Jennie Kwok

Ed 703.22
Spring 2009
 Table of Contents
 Introduction
 Statement of the Problem
 Review of Related Literature
 Statement of Hypothesis
 Method
 Participants
 Instruments
 Experimental Design
 Procedure
 Results
 Discussion
 Implications
Statement of the Problem
Due to an increase number of parents entering the work force,
there is a great need to place children in after-school programs
that enrich their academic and social development. After-
school programs can focus on academics or recreational.
However, it is not clear which after-school program promotes
academic achievement. This study will focus on the following
question: Which type of after-school program is beneficial to
students’ academic achievement?
 Review of Related Literature
Pros of After-school Programs
 Participation in after-school programs are associated with higher grades and test scores.
(Coie & Krehbiel, 1984; Posner & Lowe, 1994; Dryfoos, 1999; Larner et al., 1999; Pierce,
Hamm, & Vandell, 1999; Posner & Vandell, 1999; Vandell & Shumow, 1999; Cosden et
al., 2001; Miller, 2001; Munoz, 2002; Valentine, Cooper, & Bettencourt, 2002; Junge et al.,
2003; Miller, 2003; Cosden et al., 2004; Mahoney et al., 2005; AfterSchoolAlliance, 2007;
Jenner, E. & Jenner, L.W., 2007; Viadero, 2007)

 Low-income students gain the most from after-school programs. (Posner & Lowe, 1994;
Larner et al., 1999; Posner & Vandell, 1999; Vandell & Shumow, 1999; Miller, 2001;
Miller, 2003; Mahoney et al., 2005)

 Participation in after-school programs gave students greater confidence in their

academic abilities and provides an opportunity to develop positive, school-related, adult
attachments. ( Posner & Lowe, 1994; Pierce, Hamm, & Vandell, 1999; Cosden, Morrison,
Alabanese, & Macias, 2001; Miller, 2001; Miller, 2003; Cosden et al., 2004; Viadero, 2007)

 After-school participation is also linked with lower involvement in risky behaviors like
violence, drugs, sex, etc. (Larner et al., 1999; Cosden et al., 2001; Miller, 2001; Jenner, E. &
Jenner, L.W., 2007)

 Research concludes the following regarding after-school programs: youth benefit from
consistent participation in quality after-school programs, after-school programs can
increase engagement in learning, can also increase educational equity (which provides
disadvantaged youth opportunities and experiences that are available to middle and
upper class students), and after-school programs build key skills (teamwork, problem
solving, communication) necessary for success in today's world. (Miller, 2003)
 Review of Related Literature
Cons of After-school Programs

 However, after-school programs can interfere with a child’s

commitment to their family and community. It can also reduce
parental involvement in their child’s academic process. (Cosden,
Morrison, Alabanese, & Macias, 2001; Cosden, Morrison, Gutierrez,
& Brown, 2004)

 A study by Vandell & Corasaniti reported middle class children who

attended after-school had poorer grades and test scores and were
more likely to be rejected by their classmates. (Pierce, Hamm, &
Vandell, 1999 )

 Another study reported that children in after-school showed more

problems socially, emotionally, and academically when compared to
those in mother care or self-care after-school. (Posner & Lowe, 1994)
Review of Related Literature
Pros of Academic After-school Programs
 The Gevirtz Homework Project (2001) that provided homework assistance
had a positive impact on 4th grade English Language Learners. (Cosden
et al., 2001; Cosden et al., 2004)

 Homework completion plays an important role in supporting academic

achievement. It develops good work habits and job management skills.
(Corno & Xu, 2004)

Pros of Recreational After-school Programs

 The Ecological Study of After-school Care found 3rd graders who spent
time in enrichment activities (music, organized sports, dance, etc.) had
better work habits, better relationships with peers, and better emotional
adjustment. (Vandell & Shumow, 1999)

 Physical activity and sport participation are linked directly and indirectly
with better cognitive functioning, higher academic achievement, reduced
school dropout and greater odds of going to college full time. (Coatsworth
& Conroy, 2007)
 Statement of Hypothesis
(HR1)
 In comparing academic and recreational after-school
programs, 17 third-graders attending an academic after-
school program in Brooklyn, N.Y. will yield better
reading results than 17 third-graders attending a
recreational after-school program in Brooklyn, N.Y.
 Participants
 17 – 3rd graders attending an academic after-school program in P.S. X

 17 – 3rd graders attending a recreational after-school program in P.S. X

 Instruments
 Reading Comprehension Exams (3)
 Consent Forms
o Principal
o After-school Coordinators
o Parents
 Surveys
o I like going to after-school.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree

o I spend time doing homework.

1. Less than 30 minutes.
2. 30 minutes
3. 1 hour
4. 1½ hours
 Research Design
 Pre-Experimental Design
 Static-Group Comparison
 Individuals are not randomly assigned. They are in pre-existing
groups.
 Two Groups: Control Group (X1) experience one treatment
(academic after-school program) and Experimental Group (X2)
experience a different treatment (recreational after-school
program).
 Both groups (X1 and X2) are posttested (O) and their results are
compared.
 Symbolic Design:
 X1 O
 X2 O
Threats to Internal/External
Validity
 Threats to Internal Validity
 History – Classroom teacher came into the room and the phone rang when
participants were filling out their attitude survey.
 Instrumentation – Questionnaires were self-created by researcher.
 Selection-Maturation Interaction – Participants may mature differently
than others.

 Threats to External Validity

 Selection-Treatment Interaction – Participants weren’t individually
selected.
 Experimenter Effects (Passive Elements) – Participants were intimidated by
researcher because she is not their daily after-school counselor.
 Hawthorne Effect – Participants respond differently because they know
they are in an experiment.
 Procedure
 Study implemented between March 2009 – April 2009. Prior to the
study, participants have been exposed to academic assistance
(homework help/tutoring) and recreational activities (dancing,
organized sports, arts & crafts) for five months in their after-school
programs.

 Parental consent forms distributed in March 2009 and April 2009.

 Three different sets of reading comprehension exams were distributed

for three consecutive days (one for each day). Attitude and
demographic survey distributed on the fourth day.

 Exams and surveys were graded and analyzed.

 Test Results
(Academic and Recreational )
Mean of all Mean of all
Student Test #1 Test #2 Test #3 3 tests Student Test #1 Test #2 Test #3 3 tests
A 95 89 79 87 A 74 95 84 84
B 100 89 89 92 B 95 95 58 83
C 95 63 79 79 C 74 84 63 74
D 79 68 37 61 D 58 53 47 53
E 74 79 53 68 E 84 79 63 75
F 58 63 11 44 F 100 95 84 93
G 63 68 58 63 G 79 58 79 72
H 79 79 74 77 H 84 68 100 84
I 84 79 63 75 I 84 63 53 67
J 89 68 74 77 J 89 58 33 60
K 95 68 53 72 K 95 89 95 93
L 74 58 74 68 L 95 95 89 93
M 79 84 58 73 M 89 79 84 84
N 100 89 74 87 N 95 100 74 90
O 68 47 21 45 O 84 47 11 47
P 53 42 37 44 P 33 17 22 24
Q 95 95 95 95 Q 89 74 84 82
Mean 81 72 60 71 Mean 82 74 66 74
Mode 95 68 74 87 Mode 95 95 84 93
Median 79 68 63 73 Median 84 79 74 82

The mean of all three exams of 17 third-grade The mean of all three exams of 17 third-grade
students in the academic after-school students in the recreational after-school
program is 71. program is 74.
 Correlation
Rxy = 0.05
Amt of time reading and Test Scores
There is no correlation between
(Academic After-school Program)
the amount of time spent reading
100 and test scores in the academic
Average Test Scores

80 after-school program.
Average
60
Linear (Average)
40 Average time spent reading = 37
20
minutes
0
0 20 40 60 80
Note: The question regarding the amount of
Amount of Time Reading (Mins) time a student spent on reading was specified
to a specific setting, whether it was during
after-school, school hours, or at home.
Amt of time reading and Test Scores
(Recreational After-school Program)

100 Rxy = 0.6

Average Test Scores

80 There is a correlation between the

Average amount of time spent reading and
60
Linear (Average) test scores in the recreational
40 after-school program.
20

0 Average time spent reading = 47

0 20 40 60 80
minutes.
Amount of Time Reading (Mins)
 Correlation
Student Mean Finish HW after-school X amt of time on HW
A 88 4 15 mins
B 93 4 60 mins
C 79 3 30 mins
D 61 2 15 mins
E 69 3 15 mins
F 44 1 15 mins
Rxy = 0.4
G 63 1 30 mins
H 77 3 60 mins There is no correlation between homework
I 75 2 90 mins
J 77 3 90 mins completion and reading test scores.
K 72 3 30 mins
L 69 4 60 mins
M 74 4 60 mins
Average amount of time spent on HW = 42
N 88 3 15 mins minutes out of total 3 hr span in after-
O 45 4 90 mins school
P 44 3 15 mins
Q 95 3 30 mins

Complete HW after-school and Test scores

Attitude of HW completion
100
recorded to numerical value:
Average Test Scores

1 = Strongly Disagree 80

2 = Disagree 60
Average
3 = Agree 40 Linear (Average)
4 = Strongly Agree 20

0
0 1 2 3 4 5

Homework Completion
(Academic After-school Program)
 Correlation
Student Mean Have fun in after-school
A 84 4
Rxy = 0.6
B 83 4
C 74 4
There is a correlation between
D 53 4
E 75 1
having fun in recreational after-
F 93 4
school and reading test scores.
G 72 4 Students who have fun in after-
H 84 4 school will produce better reading
I 67 3 scores.
J 60 2
K 93 4
L 93 4
M 84 4
N 90 4 Have fun in After-school and Test Scores
O 47 3
P 24 1 100
Q 82 3 90
Average Test Scores

80
70
Attitude of having fun in after-school 60
Average
recorded to numerical value: 50 Linear (Average)
40
1 = Strongly Disagree 30
2 = Disagree 20
3 = Agree 10
0
4 = Strongly Agree 0 1 2 3 4 5

Have fun in after-school

 Discussion
 The results of this study does not support the original hypothesis: 17 third-
graders attending an academic after-school program in Brooklyn, N.Y. will yield
better reading results than 17 third-graders attending a recreational after-school
program in Brooklyn, N.Y.

 Results consistent with the following viewpoints and findings:

 After-school programs that focus on recreational activities will promote academic
achievement (Dryfoos, 1999; Vandell & Shumow, 1999; Valentine, Cooper, &
Bettencourt, 2002; Coatsworth & Conry, 2007)
 Too much emphasis on work is negatively related to achievement (Warren, LePore, &
Mare, 2000)

 Results inconsistent with the following viewpoints and findings:

 After-school programs that focus primarily on academics provide higher academic
performance (Cosden, Morrison, Albanese, & Macias, 2001; Corno & Xu, 2004;
Cosden, Morrison, Gutierrez, & Brown, 2004)
 Homework plays an important role in supporting academic achievement (Corno &
Xu, 2004)
 Implications
 Results of this study cannot be generalized to
the general population since 100% of the
participants in this study were Asian.

 Need for a larger sample size

 Need for long-term study

 More research is needed especially regarding

recreational after-school programs and their
effects on academic achievement.