Alexis McCloud Mrs.

Megan Keaton English 1103 April 14th 2013 Setting: On a Saturday afternoon in Florida at the Orange County Convention Center in the summer of 2012 where a teacher/administrator workshop is being held. Introduction: This particular workshop invites one or two representatives from each school district of every state to this convention in efforts to promote new strategies and techniques that each teacher or administrator can bring back to their school. Each person will be assigned to a group of teachers of the same education class such as Elementary/middle school, substitutes, and supplemental education services instructors. There will be time during the two day convention for each member of the group to express ways and efforts their school or program achieves to educate their students. Cast: Rusell, Harding, Minnici, Deke, Zimmer, Koyama, McCloud. Background Information Knowledge of supplementary education services has great importance to find out its effectiveness it has on students overall progression and performance in the classroom. In this paper I will discuss several different articles that have evaluated the program and use their data and findings to indicate if these services are doing their job and giving students extra educational help outside the classroom. Supplemental Education Services The No Child Left Behind Act requires Title I schools that have not made adequate yearly progress (AYP) in raising student achievement for three or more consecutive years to offer supplemental educational services (SES) to low-income students (Minnici). Also the act provides Parents of low-income students in low-performing schools are offered a choice of Supplemental Educational Services for their children. The program includes tutoring or other academic support services offered outside the regular school day, at no charge to students or their families, by public or private organizations that have been approved by the state (Deke). In efforts to close the achievement gap the programs are focused toward raising students proficiency in math and readings.

(Members of the convention are told to find their table and wait patiently the scheduled guest speakers is late). Rusell: Im glad conventions like these are held annually students education is so important and any way we can improve our techniques for them is very beneficial. McCloud: Even with these conventions and other things for teachers to go to, to increase their teaching methods. Programs such as the Supplemental education services are not fully doing their Job. Koyama: If schools had been doing their job there would be no need for No child left behind of SES. Rusell: I would have to disagree the out-of-school time program in New-York city where Im from do an excellent job of providing extra help to students who need them McCloud: What are some of their efforts? Do students seem to adapt to these techniques? Rusell: Yes, the program generally offers varied activities including academic skills enhancement, cultural exposure & enrichment, recreational sports, and leadership development we have art and dance session towards the closing of the day to let the students relax and release stress we also provide an play area and sports equipment that is only used when students are done with their lessons.(2) Koyama: That is awesome, but more than not do after school programs mandated by the NCLB narrows the abilities of after school program by only focusing on standard based mathematics, English language, and since 2008 science lessons. Rusell: Well overall, participants of the program reported a high degree of satisfaction with the extent to which the program exposed them to new experiences (2) Also the most common

academic benefit reported by participants was that the program helped them finish their homework Harding: Its an obvious correlation that students who attend schools that showed a rise in AYP particularly had more participation in SES programs than schools that have a low AYP report Minnici: that may be true; however there is not an cumulative evaluation to determine if the programs are effective or not Koyama: These services must be appealing because in 2005 there were 1,800 and in 2006 the federal government reported that there were 3,000 providers across the nation (p.g 53). Deke: With participation more than doubling, there is still no evidence of the impact of offering SES to students outside of school. Zimmer: These programs are voluntary and students who choose to participate in not always need the service as much as the student next to him and make it tough to assess the programs effectiveness. Zimmer: Also other studies show that programs usually do not have waiting list which means theyre of no high demand Koyama: That is not true for all districts because in 2006 only 3,025 of 24,563 eligible students in Washington D.C received services because the district claimed it could afford no more. Koyama: Students in Chicago receiving at least 40 hours of tutoring experience greater gains in reading and math than those students who did not receive SES, a SES study in Los Angeles unified schools districts concluded that even among students with high SES attendance gains in academic achievement were fairly small (p.g. 68)

Harding: It has to be the way the services are implementing the curriculum to the students. Not all students learn the way inside and outside of the classroom so multiple approaches should be available for the diversity of student learning. Zimmer: Pittsburg public schools tutoring sessions occur within the schools the students attend and the tutors are a combination of school teachers within the schools, retired teachers, and college students intended to provided tutoring geared toward raising students proficiency in math and reading. Harding: Its important to pay attention to the highest attraction to the students of the mode of instruction such as one-on-one, or small groups learning in motivation students to participate. Harding: Officials are skeptical about SES programs improving the academic proficiency of students and reducing number of poor-performing schools because of the low or non-existent changes in test scores. Koyama: It has almost become a competition between SES providers in bringing in the most students to receive more money. The better they do the more money they make from the government. Overall assessment Its not so much if the SES programs are helping students achieve but what are the techniques and ways that the programs go about doing so. Yes, findings have found slight increase over schools overall performances on standardized testing but the scores could increase even more if the SES programs find better efforts or ways to help these low performing students understand math and reading. Utilizing different teaching techniques like having smart-boards

instilled into the organizations for students to use. The smart-board would allow participations of the program to use advanced technology to work on assignments like math problems. The smartboard is widely useful because it is a touch pad, art pad, and projection screen all in one. Another way could change their methods for teaching students is for them to teach each other. By teaching each other theyre learning and healping their peers at the same time. Growing up I didnt attend an SES program however during high school I would stay after or come in early before school started to do tutoring session with the teacher that was planned by them. That was enough extra help for me whenever I didnt understand a concept during the class time. After doing research on SES programs and why theyre enforced throughout the nation I think the effort is put out there but in-between details that need tweaking like how the programs are run (which should be universal), and the finical issues worked out these programs could be running at a much higher efficiency.

Works Cited Koyama, Jill P. making failure pay: for-profit tutoring, high stakes testing and public schools. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010. Print (ED) National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, et al. "Impacts Of Title ISupplemental Educational Services On Student Achievement. Executive

Summary. NCEE 2012-4054." National Center For Education Evaluation And Regional Assistance (2012): ERIC. Web. 24 Mar. 2013. Ron, Zimmer, Hamilton Laura, and Christina Rachel. "After-School Tutoring In The Context Of No Child Left Behind: Effectiveness Of Two Programs In The Pittsburgh Public Schools." Economics Of Education Review 29.(n.d.): 18-28. ScienceDirect. Web. 22 Mar. 2013. Inc. Policy Studies Associates, et al. "Evidence Of Program Quality And Youth Outcomes In The DYCD Out-Of-School Time Initiative: Report On The Initiative's Firs Three Years." Policy Studies Associates, Inc (2009): ERIC. Web. 23 Mar. 2013. Minnici, Angela, Alice P. Bartley, and Washington, DC. Center on Education Policy. "State Implementation Of Supplemental Educational Services Under The No Child Left Behind Act. From The Capital To The Classroom: Year 5 Of The No Child Left Behind Act Series." Center On Education Policy (2007): ERIC. Web. 14 Apr. 2013. (ED) National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, et al. "Impacts Of Title I Supplemental Educational Services On Student Achievement. Executive Summary. NCEE 2012-4054." National Center For Education Evaluation And Regional Assistance (2012): ERIC. Web. 14 Apr. 2013.