the capacity of after school programs can mean more than capacity to collect data or participate in evaluation; it can mean the capacity to participate in a cross-cutting conversation in which evaluators, practitioners, funders, policy makers, and other after school stakeholders learn from each other, continuously improving the out-of-school time field.
This issue and the Fall 2000 issue of The Evaluation Exchange are part of our contribution to this ongoing conversation.
Heather B. Weiss, Ed.D.
Founder & Director
Harvard Family Research Project