Jump to:Page Content
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
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.
Mar 30, 2011
Research Description
Overview and Components | This study focused on afterschool programs in two rural counties in a Western state. Both programs offer recreational opportunities, homework assistance, creative arts, and computer literacy activities, with the aim of helping youth gain knowledge and skills that will improve attitudes and behaviors necessary to become contributing community members. |
Start Date | Data for the study were collected during the 2003–2004 school year. |
Scope | local |
Type | afterschool |
Location | rural |
Setting | public school, recreation center |
Participants | preschool through high school |
Number of Sites/Grantees | 2 rural counties |
Number Served | approximately 50–60 youth served, 25–30 at each site |
Study Details | This study examined how the afterschool programs helped youth develop basic life skills/competencies and positive behaviors, learn to make healthy choices, improve relationships with their parents, complete homework, and feel connected to their school community. |
Funding Level | The grant for this project totaled $750,000, including $24,100 for evaluation, over 5 years. |
Funding Sources | The two study counties received grant funds from United States Department of Agriculture’s Children, Youth, and Families at Risk program to enhance or expand their afterschool programs to reach more youth in their communities. |
Researchers | Bethany L. Letiecq, Sandra J. Bailey, and Julie A. Keller, Department of Health & Human Development, Montana State University |
Research Profiled | Meeting the Needs of At-Risk Youth and Their Families |
Research Planned | None. |
Reports Available | Letiecq, B. L., Bailey, S. J., & Keller, J. A. (2007). Rural after-school programs: Meeting the needs of at-risk youth and their families. Journal of Youth Development 2(2). Available at: http://centralvalleyafterschool.org/pdf/RuralAfterSchool.pdf |
Contacts
Research | Bethany L. Letiecq Associate Professor Community Health Department of Health & Human Development Montana State University 316D Herrick Hall Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717-3540 Tel: 406-994-7396 Email: bletiecq@montana.edu |
|
Profile Updated | March 31, 2011 |
Research Study: Meeting the Needs of At-Risk Youth and Their Families
Research Description
Research Purpose | To examine the relationships between youth’s perceptions of their life skills, school connectedness, and parents’ caregiving practices; how youth’s behaviors and competencies changed over the school year; the relationship between youth’s behaviors and competencies and youth and parent/caregiver perceptions of life skills, school connectedness, and caregiving practices; and parents’/caregivers’ perceptions of their child’s afterschool program and that program’s influence on their child’s behavior, peer relationships, and parent–child relations. |
Research Design |
Quasi-Experimental and Non-Experimental: Pretest and posttest interviews were conducted with 47 youth (21 boys and 26 girls) participating in one of the two afterschool programs. Youth who participated in the study ranged in age from 6–16 with an average of just under 9 years old. The majority of participants (87%) were White. |
Data Collection Methods |
Interviews/Focus Groups: Youth interviews examined their perceptions of their life skills, school connectedness, and parents’ caregiving practices over the course of the school year. Parents/caregivers interviews assessed the relationship between youth behaviors and competencies and perceptions of life skills, school connectedness, and caregiving practices, as well as perceptions of their child’s afterschool program and the influence of that program on their child’s behavior, peer relationships, and parent–child relations. Surveys/Questionnaires: Program teacher surveys examined youth participants’ progress in the program. Test/Assessments: Youth interviews included adaptations of the following assessments:
Program teacher surveys included a version of the Teacher–Child Rating Scale (Hightower et al., 1986), with 36 items (18 competencies and 18 problem behaviors of youth). Competency subscales included acting out, shyness/anxiety, and learning problems. Behavior problem subscales included frustration, tolerance, assertiveness, and task orientation.
Related references: Schaefer, E. S. (1965). Children’s reports of parental behavior: An inventory. Child Development, 36, 417–424. |
Data Collection Timeframe | Data were collected during the 2003–2004 school year. |
Findings:
Formative/Process Findings
Activity Implementation |
Interviewed parents/caregivers agreed that the program provided appropriate activities (mean = 4.28 on a scale of 1–5, where 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree). |
Parent/Community Involvement |
Interviewed parents/caregivers were, on average, uncertain about the afterschool program’s adequacy to facilitate parent–school–community relationships (mean = 3.31 on a scale of 1–5, where 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree). Several parents stated feeling somewhat disconnected from the program and that they would like to be more involved. In interviews, parents/caregivers cited the program’s hours of operation as problematic and they requested more flexibility in time offerings. |
Staffing/Training |
Interviewed parents/caregivers agreed that the staff exhibited positive and professional characteristics (mean = 4.16 on a scale of 1–5, where 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree). Interviewed parents/caregivers agreed that the program provided adequate guidance and supervision (mean = 3.90 on a scale of 1–5, where 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree). |
Summative/Outcome Findings
Academic |
Surveys indicated a significant decrease from pretest to posttest in youth reports that their classes were boring and that youth wasted time when they should have been studying (p < .01 for each). |
Family |
Youth reported that their parents were significantly less willing to let them choose their own way of doing things (in general) at posttest than pretest (p < .05). |
Prevention |
From pretest to posttest, program teacher ratings revealed that youth showed significant decreases (p < .001 for each) in behavioral problems, both overall and in terms of the subscales for youth acting out, exhibiting shyness or anxiety, and learning problems. |
Youth Development |
From pretest to posttest, program teacher ratings revealed that youth showed significant gains (p < .001 for each) in competencies overall and in terms of the subscales of youth frustration tolerance, assertiveness, and task orientation. |