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.

www.HFRP.org

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.

Terms of Use ▼

Research Description

Overview and Components The Yale Study of Children’s After-School Time involves a 4-year longitudinal investigation of a representative sample of children who attended Grades 1–3 in Fall 2002. During the 2002–2003 school year, 37% of the sample participated in an after school program (ASP) that was part of a northeast city’s citywide after school initiative in the public school district. The remainder of sample had alternative after school arrangements including care from parents and other adults and self/sibling care. The study’s main goal is to understand how the variety of after school care arrangements these children experience relate to their overall development and well being over time.
Start Date Fall 2002 (ongoing, with anticipated completion in March 2007)
Scope local
Type after school
Location urban
Setting public school
Participants elementary school students (Grades 1–6)
Number of Sites/Grantees 9 ASPs in 3 public schools at baseline (Fall 2002) and 25 ASPs in 37 public schools at the most recent follow-up (Fall 2006)
Number Served The study involves 651 children enrolled in Grades 1–3 at one of 3 public schools in 2002—2003 (year 1).
Study Details The 3 schools were selected partly because they were located in geographically distinct areas and were among the most disadvantaged in the city (e.g., over 95% of students at these schools were eligible for free or reduced lunch in the 2002–2003 school year). All of the ASPs at these schools received support from a 21st Century Community Learning Centers grant and from local, state, and federal sources, as well as modest enrollment fees based on family income. All the ASPs had been operating for at least 5 years prior to the beginning of the study.

The ASPs’ goals are to provide a safe and supportive environment after school and to promote youth’s academic and social competence, and physical health. The ASPs are carried out within public schools between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m., with activities conducted separately by grade. Each ASP includes time for a snack, homework, enrichment learning (e.g., musical instruments, computers), supervised recreation (e.g., basketball, board games), and art. The majority of participants live in poverty and represent traditionally defined minority groups.
Funding Level The study’s funding totaled $1,086,623 (direct and indirect costs).
Funding Sources The study is supported by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the Smith Richardson Foundation.
Researchers Joseph L. Mahoney, Heather Lord, and Maria E. Parente, Department of Psychology, Yale University

Erica Carryl, Department of Applied Psychology, New York University
Research Profiled An Ecological Analysis of After School Program Participation and the Development of Academic Performance and Motivational Attributes for Disadvantaged Children

Afterschool Program Participation and the Development of Child Obesity and Peer Acceptance

Afterschool Program Engagement: Links to Child Competence and Program Quality and Content
Research Planned Forthcoming reports include:

Lord, H., & Mahoney, J. L. (acceptance pending). Neighborhood crime and self care: Risks for aggression and lower academic performance. Developmental Psychology.

Lord, H. (2006). Examining afterschool programs and self care as moderators in the association between neighborhood risk and children’s academic performance and aggression. Unpublished dissertation, Yale University.
Report Availability Mahoney, J. L., Lord, H, & Carryl, E. (2005). An ecological analysis of after-school program participation and the development of academic performance and motivational attributes for disadvantaged children. Child Development, 76(4), 811–825.

Mahoney, J. L., Lord, H, & Carryl, E. (2005). Afterschool program participation and the development of child obesity and peer acceptance. Applied Developmental Science, 9(4), 202–215. Available at www.leaonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s1532480xads0904_3.

Mahoney, J. L., Parente, M. E., & Lord H. (in press). Afterschool program engagement: Links to child competence and program quality and content. The Elementary School Journal.


Contacts

Research Joseph L. Mahoney, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Psychology
Yale University
P.O. Box 208205
New Haven, CT 06520
Tel: 203-432-7904
Fax: 203-432-7172
Email: joseph.mahoney@yale.edu
Profile Updated November 15, 2006

Research Study 1: An Ecological Analysis of After School Program Participation and the Development of Academic Performance and Motivational Attributes for Disadvantaged Children


Research Description

Research Purpose To study ASP participation and the development of academic performance and related motivational attributes in a sample of disadvantaged children.
Research Design Quasi-Experimental: In Fall 2002, 818 first through third graders at 3 public schools were invited to participate in the study. Of these, 599 received parental consent to participate (73%). The sample was balanced by gender (49% female) and was racially/ethnically diverse (50% Hispanic, 36% Black, 10% White, 2% Asian, and 2% other). The sample diversity was substantially similar to the total population of students served by the participating schools. During the 2002–2003 school year, the vast majority of fourth graders at these schools failed to meet state minimal proficiency requirements in reading, writing, and math. The sample’s median annual household income, including all forms of public assistance and compensation, was $16,794 for an average family size of 4.4 persons. The poverty status of the sample was as follows: 22% extremely poor (below 50% of the poverty threshold), 35% poor (50–100% of the threshold), 27% near poor (100–175% of the threshold), and 16% nonpoor (above 175% of the threshold).

Data were obtained for all 599 children in the research sample as follows: pretest parent survey/interview, pretest/posttest classroom teacher and ASP staff survey, and posttest academic measures (school grades and reading achievement). Response rates for each ranged from 83% to 99%.

The analysis strategy involved four steps. First, researchers identified patterns of after school care arrangements based on parents’ reports of the number of hours between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. in a typical school week that their child was involved in four types of care arrangements: ASP, parent/guardian, nonadult (e.g., self, sibling), and other adult (e.g., babysitters, relatives, adult friends). Analysis revealed four patterns of care arrangements: ASP care (children who attended ASPs nearly every day and were also in parent care for a portion of time on some days), parent care (children who were primarily in parent care each day), parent/nonadult care (children who regularly had a mix of parent/nonadult care each day), and other adult/nonadult care (children with a mix of other adult/nonadult care across the week). Second, patterns were evaluated with respect to potential selection influences: poverty status and caregiver employment, race/ethnicity, and grade and gender. Third, patterns were evaluated for differences in spring academic performance and supporting motivational attributes as measured by the teacher survey, adjusting for fall academic functioning and selection influences. Finally, patterns involving regular ASP participation were subdivided based on whether ASP staff rated a child as above (high engagement) or at/below (low engagement) the sample median for engagement in ASP activities. Academic performance and motivational attributes were compared between subgroups and care patterns.
Data Collection Methods Interviews/Focus Groups: Parents who were unable or unwilling to complete the written survey were offered the opportunity to be interviewed; 7 parents chose an interview.

Secondary Source/Data Review: Daily ASP attendance records were collected across the year.

Children’s grades in reading, math, writing, language, social studies, and science were collected from school academic records and coded separately on a scale of 1 (unsatisfactory or failing) to 4 (excellent or ‘A’). Subject grades were summed and averaged to create an overall grades measure.

Surveys/Questionnaires: Parent surveys asked about their children’s after school care arrangements and family demographics.

ASP staff surveys included a 10-item scale about each child’s engagement (enjoyment, effort, and interest) in five academic and five nonacademic/recreational program activities. Responses were rated on a scale ranging from 1 (very untrue of the child) to 5 (very much true of the child). Fall and spring engagement were summed and averaged to derive each child’s overall engagement level across the school year.

Classroom teacher surveys asked teachers to assess their students using several scales of motivation and competence in the fall (baseline) and spring (follow-up).

Test/Assessments: The Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) was used to measure children’s reading achievement (Beaver, 1997). The DRA assesses reading comprehension and fluency through a series of progressively challenging stories based on accuracy in reading aloud, retelling, and answering questions about the stories.

The classroom teacher survey included four child assessments from two measures: (a) the EZ-Yale Personality Questionnaire’s (Zigler, Bennett-Gates, & Hodapp, 1999) scales of expectancy of success (the degree to which one expects to succeed or fail on a new task) and effectance motivation ¬(the intrinsic pleasure derived from solving difficult problems) and (b) the Interpersonal Competence Scale’s (ICS; Cairns, Leung, Gest, & Cairns, 1995) academic competence scales of ‘‘good at spelling’’ and ‘‘good at math.” All items were rated on a scale of 1 (very much untrue of the child) to 5 (very much true of the child).

References:
Beaver, J. (1997). Developmental reading assessment. Glenville, IL: Celebration Press.

Cairns, R. B., Leung, M-C., Gest, S. D., & Cairns, B. D. (1995). A brief method for assessing social development: Structure, reliability, stability, and developmental validity of the interpersonal competence scale. Behaviour Research and Therapy Incorporating Behavioural Assessment, 33, 725–736.

Zigler, E., Bennett-Gates, D., & Hodapp, R. (1999). Assessing personality traits of individuals with mental retardations. In E. Zigler & D. Bennett-Gates (Eds.), Personality development in individuals with mental retardation (pp. 206–225). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Data Collection Timeframe Data were collected during the 2002–2003 school year; pretest data were collected in the fall and posttest data were collected in the spring.


Findings:
Formative/Process Findings

Recruitment/Participation Analyses found that children in the ASP care pattern subgroup were significantly more likely to be in second or third grade, have a primary caregiver who was employed, and experience less marked poverty than those in the other care patterns (p < .05).


Summative/Outcome Findings

Academic Children in ASP care had significantly higher reading achievement than those in other care arrangements (p < .05). Children in ASP care also had significantly higher expectancy of success than those in other adult/nonadult care (p < .05).

Children in the high-ASP-engagement subgroup had significantly higher expectancy of success and reading achievement than those in all other care arrangements (p < .05).

Effectance motivation of children in the high-ASP-engagement subgroup was significantly higher than for those in the low-ASP-engagement subgroup and in other adult/nonadult care (p < .05).

The reading achievement of children in the low-ASP-engagement subgroup was significantly higher than those in other adult/nonadult care (p < .05).

Expectancy of success for children in the low-ASP-engagement subgroup did not differ significantly from those in other arrangements.

Effectance motivation of children in the low-ASP-engagement subgroup was significantly lower than that of children in parent care (p < .05).

© 2016 Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College
Published by Harvard Family Research Project