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.

Terms of Use ▼

With eleven new entries just added, this annotated bibliography is part of our ongoing efforts to document the growing momentum for and approaches toward complementary learning during this important policy window.


Across the country, a growing chorus of voices is calling for more holistic approaches to education and youth development—approaches that intentionally connect the many settings in which children and youth live and learn. Many practitioners, researchers, and policymakers are talking about the need to break out of their silos and build deep and meaningful connections between early childhood education, schools, families, out-of-school time, cultural and community institutions, and health and wellness services.

At Harvard Family Research Project (HFRP), we call this vision of connected supports complementary learning. Our colleagues in the field may use different terminology and strategies—supplementary education, smart education systems, and community schools, to name a few. Regardless of these differences, however, the vision of connected supports is consistent—and the national momentum for it is growing.

This annotated bibliography compiles publications from the many organizations and individuals who are working to ensure that children have all the resources and skills they need to succeed in school and life. Although not all authors wrote their works with the complementary learning terminology in mind, we at HFRP see all of these resources as contributing to a related—and essential—national conversation.

The bibliography contains a special section on Time and Learning, which reflects increasing discussion about how to best structure and utilize learning opportunities across a whole day and year. The publications included in this section exemplify a recent shift from supporting piecemeal services—six hours a day of school, a few hours of parks and recreation or homework help, a summer camp experience—to considering intentional pathways of linked and aligned opportunities that maximize learning.

This bibliography is designed as a resource for professionals from many backgrounds to learn about the many promising ideas and approaches in the field today. As part of our ongoing efforts to inform and facilitate dialogue, it will be updated on a regular basis as new resources become available.



Complementary Learning Publications From HFRP

Evaluation Exchange on Complementary Learning
Harvard Family Research Project. (2005). The Evaluation Exchange: Complementary Learning, 11(1).
The first issue of The Evaluation Exchange published in 2005 introduces HFRP's concept of “complementary learning.” The issue delves into the evidence base behind complementary learning and examines mechanisms (e.g., family involvement, technology, professional development, and diverse funding streams) that can create effective linkages. The issue includes promising approaches for evaluating complementary learning practices and programs, in terms of both outcomes and methodologies.

Complementary Learning in Action
Harvard Family Research Project's Complementary Learning in Action series profiles complementary learning initiatives from around the country, highlighting lessons learned about building and sustaining connected systems of support for children and youth. Profiles describe how and why the initiatives began, key implementation strategies, challenges, and approaches to overcoming them. Insights and lessons shared have implications for other communities, policymakers, practitioners, and stakeholders working to ensure systemic approaches to promoting learning and development for all children and youth.

Evaluation Exchange on Out-of-School Time Connections
Harvard Family Research Project. (2006). The Evaluation Exchange: Building and Evaluating Out-of-School Time Connections, 12(1&2).
This double issue of The Evaluation Exchange focuses on creating and evaluating connections between out-of-school time (OST) programs and the other settings in which children and youth live, learn, and play. The issue includes a research-based case that a network of supports, with out-of-school time programs as a key component, are critical to positive learning and developmental outcomes for children and youth, and illustrates the diverse approaches that OST programs use to link with other institutions, including universities, social and health services, families, schools, and museums.

Evaluation Exchange on Building the Future of Family Involvement
Harvard Family Research Project. (2008). The Evaluation Exchange: Building the Future of Family Involvement, 14(1&2).
This double issue of The Evaluation Exchange examines the current state of and future directions for the family involvement field in research, policy, and practice. Featuring innovative initiatives, new evaluation approaches and findings, and interviews with field leaders, the issue is designed to spark conversation about where the field is today and where it needs to go in the future.



Complementary Learning Publications From Other Field Leaders

New Directions for Student Support
Adelman, H., & Taylor, L. (2007). New directions for student support: Current state of the art. Los Angeles: Center for Mental Health in Schools, UCLA.
With the twin aims of enhancing equity of opportunity for students and strengthening public education, this report summarizes initial findings from a 2006–2007 survey of 300 district and state superintendents and directors of student support, special education, and federal programs. It concludes that few districts are developing a system to comprehensively address the many factors interfering with students having an equal opportunity to succeed at school, and emphasizes the need for a “unifying intervention framework that encompasses a comprehensive and multifaceted continuum of interventions.” The report offers recommendations for future work, and highlights some efforts to move in these new directions.

NEW! Community Schools: Working Toward Institutional Transformation
Adelman, H., & Taylor, L. (2008). Community schools: Working toward institutional transformation. Los Angeles: Center for Mental Health in Schools, UCLA.
This report emphasizes that the collaboration between schools, families, and communities found in community schools is a key lever for promoting student achievement and a safe, supportive school climate. The report points to a growing interest in community schools and a growing body of research supporting their efficacy. The bulk of the report provides frameworks and structures to facilitate collaboration among stakeholders to provide better outcomes for children.

Adequate Resources for At-Risk Children
Allgood, W.C. (2006, August). The need for adequate resources for at-risk children. EPI Working Paper No. 277.
This report provides a model for determining the cost of an adequate education for at-risk students. Using four state examples, the paper addresses risk factors and ways to eliminate the achievement gap. The report looks at all factors that place students at risk of academic failure, how those factors operate in the lives of children, and how the absence of supports can impede adequate education. The key question is: What do nonpoor children typically have access to in their total lives, that poor children lack, that drives the achievement gap and has implications for adequacy?

Every Child, Every Promise
America's Promise Alliance. (2006). Every child, every promise: Turning failure into action. Alexandria, VA: Author.
Every Child, Every Promise is an effort to measure the presence of key resources in the lives of young people—the “Five Promises”—that correlate with success in both youth and adulthood: 1) caring adults, 2) safe places and constructive use of time, 3) healthy start and healthy development, 4) effective education for marketable skills and lifelong learning, and 5) opportunities to make a difference through helping others. Unfortunately, the data show that more than two thirds of youth are not currently receiving enough of these resources. The study affirms that “whole child investments”—ensuring that children experience the sustained and cumulative benefits of at least four of the Promises at home, in school, and in the community—can significantly reduce gaps separating low-income and minority youth from other youth.

NEW! 2008 ASCD Legislative Agenda
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (2008). 2008 ASCD legislative agenda. Alexandria, VA: Author.
This set of policy recommendations from the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) to Congress focuses on four core principal changes to No Child Left Behind: multiple indicators of achievement, school improvement and services, teachers and school leaders, and high school redesign. The changes recommended within the school improvement section include replacing current supplemental learning with extended learning and developing full-service community schools.

Learning In and Out of School
Banks, J. A., Au, K. H., Ball, A. F., Bell, P., Gordon, E.W., et al. (2007). Learning in and out of school in diverse environments: Life-long, life-wide, and life-deep. Seattle: The Learning in Informal and Formal Environments (LIFE) Center and the Center for Multicultural Education, University of Washington.
A major assumption of this consensus report is that if educators make use of the informal learning that occurs in the homes and communities of students, the achievement gap between marginalized students and mainstream students can be reduced. The report explicates “four principles” as a framework of this learning that is mediated by local cultural practices and perspectives, takes place not only in school but also in multiple contexts and across the life span, needs multiple sources of support from a variety of institutions to promote personal and intellectual development, and is facilitated when learners are encouraged to use their home and community language resources.

Schools as Centers of Community
Bingler, S., Quinn, L., & Sullivan, K. (2003). Schools as centers of community: A citizen's guide for planning and design. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities.
This publication outlines a planning approach to schools as centers of community, defined as schools that encourage student learning, school effectiveness, family engagement, and community vitality. The report primarily focuses on facilities development and management-how to create spaces that encourage community engagement and student development.

Success for All Students
Branch-Smith, E., Gray, R., Fruchter, N., Hernandez, M., Joselowsky, F., et al. (2006). A framework for success for all students. Washington, DC: Academy for Educational Development and Collaborative Communications Group.
This report addresses how districts can transform high schools into systems of support for youth people and provide access to high-quality education. The pillars of the theory include: schools meeting diverse needs of students; redesigning districts to support new schools, teachers, and leaders; engage youth; engaging the community to demand and integrate systems of support; and creating collaborative partnerships with other organization to enhance capacity and sustainability.

Helping the Whole Child
Blank, M., & Berg, A. (2006). All together now: Sharing responsibility for the whole child. Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Leadership, Coalition for Community Schools.
This report provides key strategies for education policymakers to pursue a more balanced approach to educating children—a focus on the whole child. The key questions are: What are the conditions that foster the development of the whole child? Who is responsible for creating these conditions? What does it take to build and foster these conditions? Communities In Schools believes that community involvement and support are necessary to set up a framework of the “Five Basics” required to help youth succeed.

Community Schools
Blank, M. J., Melaville, A., & Shah, B. P. (2003). Making the difference: Research and practice in community schools. Washington, DC: Coalition for Community Schools.
This report synthesizes research from the fields of health, mental health, youth development, family and community engagement and community building, and demonstrates the connection to student learning. Based on the research, five conditions for learning need to be in place for children to succeed at high levels. The report features evaluation data from 20 different community school initiatives and a synthesis of their combined results. A lengthy bibliography, resource list, and community school networks contact information are included.

NEW! The Community Agenda for America’s Public Schools
Coalition for Community Schools. (2008). The community agenda for America’s public schools. Washington DC: Author
This policy agenda provides strategies and policy options intended to improve educational outcomes for all students based upon a set of four core beliefs: “communities and schools are fundamentally and positively interconnected…schools can make a difference in the lives of all children…children do better when their families do better…and the development of the whole child is a critical factor for student success.” Endorsers include organizations involved in community engagement, K–12 education, family engagement, health, higher education, youth development, after school, and policy.

The Learning Compact Redefined
Commission on the Whole Child. (2007). The learning compact: A call to action. Washington, DC: The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
This report addresses a need for nonschool supports that are core elements to ensure that children are healthy, knowledgeable, motivated, and engaged. It calls for collaboration and coordination of services between schools and communities to provide access to opportunities that would benefit the whole child. Such collaboration requires a shift in how both schools and communities look at children's learning and ways to enhance child development.

Educational Imperatives
Communities in Schools. (2006). A national educational imperative: Support for community-based, integrated student services in the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Alexandria, VA: Author.
This report argues that addressing the “dropout epidemic” requires changes that would systematically link school-based efforts with outside health, safety, and counseling services for at-risk youth, including support for one-on-one relationships, safe places for students to learn and develop, connections with health professionals, connections with higher education and workforce opportunities, and connections with community service. The report calls for more proven, cost-effective strategies that will help reduce the dropout rate.

A Broader, Bolder Approach
Economic Policy Institute. (2008). A broader, bolder approach to education. Washington, DC: Author.
A Task Force convened by the Economic Policy Institute released this statement to push policymakers to refocus their efforts using an “expanded concept of education.”  This expansion means focusing on the “development of the whole person” and looking beyond schools to early childhood education, out-of-school time, and other institutions.  The four priorities of the approach include continued school improvement efforts; increased investments in early childhood, preschool and kindergarten; increased investments in health services; and attention to out-of-school time.

The Need for a New Federal Policy
The Forum for Education and Democracy. (2008). Democracy at risk: The need for a new federal policy in education. Amesville, OH: Author.
This report from The Forum for Education and Democracy argues that attempting to improve schools “through mandates and sanctions” cannot achieve the goals of promoting 21st century skills.  The report proposes a different federal approach with wide-ranging recommendations, including investments in out-of-school supports such as housing, health care, and early learning and the placing schools at the center of communities by building meaningful family and community engagement.

Ready by 21
Forum for Youth Investment. (n.d.) Ready by 21: Taking aim on the big picture. Washington, DC: Author.
The Forum for Youth Investment draws on research to show the importance of coordination across systems, policies, and programs to achieve positive outcomes for children and youth. This document provides a snapshot of the underlying research and a game plan for shaping public policy. The document offers questions and answers about key concepts and shares opportunities for coordination.

Supplementary Education
Gordon, E. W., Bridglall, B. L., & Meroe, A. S. (2005). Supplementary education: The hidden curriculum of high academic achievement. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
The concept of supplementary education recognizes the importance of nonschool learning opportunities and the need to make access to those opportunities more equitable as a means of increasing the health, human, polity, cultural, and social capital necessary for schools to succeed at increasing student achievement. Universal access, cooperative learning, and the implementation of specific interventions could increase levels of achievement, particularly for students of color.

Engaging Cities
Grady, M., Rothman, R., & Smith, H. (2006). Engaging cities: How municipal leaders can mobilize communities to improve public schools. Providence, RI: Annenberg Institute for School Reform, Brown University.
This report showcases five examples of mayoral leadership in efforts to engage multiple stakeholders in improving educational opportunities and services for children and youth. The cases focus on the different ways mayors have mobilized diverse groups in their cities to provide supports for their children and youth.

NEW! Schools, Skills, and Synapses
Heckman, J. (2008). Schools, skills, and synapses. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
This working paper argues that the noncognitive skills associated with schooling are just as important for successful adult outcomes as cognitive skills. The detrimental effects of poverty on both skill sets can be seen early in childhood. However, early intervention can significantly reduce the negative outcomes associated with poverty in a cost-effective manner. The paper includes practical issues regarding the design and implementation of early childhood programs.

NEW! Transforming the Federal Role in Public Schools
Learning First Alliance. (2008). Transforming the federal role in America’s public schools. Washington, DC: Author.
The Learning First Alliance of 18 national organizations recommends six changes to the federal role in public education. These changes include creating a broad vision of 21st century education, fully funding the resources necessary to meet federal mandates, providing comprehensive and coordinated supports for students and families, and additional funding for educational research. Health services, parental involvement support, and early childhood, preschool, after school, and summer programs are recommended by the Learning First Alliance as necessary supports for families and students.

NEW! A Developmental Perspective on College & Workplace Readiness
Lippman, L., Atienza, A., Rivers, A., & Keith J. (2008). A developmental perspective on college & workplace readiness. Washington, DC: Child Trends.
By exploring college readiness, work readiness, and how they are interrelated through five domains of youth development, this report attempts to widen the road to success for students. It argues that specific competencies in the domains of physical, psychological, social, cognitive, and spiritual development must be taught for students to transition successfully to adulthood. There is additional emphasis on the needs of special populations including low-income youth, racial and ethnic minority youth, English Language Learners, youth with disabilities, disconnected youth, foster youth, and sexual minority youth.

Coordinated School Health
Marx E., Wooley S. F., & Northrop, D. (Eds.) (1998). Health is academic: A guide to coordinated school health programs. New York: Teachers College Press.
This book highlights the importance of putting children's health at the center of school programs and policies as a prerequisite for learning. It discusses ways schools and communities can link, and thus improve, both health and learning in young people through coordinated school health programs in local schools. Chapters cover comprehensive school health education that includes counseling, psychological, social, and nutrition services; family and community involvement in school health; physical education; school health services; school-site health promotion for staff; and both state and national roles in coordinated school health programs.

NEW! Convergence as Strategy and as Model
McGrath, D. (2008). Convergence as strategy and as model: Linking P–16 education reform and economic development. Cincinnati: Knowledge Works Foundation.
This report examines complementary learning partnerships through four case studies of organizations in Ohio. The distinctive aspects of the “convergence” approach are outlined and state policy recommendations are advocated by the author. Resource maximization and the ability to scale initiatives are touted as benefits of partnerships.

Ready to Learn, Empowered to Teach
National Association of School Psychologists. (2008). Ready to learn, empowered to teach: Excellence in education for the 21st century. Bethesda, MD: Author.
This report calls for a whole child education policy that will promote services that complement and support child learning both inside and outside school. The report recommends five guiding principles. Among them are the need to support services that meet the whole child; expansion of accountability systems to reflect student learning; and calling on federal government to support research, disseminate best practices, and coordinate leadership.

NEW! Toward a Brighter Future
National Collaboration for Youth. (2008). Toward a brighter future: An essential agenda for America’s young people. Washington DC: Author.
The National Collaboration for Youth outlines its policy recommendations to the 111th Congress to improve the lives of children living in poverty in the United States in this 16-page document. It recommends increasing access to Head Start and pre-K education, increasing the availability of quality after school and summer programming, and creating mentoring and service opportunities for K–12 youth. 

Cross-System Collaboration
National League of Cities. (2007). Beyond city limits: Cross-system collaboration to reengage disconnected youth. Washington, DC: Author.
This report describes how eight different cities have launched cross-system initiatives and what they have accomplished through this new collaboration. The case studies suggest that cities are opening dialogues on ways to close service gaps for children, youth, and families.

NEW! 21st Century Skills, Education & Competitiveness
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2008). 21st century skills, education & competitiveness: A resource and policy guide. Tucson, AZ: Author.
This guide summarizes the challenges and opportunities facing the United States at the beginning of the 21st century. After outlining how the U.S. has changed from a manufacturing to a service economy, the new skills needed for service careers, and the racial and international achievement gaps affecting productivity, this policy report recommends a workforce pipeline that includes pre-K programs, K–12 programs linked to 21st century skills, and after school and youth development programs.  Recommendations are broken down into federal, state, and local policies. 

Educational Opportunity and the Role of the Courts
Rebell, M. (2007). Poverty, “meaningful” educational opportunity, and the necessary role of the courts. North Carolina Law Review, 85, 1467–1544.
This article argues for the necessity of continued and expanded involvement of the courts in enforcing constitutional requirements for “meaningful educational opportunity”: an opportunity for children and youth of all backgrounds to have access to quality in- and out-of-school services and supports that can enhance their academic opportunities and their overall development. The argument is backed by analysis of state cases and federal educational laws and court decisions that make the case for equitable school opportunities. The article calls for a collaboration of all three branches of the federal government to ensure that such opportunities could be attained.

Smart Education Systems
Rothman, R. (Ed.). (2007). City schools: How districts and communities can create smart education systems. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
The concept of smart education systems, developed by the Annenberg Institute for School Reform, explores ways in which urban districts around the country can build comprehensive systems of support for children, youth, and families. This book addresses individual components of a smart education system as well as ways such an approach can build sustainable partnerships among diverse community stakeholders.

Building “Smart Education Systems”
Rothman, R. (2007). Building “smart education systems.” Education Week, 26(44), 25–27.
In this commentary, Rothman unpacks the term “smart education systems” and defines the educational goal of such systems: to ensure that all young people are supported in and out of school in their learning and other areas of development (health, social skills, cultural competence, character, motivation, self-discipline) that support academic achievement.

Class and Schools
Rothstein, R. (2004). Class and schools: Using social, economic, and educational reform to close the Black–White achievement gap. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
The book addresses the need to consider a variety of social and economic factors that contribute to learning and achievement, and demonstrates that children cannot learn without appropriate nutrition, healthcare, and other supports. It makes the case that investments in such supports are needed in order to close achievement gaps and ensure an adequate chance for all children.

Reforms to Help Narrow the Achievement Gap
Rothstein, R. (2006). Reforms that could help narrow the achievement gap. San Francisco: WestEd Policy Perspectives.
Building on the arguments from Rothstein's book Class and Schools, this article makes the case that investments are needed not only in in-school resources, but also in out-of school supports, such as quality early childhood, health care, out-of-school time learning, and socio-economic opportunities for development and growth.

Comprehensive Equity
Rothstein, R., Jacobsen, R, & Wilder, T. (2008). A report card on comprehensive equity: Racial gaps in the nation's youth outcomes. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
This paper broadens traditional notions of the achievement gap and argues that efforts to promote educational equity must go beyond academic achievement to include social skills, citizenship, physical and emotional health, appreciation of the arts and literature, and other skills. It estimates current gaps in eight such areas across racial and ethnic groups and recommends that data should continue to be collected on all of these indicators to help policymakers think broadly about achievement gaps and educational equity.

NEW! Whatever It Takes: Harlem Children’s Zone
Tough, P. (2008). Whatever it takes: Geoffrey Canada’s quest to change Harlem and America. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Paul Tough’s book examines the Harlem Children’s Zone as a model of systemic change and Geoffrey Canada as a leading figure in a movement for equity for all children. The book explores the Harlem Children’s Zone through the voices of participants in various components of the “conveyor belt” of services including students in Baby College and the Promise Academy charter schools, the employees of the Harlem Children’s Zone, and Geoffrey Canada himself. 

A Collective Responsibility
Tsoi-A-Fatt, R. (2008). A collective responsibility, a collective work: Supporting the path to positive life outcomes for youth in economically distressed communities. Washington, DC: Center for Law and Social Policy.
This report from CLASP calls for a “community-wide continuum of support” from childhood to adulthood in order to address the dropout crisis and promote postsecondary success. Pointing out that, along with schools, “piece-meal community infrastructure” is partially to blame, it highlights five problems with the current administration of youth services. The report also offers a set of strategies for building a more coordinated approach that incorporates multiple developmental domains, contexts, and youth-serving sectors, and resources. It also includes data from 10 cities to illustrate the nature of the challenge.

A Place to Grow and Learn
The Wallace Foundation. (2008, February). A place to grow and learn: A citywide approach to building and sustaining out-of-school time learning opportunities. New York: Author. This report outlines a citywide approach to supporting and growing out-of-school time programs in and outside of schools. The report highlights Boston, Chicago, New York, Providence, and Washington, DC.

Urban Education Reform
Warren, M. (2005). Communities and schools: A new view of urban education reform. Harvard Educational Review, 75(2), 133–173.
In this article, Warren argues that if urban school reform in the United States is to be successful, it must be linked to the revitalization of the communities around our schools. He identifies a growing field of collaboration between public schools and community-based organizations, and identifies three different approaches: the service approach (community schools), the development approach (community sponsorship of new charter schools), and the organizing approach (school-community organizing). He elaborates a conceptual framework using theories of social capital and relational power, presenting case studies to illustrate each type. He also discusses a fourth case to demonstrate the possibilities for linking individual school change to political strategies that address structures of poverty.

NEW! Narrowing the Achievement Gap for Low-Income Children
Wilder, T., Allgood, W., & Rothstein, R. (2008, November). Narrowing the achievement gap for low-income children: A 19-year life cycle approach. Paper presented at the 2008 Equity Symposium of the Campaign for Educational Equity, New York, NY.
Presented at Teachers College, Columbia University’s conference, Comprehensive Educational Equity: Overcoming the Socioeconomic Barriers to School Success, this paper reviews the history of compensatory reform efforts addressing the achievement gap and attributes their failure to a unilateral focus on school reform. Based on the recommendations from A Broader, Bolder Approach to Education, the authors provide a detailed and comprehensive model of intervention beginning with pregnancy and providing supports through age 18 for disadvantaged youth. Throughout their argument, the authors provide fiscal estimates to highlight the savings associated with early intervention efforts.

Putting Children Front and Center
Zaff, J. F. (2008). Putting children front and center: Building coherent social policy for America's children. Washington, DC: First Focus.
This paper presents a framework for considering the development and implementation of social policy and programs for children and youth in a holistic, child-centered way. The author argues that the current landscape of policies to support children and youth are disjointed and therefore have limited effect. To be effective, he argues, policies and programs should leverage the inherent strengths of young people by “going long” (investing in young people throughout the first two decades of life); “going wide” (considering family, community, and school contexts as well as the multiple domains of development, including cognitive, socio-emotional, health, and civic); and being “child centered” (considering the unique needs of children instead of the generic needs of large groups of children). Coming soon from America's Promise Alliance.



Time and Learning Publications From HFRP

After School Programs in the 21st Century
Little, P. M., Wimer, C., & Weiss, H. B. (2008). After school programs in the 21st century: Their potential and what it takes to achieve it. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Family Research Project.
This research brief draws on seminal research and evaluation studies to address two primary questions: (a) Does participation in after school programs make a difference, and, if so (b) what conditions appear to be necessary to achieve positive results? The brief concludes with a set of questions to spur conversation about the evolving role of after school in efforts to expand time and opportunities for children and youth in the 21st century.



Time and Learning Publications From Other Field Leaders

Expanding Learning Opportunities
Afterschool Alliance. (2007, September). Expanding learning opportunities: It takes more than time. Afterschool Alert Issue Brief No. 29. Washington, DC: Author.
This brief addresses the importance of learning in the after school hours and reviews the current policies about and the growth of the extended-day movement.

School Calendar Reform
Ballinger, C., & Kneese, C. (2006). School calendar reform: Learning in all seasons. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
This book focuses on two core areas: school calendar restructuring and a historical analysis of year-round education.

Extended Learning Initiatives
Council for Chief State School Officers. (2000, May). Extended learning initiatives: Opportunities and implementation challenges. Washington, DC: Author.
This report highlights six case studies of states that are thinking innovatively about time and learning: California After-School Learning and Safe Neighborhood Partnership Program, Illinois Summer Bridges, Kentucky Extended School Services, Massachusetts After-School and Other Out of School Time Program, Minnesota After-School Enrichment Program, and Texas Optional Extended Year Program.

Extended Learning Opportunities
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2006, January). Extended learning opportunities: A policy statement of the Council of Chief State School Officers. Washington, DC: Author.
This policy statement outlines the Council of Chief State School Officers’ joint vision for extended learning opportunities, which they define as “structured environments for students outside the regular school day.”

Extended Learning Opportunities for High School Students
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2007, May). Extended learning opportunities for high school students. [Audioconference]. Washington, DC: Author.
This page summarizes presentations given by thought leaders and practitioners in the out-of-school time field around time and learning and connections between out-of-school time and school reform.

Rethinking the Use of Time and Learning
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2007, February). Special edition: Rethinking the use of time and learning. ELON News.
This special report reviews core publications on time and learning including: Prisoners of Time; Getting Smarter, Becoming Fairer; A New Day for Learning; and On the Clock, among others.

Time for Change
Farbman, D., & Kaplan, C. (2005). Time for a change: The promise of extended-time schools for promoting student achievement. Boston: Massachusetts 2020.
This report explains effective practices of Massachusetts extended-time schools who have engaged in more time on task, greater teacher professional development and enrichment for students, and stronger adult–child relationships.

Additional Learning Opportunities in Rural Areas
Forbes, R. (2008, April). Additional learning opportunities in rural areas. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
This report outlines the common challenges rural areas face around time and learning and provides examples of promising practices, schools that are adding more instructional time and/or enrichment opportunities to the traditional school day.

Leveling the Playing Field: The Promise of Extended Learning Opportunities and Supports for Youth
Lemmel, H. H., & Rothman, R. (2007, Summer). Leveling the playing field: The promise of extended learning opportunities and supports for youth. Voices in Urban Education, 16.
This article provides an overview of extended learning opportunities (ELO) defined as range of activities and learning experiences outside the traditional school day that include both academic and enrichment opportunities.

The Learning Season
Miller, B. M. (2007, June). The learning season: The untapped power of summer to advance student achievement. Quincy, MA: Miller Midzik Research Associates.
This comprehensive report synthesizes evidence on the effectiveness of summer learning programs, including how multiple resources are leveraged and reviews different types of summer programs that serve to close the learning gap. The report concludes with policy and research recommendations.

Prisoners of Time
National Education Commission on Time and Learning. (1994). Prisoners of time. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
This seminal report on time and learning provides an in-depth analysis of historical debates and policies on the use of time in school and in out-of-school time for student learning and achievement. The report concludes with a series of recommendations on ways to reconsider the use of time in students’ education.

Expanding Learning Time in High Schools
Pennington, H. (2006, October). Expanding learning time in high schools. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
This paper examines secondary schools that have extended the school day and analyzes the implications of longer learning days.

Extending Learning—Will We Ever Get it Right?
Pittman, K. (2007, October). Extending learning—Will we ever get it right? Washington, DC: The Forum for Youth Investment, Impact Strategies, Inc. [A version of this article appears in Youth Today, 16(9), 19.]
In this commentary, Karen Pittman addresses the importance of relationships, environment, and participation to support adolescent development.

Expanded Learning Time in Action
Rocha, E. (2008, July). Expanded learning time in action: Initiatives in high-poverty and high-minority schools and districts. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
This report highlights examples of schools and districts that have expanded learning time through longer hours and/or calendar days in order to boost academic achievement in high-poverty schools. Each example illustrates how schools have approached time and learning, success and challenges along the way, student and teacher support, leadership, partnerships, and achievement. The report ends with a comprehensive look of the extended learning time model and road ahead.

Choosing More Time for Students
Rocha, E. (2007, August). Choosing more time for students: The what, why, and how of expanded learning. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress. This paper defines expanded learning time, identifies promising practices, and examines how the concept aligns with school reform efforts.

Expanded Learning Time Through Supplemental Educational Services
Rocha, E., & Brown, C. G. (2007, May). Expanded learning time through supplemental educational services. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
This white paper examines the No Child Left Behind provisions that propose expanded learning time, including the use of supplemental educational services funds for whole-school improvement.

Extending Learning
Rothman, R. (Ed.). (2007). Voices in Urban Education: Extending Learning, 16.
The articles in this issue of the Voices in Urban Education journal focus exclusively on the need for high-quality learning opportunities for youth beyond the school day. Articles discuss various models for extending learning time, as well as the importance of blending academics with more alternative methods of education.

On the Clock
Silva, E. (2007, January). On the clock: Rethinking the way schools use time. Washington, DC: Education Sector. This report reviews the current policies around time and learning, states’ efforts to lengthen the school day or calendar, and the connections between school and after school time.

The Daily Schedule
Stanley, K. R., Spradlin, T. E., & Plucker, J. A. (2007, Summer). The daily schedule: A look at the relationship between time and academic achievement. CEEP Education Policy Brief, 5(6), 1–7.
This policy brief highlights nontraditional school initiatives emerging in many states to lengthen the instructional time.

Policy Toolkit: Expanded Time and Support for Learning
Strong American Schools. (2008). Policy toolkit: Expanded time and support for learning. Washington, DC: Author.
This report by Strong American Schools’ ED in ’08 campaign looks at international examples of the use of time for academic learning as well as at considerations of how the expanded learning time can help close the achievement gap in the U.S. In addition, a two-page brief, entitled More Time and Support for Learning, summarizes arguments for expanded learning time.

A New Day for Learning
Time, Learning, and Afterschool Task Force. (2007, January). A new day for learning. Washington, DC: Collaborative Communications Group.
This report from the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation suggests that due to modern changes in cultural diversity and technology in the U.S., schools and communities should re-evaluate how time and resources are currently used to educate youth. The report suggests that access to high-quality educational opportunities throughout the day and year is critical to helping children, families, and communities succeed in an increasingly competitive society. Specifically, the report calls for a redefinition of student success, use of research-based knowledge, integrated proven strategies for acquiring and reinforcing knowledge, building new collaborative structures across communities, and creating new opportunities for leadership and professional training in teaching.

What Happens to Summer Learning in Year-Round Schools?
Von Hippel, P. T. (2007, December). What happens to summer learning in year-round schools? Sociology of Education.
This research study compares learning rates between traditional school day and year-round school students finding that both groups learn about an equal amount and that the summer slide some low-income students might experience could be due to environmental factors that could not be fully compensated through rearrangement of the school calendar.

Making Time Count
WestEd. (2001). Making time count. San Francisco: WestEd.
This policy brief reviews related literature on the use of money and resources to support extended learning time to boost student achievement and provides critical commentary on whether more time on task does  equal higher test scores.

Supporting Student Success
Wright, E. (2005). Supporting student success: A governor’s guide to extra learning opportunities. Washington, DC: National Governors Association.
This report serves to inform governor’s offices on ways to support extra learning opportunities by leveraging funding and new resources to support coordination of out-of-school time for students.



For questions about complementary learning at HFRP, please contact Suzanne Bouffard, Project Manager.

The development of the complementary learning section of our website was made possible through a grant from the W. K. Kellogg Foundation. Please check the acknowledgements in our publications for the sources of additional support for our work in specific complementary learning contexts.

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