Jolene Johnson, Ed.D. - Nebraska...6 21ST CENTURY COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTERS – 2015-16 EVALUATION REPORT NDE 21st CCLC provided technical assis-tance and professional development

� 3 21st Century Community Learning Centers – 2012/13 Evaluation Report ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Jolene Johnson, Ed.D.

Assistant Professor, Education and Child DevelopmentMunroe-Meyer Institute

University of Nebraska Medical Center985605 Nebraska Medical Center

Omaha, NE [email protected]

(402) 559-5723

Funding for the external evaluation and this publication was provided byfederal funds under Title IV, Part B of the Elementary and SecondaryEducation Act (ESEA) as amended, and administered by the NebraskaDepartment of Education.

21st Century Community Learning Centers Grant ProgramNebraska Department of Education301 Centennial Mall South, Box 94987Lincoln, NE 68509-4987Phone: (402) 471-0876Fax: (402) 471-2371Web Site: http://www.education.ne.gov/21stcclc

All photos in this publication were taken in Nebraska 21st CCLC programs.The contents of this Annual Evaluation Report are available online at

http://www.education.ne.gov/21stcclc/ProgramEvaluation/EvaluationReport2015-2016.pdf.

1

Table of ContentsOverview of 21st Century Community Learning Centers ............................ 2

Community Partners .......................................... 5

Technical Assistance and Professional Development ................................. 6

21st CCLC Programming .................................... 7

Evaluation Plan and Activities........................... 10

Who Attended 21st CCLCs?.............................. 13

Program Quality ............................................... 17

Survey Outcomes ............................................ 21

Parent Survey Outcomes ......................... 21

Teacher Survey Outcomes ....................... 23

Student Survey Outcomes....................... 25

Afterschool Staff and Program Leader Survey Outcomes......................... 30

Preparing for Transition..................................... 35

Summary of Key Findings ................................ 36

Recommendations and Future Plans ............... 37

References....................................................... 38

Appendix .......................................................... 39

21st CCLC AQuESTT Alignment ....................... 40

2 21ST CENTURY COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTERS – 2015-16 EVALUATION REPORT

The 21st Century Community LearningCenters (21st CCLC) is a federally-funded,competitive grant program designed tosupport the establishment of communitylearning centers serving studentsattending schools with high needs. In1998, the 21st CCLC initiative wasauthorized under Title IV, Part B of theElementary and Secondary Education Act(ESEA). The No Child Left Behind (NCLB)Act of 2001 amended the initiative and

transferred the administration to statedepartments of education. The NebraskaDepartment of Education (NDE)administers these grants to offer studentsa broad array of services, programs, andactivities aligned to the school day thatoccur during non-school hours or periodswhen school is not in session such asafterschool, out-of-school days (full daysduring the school year when school is notin session), or summer.

Overview of 21st Century CommunityLearning Centers

3

The 21st CCLC programs are required toestablish and maintain a partnership withat least one community-basedorganization or other public or privateentity. Programs are also required toidentify a site-level management teamthat includes the building principal, projectdirector, site supervisor, and othersidentified by the site. These teamsconduct regular meetings and areresponsible for shared decision-making,reviewing evaluation data and developingaction plans for continuous improvement.

The three overarching goals of the 21stCCLC program are to: 1) improvestudent learning performance in one ormore core academic areas; 2) increasesocial benefits and positive behavioralchanges; and 3) increase family andcommunity engagement in supportingstudents’ education. Centers mayprovide a variety of services to achievethese goals, including remedial educationand academic enrichment learningprograms, tutoring and mentoringservices, services for English learners,technology education programs, programsthat promote parental involvement andfamily literacy, drug and violenceprevention programs, and counselingprograms, among other services. Theprogramming offered in a 21st CCLCshould be aligned to the school day and in

collaboration with other federal and stateinitiatives.

21st CCLC project directors wereinstrumental in the development of adocument that identifies the intersectionbetween NDE’s six tenets of AQuESTT,Accountability for a Quality EducationSystem, Today and Tomorrow, and theNebraska 21st CCLC program. Thisdocument articulates the many initiativesand activities that support StudentSuccess and Access and Teaching andLearning, the two domains of NDE’s newaccountability system, AQuESTT—acomprehensive system that is designedto ensure the success of all Nebraskastudents (see Appendix). This resourceallows 21st CCLC project directors toeffectively engage in conversations at theschool and district level related tocontinuous school improvement andprovides them with specific examples ofafterschool program activities that align toprogram, school and district improvementgoals. Examples of afterschool programindicators that support AQuESTT includediverse, prepared program staff, a systemthat supports students’ transitions fromgrade to grade and across levels,engagement of families and thecommunity in schools and programs,additional learning time, college andcareer readiness activities, ongoing data


collection and analysis, and ongoingprofessional development for programleaders and staff.

Beginning in 2003-2004, NDE hasconducted an annual grant competition toaward five-year 21st CCLC federal grantsfor out-of-school time programming.These 21st CCLC grant dollars areleveraged with other federal, state, andpartner/local fiscal support to operatequality afterschool and summer programs.This year, two types of competitive grantswere available (first-time grants andcontinuation grants). First-time grantswere 100% grant-funded in years onethrough three, 80% in year four, and 60%in year five. Continuation grants(calculated at a daily rate that is 50% ofthe amount of the grantee’s first-timegrant) were awarded to quality 21st CCLCprograms with level funding for a five-yeargrant period, and were available only toschool buildings, which have successfullyimplemented 21st CCLC programming forfive years. All data in this report werederived from these grantees.

Grantees began reporting partner/localfiscal support in 2013-14. Reports includethe amount expended and/or the value ofvolunteer time and/or donated/discountedgoods or services for the school year and,where applicable, summer program.Funding sources include other federal orstate funding, community-based or faith-based organization support, parent feesas well as other sources of funding.Although Nebraska grantees have manycommonalities, it is apparent in thecollection of this data from over 100 sitesthat there also are many differences,which makes it difficult to compare data.For example, resources to operate a smallrural elementary site may be quitedifferent from those needed in a largeurban middle school site. Some sitesoffer summer programming, but others donot. Some sites serve over 300 studentsdaily, while others average less than 40.Some sites were provided a wide rangeof unique partner/community supports,which are difficult to combine forstatewide analysis. In addition, manycomponents of a program were difficult toquantify, which resulted in too manyvariables to yield reliable conclusions. TheNDE 21st CCLC management teamcontinues to review national data as wellas methodologies used by other states intheir quest to determine the average costper student attending a 21st CCLCprogram.

In 2015-2016, grant awards

totaled $5,496,155 to

benefit students in 116 sites

in 31 Nebraska communities.

5

Community Partners21st CCLC programs rely on partnershipswith statewide and communityorganizations, local business and industry,and others to implement high-quality,sustainable 21st CCLC programs. 21stCCLC project directors work with schoolbuilding principals, community leaders, andrepresentatives of statewide organizationsto identify partners whose goals align tothose of the program. Mutually beneficialrelationships are then established resultingin a wide-variety of interesting and uniquelearning experiences for children andyouth. Examples of program supportprovided by partners include:• Support for implementation of a club

or activity

• Civic engagement and service learn-ing opportunities

• Exposure to and exploration of poten-tial careers and future college experi-ences

• Professional development• Curriculum development• Other important contributions

Partners supporting the work of aNebraska 21st CCLC program mightinclude Nebraska 4-H Extension, NebraskaGame & Parks Commission, BeyondSchool Bells, local libraries, communityorganizations committed to the health andwell-being of the community, artsorganizations, universities and communitycolleges, or groups committed topreserving and ensuring an appreciation ofthe environment.


NDE 21st CCLC provided technical assis-tance and professional development sup-port for grantees to facilitate theircontinuous improvement. Ongoing sup-port included on-site visits, webinars,monthly conference calls, utilization of ane-learning system (My21stCCLC),monthly newsletters, an annual one-dayproject director meeting, and regional pro-fessional development activities.

Collaborations with statewide partners re-sulted in many quality professional devel-opment experiences for program leadersand staff:

• Program sustainability webinarsthrough a partnership with BeyondSchool Bells

• Science, technology, engineering,and mathematics (STEM) workshopsincluding:

° Wearable Technology (WearTec)through partnerships with UNL 4-HExtension, UNL College of Engi-neering, UNO STEM College, andNASA Nebraska Space Grant

° Biomedical Engineering through apartnership with UNL’s BiomedicalEngineering program

• Project-based learning through a part-nership with Nebraska Game andParks

• Classroom Assessment and ScoringSystem (CLASS) regional workshopsas part of the evaluation contractwith UNMC.

Support was also provided to 21st CCLCprograms in their efforts to align activitiesto Nebraska Department of Education(NDE) initiatives, including:• Intersection between 21st CCLC and

the Six Tenets of AQuESTT, (http://aquestt.com),

• Program alignment to the NebraskaState Board of Education Policy forQuality Expanded Learning Opportu-nities. (https://www.education.ne.gov/21stcclc/QualityFramework.html).

Technical Assistance and ProfessionalDevelopment

7

The typical 21st CCLC afterschoolschedule offers an intentionally-plannedprogram aligned to the three overarchinggoals of the program:1) Improve student learning perform-

ance in one or more academic areas2) Increase social benefits and positive

behavioral changes

3) Increase family and community en-gagement in supporting students’ ed-ucation.

In addition, activities reflect the NebraskaState Board of Education Policy forExpanded Learning Opportunities adoptedSeptember 2013.

21st CCLC Programming


!"#

$"#

%"#

&"#

'!"#

'&"#

('"#

!)"#

*$"#

)("#

%*"#

%%"#

&+"#

&,"#

&$"#

+"# ,+"# !+"# )+"# %+"# '++"# ',+"#

-./0123##

45678128#9.8:81;61#

<./=#9.8:81;61#

>6/1?8751=#

@1A.8B.818/.?C5B#

@1=75?C#D80.18.?#

E81A6.51=#

-/A6.51=#

F8.:528#D80.151=#

D80G8.?C5B#

D5A8.023#

9C3?5207#H2;:5A3#

F-@E#

H.A?IE/?52#

J6K8L6.M#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

E#@-F

25?E/IA?.H

M.6L8KJ6

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

&+"#

&,"#

&$"#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

# &$"#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

=1510.8D825:.8F

B5C?.80G8D

302.A85D

A35:;2H0725?3C9

E#@-F

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

*$"#

)("#

%*"#

%%"#

&+"#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

&"#751=>6/1?8

B5C?./818.B8A.1@

?.810.8DC?57=1@

=15.A61E8

=15.A6/-

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

&"#

'!"#

'&"#

('"#

!)"#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

!"#

$"#

%"#

&"#

+"#

3201/.-

1;61#8:8.#981245678

1;61#8:8.#9/=<.

751=>6/1?8

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

$"#

%"#

&"#

,+"# !+"# )+"#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

)+"# %+"# '++"#

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

',+"#

15% of programs reported focusing on college and career readiness

9

Program schedules include time foracademic support including optionalhomework help, a healthy meal or snack,time for physical activity, and enriching,hands-on clubs and activities.

Programs reported their activities for theyear for the 2015-16 Annual PerformanceReport (APR). As would be expected, themost frequently reported activities werehomework, STEM and other clubactivities. The least frequent activitieswere those focused on counseling, drugand violence prevention and truancy.College and career readiness is also afocus of 21st CCLCs and 15% of theprograms reported an increased focus inthis area.

Homework and AcademicSupportThe majority of Nebraska 21st CCLCprograms offer time for homework help.Homework needs are communicated byclassroom teachers to program staff on aregular basis. Other academic supportsare provided daily.

Healthy Meal or SnackEach 21st CCLC site participates inapplicable USDA nutrition programs inorder to provide students with a healthymeal or snack each day. Students aresometimes involved in planning, growing,

and preparing these meals/snacks as partof their regular afterschool and summerlearning activities.

Enrichment and ClubsThe heart of the 21st CCLC program isthe time provided for students to engagein hands-on, enrichment activities,allowing them opportunities to discoverand explore topics of interest. These clubsand activities provide students withadditional time to learn about topics thatare not typically taught during the schoolday, or allow for more in-depth explorationand application of skills learned during theschool day.Examples of clubs/activities offered inNebraska 21st CCLC programs include:• Art/music• College/career readiness • Cooking• Dance• Exploration of STEM (integrated

science, technology, engineering,and mathematics) topics

• Fitness • Literacy• Nutrition/wellness• Outdoor education • Social emotional development• Technology.


The evaluation plan for 2015-16 wasbased upon a continuous improvementmodel. 21st CCLC sites used data to setgoals, develop action plans, implementthose plans and evaluate progresstowards those plans. Sites utilized datafrom their self-assessment, teachersurveys, parent surveys, student surveysand staff surveys. In addition, data werecollected on student attendance andstudent demographics.

As part of the continuous improvementmodel, all sites were required to holdContinuous Improvement Process (CIP)meetings in the fall of 2015. Attendanceat those meetings was required for thebuilding principal, site director and othermembers of the management teamincluding the external facilitator (ifcontracted by the site). At the CIPmeeting, sites reviewed data from 2014-15 and developed their action plan for

Evaluation Plan and Activities

11

the 2015-16 school year. Action planswere sent to the NDE ManagementTeam for review.

For newly-funded programs, externalfacilitators were required to helpfacilitate the continuous improvementprocess. External facilitators led theteams through the self-assessmentprocess, participated in managementteam meetings, provided guidance forthe evaluation process and facilitatedthe continuous improvement meeting.

Teacher surveys were collected for twopurposes: 1) To fulfill the requirementsfor federal reporting; 2) To providefeedback to the programs on theprogress of students enrolled withinthe 21st CCLCs. Surveys were

administered in spring of 2016 andwere collected/analyzed for regularattendees only.

Parent surveys were collected in thespring of 2016 from parents ofstudents who were or would be regularattendees in the program. While notfederally required, parent surveysprovide information on the quality ofthe program and the levels of parentengagement with the program andschool system as a whole.

Students were given an opportunity toprovide feedback on their experienceswith the 21st CCLCs. Students ingrades 3 and up were given studentsurveys. Sites had the option ofpiloting a new survey for students ingrades 4-12 or to use the previousstudent surveys (Elementary andSecondary). Student surveys are notfederally required but like parentsurveys, provide individual programsand the NDE management teamvaluable information on both levels ofsatisfaction and perceived benefits ofthe afterschool programming.

Staff and program leadership surveyswere administered for the first timethis year as it was determined by theNDE management team moreinformation was necessary in providing


a statewide view of the programs.Sites were also asked to submit atleast one success story highlighting astudent, family or partnership thatshowed success and/or improvementover the course of the school year.

Finally, two measures were used toexamine program quality. TheClassroom Assessment and ScoringSystem (CLASS) provided input to the21st CCLC sites in three major areas:Emotional Support, ClassroomOrganization and Instructional Supportfor K-3 programs (Pianta, LaParo &Hamre, 2008). For UpperElementary/Secondary CLASS (Pianta,Hamre & Mintz, 2012) a fourth domain,Student Engagement, wasaddressed.These areas specificallyassess the educator and studentinteractions, the student-to-studentinteractions and how well students areengaged with the programming.

The Program Quality Self-AssessmentRating Tool (St. Clair, 2014) examinedmultiple facets of each site includingadministration, partnerships, safety,programming and staffing. Togetherthese tools provided feedback toprograms on areas of strength andareas needing improvement. Thescores also provided the NDEmanagement team with data regarding

quality in 21st CCLCs and guidance forfuture professional developmentopportunities.

All 21st CCLC grantees are required toannually report site-level data to the U.S. Department of Education. ThisAnnual Performance Report (APR) waspreviously collected on a federalwebsite (PPICS) which wasdiscontinued at the conclusion of the2013-2014 reporting period. The newfederal website is titled 21APR andwas released in November 2015.Although the 21APR website reducedthe amount of data previouslycollected, it now requires grantees todisaggregate and report APR data byterms (fall, spring, summer). Thischange required a reconfiguration ofthe Nebraska 21st CCLC Accessdatabase, which was accomplishedduring the 2015-16 school year.Between November 2015 - February2016 grantees reported all 2014-2015APR data. Summer 2015 APR data wasreported during May 2016. 21st CCLCgrantees will continue this catch up inAPR reporting during the 2016-2017school year.

13

Statewide, there were 116 21st CenturyCommunity Learning Centers operating inNebraska public schools during the 2015-2016 year.

As noted on the map, 33 sites are withintheir first five years while 83 are oncontinuation funding and one site is self-sustained. 21st CCLCs served students inboth rural and urban communities.

“School Year” is defined as programmingoffered afterschool for less than 4 hours.

“Summer” includes programs funded by21st CCLC operating 4 or more hoursduring summer break. “Out of School”refers to programming offered for 4 ormore hours during the school year (earlyrelease days, holiday breaks).

A “regular attender” is a student whoattended 30 days or more during theschool year or identified minimumattendance goals for other timeframes(approximately 16.66% of offerings). Ofthe 19, 745 total students attending 21st

Who Attended 21st CCLC?


CCLCs, 62% were regular attenders. Thepercentage of regular attenders varied ifthe program charged daily fees versusthose charging no fees. For programscharging daily fees, 54% of students wereregular attenders compared to 67%regular attenders for programs chargingno fees. There was minor variation forurban (60% regular attenders) and non-urban (64% regular attenders) programs.

National research on students whoattended 21st CCLCs on a regular basisfound that they had improved math andreading grades, homework completion,class participation and behavior in class(U.S. Department of Education, 2014).

The number of students and number ofregular attenders has continued toincrease on an annual basis.

15

Demographics of Regular AttendersOf the regular attenders, 71% were ingrades K-6 while 29% were in grades 7-12. Nationally, 46% of students areelementary, 24% are in middle school and30% attended high school.

In order to assure 21st CCLC programsserve high-need students who couldbenefit the most from the programmingprovided, the demographics of afterschool

students should reflect the school daydemographics at each site (within amargin of 5%). Factors examined includefree/reduced lunch, ethnicity, Englishlearner and special educationpercentages. Beginning in 2015-2016, allstudent demographic data were obtainedand imported directly from the NebraskaDepartment of Education based ondistrict reporting. Programs did not entertheir own demographic information.

!"#$%& !"'"!&!!(!!&

!#)*%& !#$)%& !'!*!& !$!*"&!+#('& !+$)#&

'!+#& $")(& ("'!& (#$$& +**!& ((++& !""$%&!!%#'& !*!('&

*""$,"(& *""(,"+& *""+,!"& *"!",!!& *"!!,!*& *"!*,!%& *"!%,!)& *"!),!#& *"!#,!'&

Number of students continued to increase in 2015-16. rembuN unitncostnedutsf o niesaecrniotdeu .6-15102

*""$,"(& *""(,"+&

*""+,!"& *"!",!!& *"!!,!*&

*"!!,!*& *"!*,!%& *"!%,!)&

*"!%,!)& *"!),!#& *"!#,!'&

4315

4739

12,186

Number of Regular Attenders

!"#$%&$'()%%*$+,-.$ '"//01$2345$ '()%%*$60,1$2345748$

Summer 2015

Out of School

School Year 2015-16 5102r aYelooSch

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

l

6

ugeRf orembuN

-1

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

s

12,186

rednettAral

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

%

4315

4739

5

l

5

#$"!

102r mmeSu

ooSchfotuO

102r aYelooSch

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

.

4315

4739

6

,-+*%%)('&% 543$210/'"/

-1

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

8

12,186

475432,106*%%)('

$ $ $ $ $ $ $


Programs varied in demographicsdepending on whether they were urban ornon-urban and also with whether or notthey charged fees. Programs chargingdaily fees served fewer EL students (8%)compared to non-fees (19%) and therewas a large difference in the percentageof ethnic minorities served (41% for feescompared to 73% for non-fees). However,both the fees and non-fees programsserved at-risk students when compared tothe state of Nebraska enrollmentdemographics. Both types of programsserved the target population for 21stCCLCs.

!"#$

%"#$ %&#$

!%#$'&#$

%'#$ !#$()#$

*+,,-.,/01,/$20314$.56,$

78,195:$;/015<=3$>,+9?15<=3$

;3@:9A4$2,5+3,+$ ;64391$B93=+9<,A$

Nebraska 21st CCLCs served a diverse population.

)%A6$CC2C$760/,36A$ D::$E,F+5AG5$760/,36A$

s12kasarbeN

7C2CC6$A%)

$$ $

$ $$

$ $ $ $

$ $ $ $

adevresCsCCLtspopulation.

6A3,/607 /6075$G5A+F,E::D

$$ $

$ $$

$ $ $ $

$ $ $ $

esrevid

6A3,/

$$ $

$ $$

$ $ $ $

$ $ $ $

/

!"#$

%"#$

'&#$

,10/.,-,,+*.56,41302

5:91,87?9+,>

$$ $

$ $$

$ $ $ $

$ $ $ $

3

%"#$ %&#$%'#$ !#$

=5<10/;3=5<1?

+,35+,24A9:@3;$$ $

$ $$

$ $ $ $

$ $ $ $

A

!%#$

()#$

,<9+=3B919364;

National 21st CCLCDemographics

73% Free/Reduced Lunch

16% English Learner

36% Hispanic/Latino

22% African American

17

Program QualityTwo measures were used to assess thequality of programming provided in thestate’s 21st CCLCs. The Program QualitySelf-Assessment Rating Tool (St. Clair,2014) was utilized at all sites by theirmanagement team. Each sitemanagement team rated their ownprogram across nine dimensions and thenidentified areas for improvement. Thesecond tool was the ClassroomAssessment and Scoring System (CLASS)(Pianta, LaParo & Hamre, 2008). Each sitesubmitted two hours of video to the

evaluation team for scoring. Externalrating across multiple domains anddimensions were provided by reliableCLASS observers from the externalevaluation team from UNMC-MMI.Feedback on the CLASS videos wasprovided back to programs.

Program Quality Self-Assess-ment OutcomesThe management team consisting of thebuilding principal, site director, staffmembers, community partner(s) andexternal facilitator (if contracted by thesite) observed the program and then rated


components of the program on a 1 to 5scale (1=Not Evident; 3 = ModeratelyEvident; 5 = Consistently Evident).

Overall, the ratings on the self-assessment were in the “Mostly Evident”range while one scale approached the“Consistently Evident” mark(Environment, Safety and Wellness). Theareas showing the most room for growthwere around partnerships (Family, School

and Community) and in programming,particularly in Enrichment.

Classroom Assessment andScoring System (CLASS) OutcomesWhile not developed specifically forafterschool programs, the CLASS tool wasused to provide programs feedback on thequality of the interactions. CLASS scoringwas based on a two-hour videotape of

!"!#$"

4.48

%"%#$"&"

&#$"'"

'#$"$"

4.4 4.19 4.2 4.15 4.77

4.45 4.23 4.07 4.33

%"

4.48

$"%#&"$"&#'"$"'#$"

4.4 4.19 4.2 4.15 4.15 4.77

4.45 4.23 4.07 4.33

!"$"!#%"

Emotional Support •!Positive Climate •!Teacher Sensitivity •!Regard for Student's Perspective

Classroom Organization •!Behavior Management

•!Productivity •!Instructional Learning Formats

Instructional Support •!Concept Development

•!Quality of Feedback

•!Language Modeling

Student Engagement

t SultiEm ! !!

!

!!

!

!

!

! !!

!

!!

!

!

!

Stu ! !!

!

!!

!

!

!

t dStu ! !!

!

!!

!

!

!

t rrt oppSulanotioEm• etmailCveitsiPo• y tviitsinSer echaeTTe• r ofrdageR

s 'tneduStveicterspPe

! !!

!

!!

!

!

!

! !!

!

!!

!

!

!

StuEn

! !!

!

!!

!

!

!

t nedStut nemegagEn

19

program interactions submitted to theevaluation team. Scoring is based on a 7-point scale with 7 indicating highestquality. The K-3 CLASS has three maindomains while the Upper Elementary toolhas four. Dimensions include Emotional,Organizational, and Instructional Support.Instructional Support tends to be thedomain with the most opportunity forimprovement as it challenges teachers toeffectively extend language, modeladvanced language, and to promotehigher-order thinking skills. Forclassrooms above third grade, a fourthdimension, Student Engagement is addedto the Domains.

The K-3 programs demonstrated mediumlevels of both Emotional Support andClassroom Organization. The scores inthose areas remained consistent with theprevious two school years and wereapproaching the high level (begins at 6).Instructional Support was in the low rangeand was consistent with the previousscores. It should be noted thatInstructional Support scores are lowernationally, even for classroom teacherswhose average scores hover between 2.0and 3.0. Scores approaching 6.0 andabove 6.0 indicate that practices wereconsistently evident.

5.64 5.51 5.51 5.44 5.63 5.63

1.97 2.09 2.02

!"

#"

$"

%"

&"

'"

("

#)!$*!%" #)!%*!&" #)!&*!'"

+,-.-/01"2344-56" 710885--,"95:0/;<0.-/" =/8653>.-/01"2344-56"" " " "" " " "" " " "" " " "

5.64 5.44

%"

&"

'"

("

" " " "

5.51 5.63

" " " "

5.51 5.63

" " " "" " " "

1.97

!"

#"

$"

%"

#)!$*!%"

201/-.-,+ " " " "

1.97 2.09

#)!%*!&"

6"5-4432 <0.;0/:59,--580817" " " "

2.09

#)!&*!'"

/-<0. 6"5-443201/-.>3658=/" " " "

2.02


For Upper Elementary/Secondary CLASSobservations, there was a drop in scoresacross all major domains from 2014-15 to2015-16. However, ClassroomOrganization remained in the high leveland Student Engagement wasapproaching the high range. TheInstructional Support score was nearly atthe mid-level and was higher than whatwas found for the K-3 scores. Studentengagement may be key in havingstudents maintain attendance andbecome regular attenders.

5.38 5.31 4.74

6.45 6.7 6.36

2.8 3.05 2.96

5.2 5.95

5.47

!"

#"

$"

%"

&"

'"

("

#)!$*!%" #)!%*!&" #)!&*!'"

Upper elementary/secondary students had high rates of engagement within the programs.

+,-.-/01"2344-56" 710885--,"95:0/;<0.-/" =/8653>.-/01"2344-56" 263?@/6"+/:0:@,@/6"

" " " "

" " " "

" " " "

" " " "

5.38

6.45

5.2

%"

&"

'"

("

meelereppUf osetar

" " " "

5.31

6.7

5.2

radncoe/syratnmehtiwtnmeegagnef

" " " "

4.74

6.36 5.95

gihdahstnedutsyr.msargorpehtnih

" " " "

5.47

hg

" " " "

2.8

!"

#"

$"

%"

#)!$*!%"

6"5-443201/-.-,+

" " " "

3.05

#)!%*!&"

/-<0.;0/:59,--580817 658=/

" " " "

2.96

#)!&*!'"

6"5-443201/-.>365 :/+6"/@?632

" " " "

2.96

6"/@,@0::

21

Survey OutcomesParent Survey OutcomesThe parent survey (St. Clair, 2008) wasgiven to parents of all students who wereregular attenders during the 2015-16school year. The multi-item survey is

designed to provide a snapshot ofprogram quality, experiences of thestudent and school/program engagementby the parent. Seventy percent of theparents returned the survey. Given thehigh rate of return, the results should beseen as representative of most parentexperiences and/or a typical parent


experience with the program. Parentswere asked to rate the following items ona 1 to 4 scale (1=Strongly Disagree,2=Disagree, 3=Agree, 4=Strongly Agree).

Parents (n=8,851) highly valued theprogramming provided to their child(ren).Ratings were high both for satisfactionwith the program and for the benefitsreceived by their child. No areas ofconcern on the survey were noted in theratings. Programs should continuereaching out to parents and making

communication a focus. The overallsatisfaction rating for the program was3.81/4.0.

!"#$%

!"$$%

!"&%

!"&!%

!"&'%

!"&$%

!"&&%

!"&(%

!" !#$" %" %#$" &" &#$" '"

Parents rated 21st CCLC programs positively.

%!()"**+*",("-""./0-)"10203)")4"56"78,9:;64<)8#"

=6"78,9:"02>46(")80"-7?@,?0("4A0/0:",2"%!()"**+*#"

"%!()"**+*"()-A"-/0"0B709902)"C7-/,2.D"/09,-190"-2:"(E,990:F#"

%!()"**+*",("-"(-G0"H9-70D"H86(,7-996"-2:"054?42-996#"

%!()"**+*"809H("78,9:I("G/,02:(8,H(#"

=6"78,9:"90-/2("54/0"16"H-/?7,H-?2.#"

J"-5",2G4/50:"-14<)"56"78,9:I("H/4./0(("-2:"108-@,4/#"

%!()"**+*"()-A"7455<2,7-)0"K,)8"50#"

r

0

stneraP

/.-"(,*+**)"(!%

" " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " "

" " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " " "

r

<

pC CCLts12detar

46;:9,8765)4)"30201-)"

" " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " "

" " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " " "

.

#

ylevitisopmsargor

)8<

" " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " "

" " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " " "

!"&&%

!"&(%

" " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " "

" " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " " "

0)8(64>20:9,87=6

0-/)-A(*+**)"(!%

H0-G(-"(,*+**)"(!%

9,87(H908*+**)"(!%

" " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " "

" " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " " "

**)"(!%2,:0/0A4(0?,@?-7

-209-1,90/D.2,-/7C)"209907B0

4?450:-269-97,(68HD0-79H

#(H,8(:20,/G(I:

" " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " "

" " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " " "

!"&!%

!"&'%

#*+

#F:099,E(:-2

#69-92

" " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " "

" " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " " "

!"&!%

!"&'%

!"&$%

!"&&%

" " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " "

" " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " " "

!"

/

$"!#

45(2-/09:9,87=6

<4-1:05/4G2,-5J"

547)-A(*+**)"(!%

" " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " "

" " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " " "

%"

#

$"%#

.2-?H,7?-/H610/

01:-2((0/.4/H(I:9,8765)"

#05)8,K-)07,2<5

" " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " "

" " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " " "

&"

!"#$%

!"$$%

!"&%

#

$"&#

/4,-@80

" " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " "

" " " " " "

" " " " " " "

" " " " "

'"

!"$$%

!"&%

Success StoryNumerous times JH hasstated “AH’s behaviors athome have improved and heis definitely happier/moreconfident since beginning theCCLC program.”

23

According to the same survey, parentsreported being engaged in the followingactivities at either the program or schoolbuilding level.

Teacher Survey OutcomesTo fulfill one of the federal APRrequirements, classroom teachers wereasked to rate individual students on theirperformance both academically andbehaviorally. Behaviorally the itemsfocused on student motivation,homework completion, participation andrelationships with others. Teachers ratedthe level of perceived student changefrom fall to spring on a seven-point scale(-3= Significant decline; 0=No change;

3=Significant improvement). The returnrate for teacher surveys was 82%(n=9,995).

Success StoryMs. B was struggling to find aplace for the boys to go after-school. She had mentionedthat all the other places werejust too expensive and she wasunsure how the boys would betaken care of once school gotout. When I told her that theafter-school program was free,she was ecstatic and hadinstant tears of joy.

19% 28%

48% 52%

70% 72% 72% 79%

!"#$%&'"()*&+*,#-.'/*

0-1.+())#*

2-33

.+&%"()*4&(5*6)"%5)#*

75"#)*8+9-#3"$-+*

:)";*<)4/1)=)#/*

:)>&)4*?-3)4-#@*

7.''-#(*A)"#+&+B*"(*?-3)*

0&/&(*7%5--1*

Parents reported high levels of engagement within the 21st CCLC programs and schools.

**

* *

**

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* *

**

* *

**

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* *

**

* *

**

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* *

**

* *

**

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* *

19% 28%

rstneraPhtnihtiw

**

* *

**

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* *

28%

48% 52%

70%

evelhgihdetroperrgorpC CCLts12eh

**

* *

**

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* *

70% 72% 72%

tnmeegagnef osl.sloochsdnamsar

**

* *

**

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* *

79%

**

* *

**

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* *

19%

/''/..'--.##-,,#+&&+"()''"%&&&'$%%%

&'$$%&

"##$!

#))#()))++(..+11.--10

"()%%"&&%++&..+33.333--322-

**

* *

**

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* *

#))#55)"%%5

))"66)(5&&(544&

()

+--+"$$-

33"##3--#99-8++9)"##)55"775

=))=11)//144/))4<<)";;<

:))"

**

* *

**

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* *

/##/))#==)@##@--#44-))433)

?--3

44?

))4&&)>>&:))>

)33)?--3

"(*(*?

BB "*

++B&&+++&"##+))"AA)(*(*A##(*--#''-'''..'77.

0**

* *

**

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* *

1--1---55-%%577%(*(*7&&(*&///&&&/&00&


On average, students showed growth ineach area assessed on the teacher survey.The areas showing the most growth wereparticipating in class, academicperformance and completing homeworkto satisfaction.

Teachers also rated students’ academicperformance in reading, writing,mathematics and science. Teachers wereasked to consider observations of thestudent in the classroom, performance ondistrict and state assessments andprofessional judgment to classify students

as not meeting, meeting or exceeding thestate standards in each content area.

67% 69% 72% 79%

!"#$%&' ()*+#%&'' ,*-.)/*$01' 20#)%0)'

Science had the highest rating.

'' ' '

'' ' '

'' ' '

67% 69%

dahceneSci

'' ' '

69% 72% 79% .gnitrastehgiheht

'' ' '

79%

'' ' '

&'%$!"# &%#*+() '' ' '

& 10*$/),*-. %0#)20'' ' '

)%0

!" !#$" !#%" !#&" !#'" !#(" !#)" !#*" !#+"

,-./01/2"34566"7.2845749"

:.;5<1/2"=.44"1/"34566"

>5?149"68@@A7B"AC"6B80./BD6"4.57/1/2"

:.1/2"5-./E<."1/"34566"

F87/1/2";A?.=A7G"1/"A/"E?."

H.I/2"54A/2"=.44"=1B;"AB;.7"6B80./B6"

JA48/B..71/2"

KA?1/2"BA"63;AA4"?AE<5B.0"BA"4.57/"

[email protected]/2";A?.=A7G"BA"65E6C53EA/"

,350.?13"@.7CA7?5/3."

L57E31@5E/2"1/"34566"

F.53;.76"@.73.1<.0"B;."?A6B"27A=B;"1/"34566"@57E31@5EA/"5/0"5350.?13"@.7CA7?5/3.#"

7AC7.@31?.503,

2/5E@13E57L

.@67.;53.F

" " "

" " " "

" " " "

" " " "

"

" " " " " "

"

" " " " " "

" " " "

" "

" " "

" " " " " " " "" "

.35/?7

65643/1

A72B"6A?.B;0.<1.37C7.@31?.5053

" " "

" " " "

" " " "

" " " "

"

" " " " " "

"

" " " " " "

" " " "

" "

" " "

" " " " " " " "" "

@13E57@65643/1B;=A#.35/?7A

" " "

" " " "

" " " "

" " " "

"

" " " " " "

"

" " " " " "

" " " "

" "

" " "

" " " " " " " "" "

05//A5E@

" " "

" " " "

" " " "

" " " "

"

" " " " " "

"

" " " " " "

" " " "

" "

" " "

" " " " " " " "" "

"1/"A/"E?GA7=.";A?/1/2F87

B867.B;AB;1=44.=2/A542I/.H

B./84AJ

BA05B.<EA?4AA;36BA2/1?AK

65E6BAG7A=.?A;2/E.4@?AK

" " "

" " " "

" " " "

" " " "

"

" " " " " "

"

" " " " " "

" " " "

" "

" " "

" " " " " " " "" "

."1/"A/"E?

B6/.0B8

2/17.B.

/57.4BA

/AE53C

" " "

" " " "

" " " "

" " " "

"

" " " " " "

"

" " " " " "

" " " "

" "

" " "

" " " " " " " "" "

" " "

" " " "

" " " "

" " " "

"

" " " " " "

"

" " " " " "

" " " "

" "

" " "

" " " " " " " "" "

" " "

" " " "

" " " "

" " " "

"

" " " " " "

"

" " " " " "

" " " "

" "

" " "

" " " " " " " "" "

.7656432/10/.-,

44.=2/15<;.:

.46BD/.0B86CAB"7A@@869415?>

.<E/.5-2/1.:

" " "

" " " "

" " " "

" " " "

"

" " " " " "

"

" " " " " "

" " " "

" "

" " "

" " " " " " " "" "

!" $"!# %"!#

9457482.

65643/1

2/1/57.

65643/1

" " "

" " " "

" " " "

" " " "

"

" " " " " "

"

" " " " " "

" " " "

" "

" " "

" " " " " " " "" "

&"!# '"!# ("!#

" " "

" " " "

" " " "

" " " "

"

" " " " " "

"

" " " " " "

" " " "

" "

" " "

" " " " " " " "" "

)"!# *"!# +"!#

25

These percentages should not becompared with proficiency rates on theNebraska State Assessments (NeSA) asthe teacher ratings take into accountmore than a single point of data and are acompilation of data across multiple gradelevels (K-12).

Key FindingsThe perception of teachers overall is that21st CCLCs positively impact studentsacademically, with classroom behaviorsand with social/emotional skills. Mostgrowth was seen in the areas typicallytargeted by programs including academics(with science having the highest rating),homework completion, classroomparticipation and motivation to learn.

Student Survey Outcomes This year (2015-16) sites had the option touse one of two student surveys. Onesurvey had been used in previous yearsand had two versions (elementary andsecondary). A separate survey waspiloted and administered to students in4th-12th grades. The surveys askeddifferent questions and used differentscales for the answers. Becauseprograms had the option of choosingwhich survey to use, it is difficult tocompare or to draw conclusions aboutprogramming due to those factors.Therefore, each survey is presented andsummarized individually.

Success StoryEC set a goal that he wants to be a peer mentor and peer tutor in the CLCprogram. We are working with his teacher and his mother to continue to build onhis momentum of being a leader. EC was enrolled in the Project Manhood classto help develop his leadership skills and give him the opportunity to have positiveexperiences outside of his neighborhood, school, and family.

EC has come a long ways from being disruptive in school and CLC. His teacherstates that it is nowhere near the level it was at when school first started. Shesaid he raises his hand before speaking in class, doesn’t dance and talk while heis in line, and he uses his boisterous personality in a positive way and not a waythat disrupts class. During CLC he continues to work with younger students withtheir homework, the staff in the kitchen after snack, and is striving to be a mentor.


• Youth Engagement SurveyThe majority of regular attendeescompleted the Youth EngagementSurvey (Youth Development Executives ofKing County, 2015) as a pilot survey. Thesurvey asked questions across severalareas pertaining to each student

personally and then in regards to theimpact of the program they had attended.Students were asked to rate each item ona four-point scale (1=Strongly Disagree,2=Disagree, 3=Agree and 4=StronglyAgree).Means were calculated statewide.

Youth Engagement Survey ItemsReturn Rate (n = 4, 237) 77%

ACADEMIC IDENTITY

1. Doing well in school is important to who I am. 3.50

2. Getting good grades is one of my main goals. 3.60

3. I take pride in doing my best in school. 3.52

4. Getting a college education is important to me. 3.67

5. I am a hard worker when it comes to my school work. 3.36

6. It is important to me to learn as much as I can. 3.59

MINDSETS

7. I finish whatever I begin. 3.13

8. I stay positive when things don’t go the way I want. 3.03

9. I don’t give up easily. 3.35

10. I try things even if I might fail. 3.37

11. I can solve difficult problems if I try hard enough. 3.36

12. I can do a good job if I try hard enough. 3.55

13. I stay focused on my work even when it’s boring. 3.06

SELF-MANAGEMENT

14. I can stop myself from doing something I know I shouldn’t do. 3.23

15. When I’m sad, I do something that will make me feel better. 3.17

16. I can control my temper. 3.10

17. I can handle stress. 3.05

18. I can calm myself down when I’m excited or upset. 3.19

19. When my solution to a problem is not working, I try to find a new solution. 3.23

20. I think of my past choices when making new decisions. 3.24

Statewide 21stCCLC Average

27

FUTURE ORIENTATION

21. I expect good things to happen to me. 3.44

22. I feel excited about my future. 3.53

23. I trust my future will turn out well. 3.46

24. I have goals in my life. 3.64

25. If I set goals, I take action to reach them. 3.45

26. I make step-by-step plans to reach my goals. 3.24

INTERPERSONAL SKILLS27. I listen to other people’s ideas. 3.16

28. I work well with others on group projects. 3.26

29. I feel bad when someone gets their feelings hurt. 3.35

30. I respect what other people think, even if I disagree. 3.23

31. I try to help when I see someone having a problem. 3.32

32. When I make a decision, I think about how it will affect other people. 3.18

ACADEMIC BEHAVIORS (looking back over this year)

33. This program has helped me to become more interested in what I’m learning in school. 3.14

34. This program has helped me to connect my schoolwork to my future goals. 3.20

35. This program has helped me to do better in school. 3.22

36. This program has helped me to complete my schoolwork on time. 3.29

37. This program has helped me to do a better job on my schoolwork. 3.25

SOCIAL EMOTIONAL BEHAVIORS (looking back over this year)

38. This program has helped me to handle stress. 2.87

39. This program has helped me to become better at controlling my temper. 2.90

40. This program has helped me to learn that my feelings affect how I do at school. 3.10

41. This program has helped me learn how to calm myself down when I’m excited or upset. 2.96

42. This program has helped me get better at staying focused on my work. 3.14

43. This program has helped me learn to resist doing something when I know I shouldn’t do it. 3.18

BELONGING AND ENGAGEMENT

44. I fit in at this program. 3.35

45. I feel proud to be part of my program. 3.40

46. The adults in this program take the time to get to know me. 3.35

47. What we do in this program is something that I feel excited about. 3.31

48. This program helps me explore new ideas. 3.27

49. This program helps me build new skills. 3.30

50. What we do in this program is important to me. 3.27

51. What we do in this program is challenging in a good way. 3.31


On the Youth Engagement Survey,areas of strength included AcademicIdentity and Future Orientation. Studentsreported wanting to earn good grades andhad future goals. Areas in which studentsreported fewer skills were in theMindsets and Self-Managementcategories, which corresponded to thefinding that students felt the programswere least influential in the SocialEmotional Behaviors category.

• Elementary and SecondaryStudent SurveysFor the Elementary and SecondaryStudent Surveys (St. Clair, 2008), itemswere rated on a 3-point scale (0 = No, 1= Sometimes and 2 = Yes).

Ratings by students indicate that overallthey feel safe and cared about at 21stCCLCs. Additionally, they report that gettinggood grades was important to them.

Elementary Student Survey Items

Return Rate (n=413) 80%

1. Getting good grades in school is important to me. 1.85

2. I feel accepted by other kids in the 21st CCLC program. 1.45

3. I feel accepted by other kids in school. 1.48

4. I feel safe in the 21st CCLC program. 1.72

5. I get my homework done in the 21st CCLC program (if I have homework). 1.55

6. I talk to my family about my homework or what I’m learning in school. 1.27

7. I’m getting good grades in reading (or language arts) at school. 1.61

8. I’m getting good grades in mathematics at school. 1.65

9. I follow the rules at school. 1.74

10. I follow the rules in the 21st CCLC program. 1.73

11. I get along well with the other students in the 21st CCLC program. 1.60

12. I get along well with the other students in school. 1.58

13. I like the activities in the 21st CCLC program. 1.67

14. I like how we learn things in the 21st CCLC program. 1.61

15. The adults in the 21st CCLC program care about me. 1.79

16. I have a safe way to get home from the 21st CCLC program. 1.86

Statewide 21stCCLC

29

Ratings by secondary students indicatedthat they were motivated to get goodgrades, attend college in the future, followrules at school and in the program and feltsafe in the 21st CCLC site.

Summary of Student Survey DataFor students taking both the elementaryand secondary versions of the survey,getting good grades was important.That finding is consistent with the YouthEngagement Survey in that students

Secondary Student Survey ItemsReturn Rate (n= 505) 84%

1. Getting good grades in school is important to me. 1.85

2. I feel accepted by others in the 21st CCLC program. 1.67

3. I feel accepted by others in school. 1.62

4. I feel safe in the 21st CCLC program. 1.82

5. I get my homework done in the 21st CCLC program (if I have homework). 1.40

6. I talk to my family about my homework or what I’m learning in school. 1.43

7. I’m getting good grades in reading (or English) at school. 1.68

8. I’m getting good grades in mathematics at school. 1.62

9. I follow the rules at school. 1.75

10. I follow the rules in the 21st CCLC program. 1.79

11. My friends encourage me to make good choices. 1.62

12. I get along well with the other students in the 21st CCLC program. 1.68

13. I get along well with the other students in school. 1.59

14. I like the activities in the 21st CCLC program. 1.61

15. I like how we learn things in the 21st CCLC program. 1.57

16. The adults in the 21st CCLC program care about me. 1.68

17. I have a safe way to get home from the 21st CCLC program. 1.80

18. I would like to go to college someday. 1.78

19. I am involved in community service or other activities to help others. 1.45

20. There are ways I can make my community a better place. 1.72

Statewide 21stCCLC


wanted to do well in school. Additionally,students taking the Secondary Studentsurvey highly rated wanting to go tocollege aligning with the results of futuregoals found in the Youth EngagementSurvey. Students across all surveysrated that they felt safe in theprograms and connected to the adults.Areas that were lower includedcompleting homework andsatisfaction/engagement with theprogram offerings.

Afterschool Staff and ProgramLeader Survey OutcomesAfterschool staff members were asked tocomplete a 27 item survey on theirexperiences working in a 21st CCLCprogram. A total of 988 responses were

received. Of the 988 respondents, 75%were female. For 21st CCLC programleaders, a total of 119 completed the surveyand of those respondents 82% werefemale. Program leaders include the projectdirectors, site coordinators and other staffmembers whom project directorsdetermined to be in leadership roles.

Staff at 21st CCLCs are highly diverse…

mirroring the students served in the programs.

31

The afterschool staff were racially diversewith 65% identifying as White, 15% asAfrican American, 14% asHispanic/Latino, 1% Native American and1% Asian/Pacific Islander with theremaining 4% either choosing not toanswer or listing other. In contrast,program leaders were not as diverse with75% identifying as White, 13% as AfricanAmerican, 8% Hispanic/Latino, 2% NativeAmerican and 1% Asian/Pacific Islander.

The results of both surveys indicate highlevels of turnover for both afterschool staffand for program leaders.

For some 21st CCLC programs, themajority of afterschool staff are collegestudents, so turnover is expected as theygraduate. For education majors, 21stCCLCs provide a training ground forworking with students of diverse ages,backgrounds and abilities. Partnerships

5%

30%

20% 17%

10% 16%

2% 2% 1%

16%

36%

27%

18%

1%

!"#$%&'(& '()*'& **)*+& *,)-+& -,).+& /0$%&.+& 1$2&345"6&

Age of Afterschool Staff and Program Leaders

7859& :%;<%5=&1$5#$%>&

30%

egA

& &

& & &

aStloochsreftAf oe

& &

& & &

36%

27%

eLm argorPdnaf fa

& &

& & &

sredae

& &

& & &

& &

& & &

5% 2% 1%

'(&$%&#!" '()*'& & &

& & &

20% 17%

1%

16%

'()*'& **)*+& *,)-+&

8597

& &

& & &

17% 10%

*,)-+& -,).+&

>%$5#$15=%<;%:

& &

& & &

16%

2%

18%

1%

&.+&%/0$ 65"432$1 & &

& & &

68%

20%

6%

3%

3%

43%

32%

13%

7%

3%

!"#$%&'()$

#"*$%&'()$

*"+!$%&'()$

+!"+*$%&'()$

,-&($+*$%&'()$

./)0$)10&$21(&30/()$4&'-&$'$5(/6('7$81091:$*$%&'();$./)0$'<&()39//4$)0'=$4&'-&$>&?/(&$#$%&'()$/?$&754/%7&:0;$

@(/6('7$A&'2&()$ B<&()39//4$C0'=$

3% 3% )'(&%*+(&-,

0&1)0$)./93)(&'<0$)./

$ $

$ $

$ $

$ $

$ $ $

$ $ $ $ $ $ $$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

$ $ $ $

/(5'$&'-&4)(0/3&(120&&(/?&>&'-&40'=)4//9

$ $

$ $

$ $

$ $

$ $ $

$ $ $ $ $ $ $$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

$ $ $ $

;)'(&%*:10918'7(6&7%/457&?/)'(&%#&

$ $

$ $

$ $

$ $

$ $ $

$ $ $ $ $ $ $$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

$ $ $ $

0;:&

$ $

$ $

$ $

$ $

$ $ $

$ $ $ $ $ $ $$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

$ $ $ $

6%

3% 7%

)'(&%#"!

)'(&%*"#

)'(&%!+"*

)'(&%*+"!+

$ $

$ $

$ $

$ $

$ $ $

$ $ $ $ $ $ $$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

$ $ $ $

20% 32%

13%

)(&'2&A'7(6/(@ &<B

$ $

$ $

$ $

$ $

$ $ $

$ $ $ $ $ $ $$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

$ $ $ $

43%

0'=C4//93)(&

$ $

$ $

$ $

$ $

$ $ $

$ $ $ $ $ $ $$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

$ $ $ $

68%


between 21st CCLC programs andpostsecondary institutions across thestate are mutually beneficial for both K-12students and students participating incollege coursework. Examples of thesepartnerships exist in Chadron, NE whereChadron State College mathematicsstudents mentor students in theafterschool program strengtheningeveryone’s math ability. Another exampleis Doane University in Crete, NE whereuniversity students design and implementclubs for students who attend theafterschool program under the supervisionof their professors. Among the manybenefits of these partnerships is theexperience it provides future teacherswho gain valuable teaching experience inafterschool programs while receivingcollege credit. These mutually beneficialpartnerships exist across the state,

making postsecondary institutionsvaluable partners in the design andimplementation of many quality 21stCCLC programs.

For program leaders, 98% have at leastsome college education with 38% havinga 4-year degree and another 31% havingat least some graduate level work. Inaddition, 82% of afterschool staff havemore than a high school diploma or GEDand 34% have a 4-year degree or higher.Overall, staff and program leaders arehighly educated.

Staff members were also asked to ratetheir top three areas for futureprofessional development. The mostfrequently selected options were:Behavior Management (55%),Programming Ideas (41%) and

!"#

$%"#

!&"#

$'"#$%"#

("# $'"#

'"# )"#

)'"#

&"#

!&"#

$!"#$&"#

!"##$%&'($&)*&$#+&,,!$

&#-*".$ #,/"$+,!!"*"$ 0$1"'2$."*2""$ 3$1"'2$."*2""$ #,/"$*2'.4'%"$5,26$

/'#%"27#$."*2""$,2$&)*&"2$

'89:;<=>>?$#@AB$ C:>D:AE$!9AF9:;$

$ $$

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $$

$ $

$ $ $ $

"#&!

$ $$

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $$

$ $

$ $ $ $

"#&!

$ $$

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $$

$ $

$ $ $ $

$ $$

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $$

$ $

$ $ $ $

$ $$

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $$

$ $

$ $ $ $

"# "#!"#' "#)

&$&)*(&'%##"!!,&,+#

"*--*&#$ $$

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $$

$ $

$ $ $ $

"#%$"#')

"#&

. "*"!!,+/",# 2$'"10

@AB#?>>=<;:98'

$ $$

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $$

$ $

$ $ $ $

"#'$"#%$ "#!$

"2"*".2$ "2"*".2$'"13 ,#

@AB ;:9AF9!AE:D>:C

$ $$

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $$

$ $

$ $ $ $

"#( "#'$"#

"#&$

"%'4.2'*/"26,5

"2"*".#27"%#/'2$&"&)*2$,

$ $$

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $$

$ $

$ $ $ $

33

Communicating with Parents (31%).The training needs identified by staff weresomewhat consistent with the mostfrequent areas of collaboration withschool day staff during the school year: 1)Discussing student homeworkassignments; 2) Discussing studentbehavior concerns and strategies and 3)Monitoring student development.

The Program Leader survey focused on three areas: 1) Partner SchoolRelationships; 2) Partner SchoolCommunication and 3) Administrationand Program Sustainability. Directorswere asked to rate items on a 1 to 4 scale(1=Strongly disagree to 4 = Strongly agree).

Afterschool Staff Survey Items

Staff use positive behavior management strategies.

Staff are actively engaged with students.

Students interact positively with each other.

Students interact positively with staff.

Staff build respect for differences among students.

Staff enjoy their work.

The program facilitates students’ self-confidence.

The program facilitates positive behavior.

The staff helps students academically and/or in homework completion.

There is a balance between academic and enrichment activities.

Activities are offered that reflect all abilities of students in the program.

The school supports the afterschool program in general.

90% of staffAgreed orStrongly

Agreed with the items


Program Leaders Survey

From the survey, site directors reportedstrong relationships with the schools inrelation to overall support, studentdiscipline, policies and procedures andshared space. Fewer site directorsreported collaborating on programplanning and/or attending faculty

meetings. The budget and financialplanning for some programs continues tobe a challenge. Some of this may be dueto the repeated turnover of leadership forsome programs (director turnover,principal turnover or both).

21st CCLC Program Leader Items

There is a strong partnership between the afterschool program and the school. 88%

The principal keeps me informed of important decisions and issues related to school policy. 86%

Building teachers are willing to collaborate with the afterschool program staff. 86%

School staff are encouraged to visit the program. 84%

I am invited or encouraged to attend school faculty meetings. 77%

I am invited to attend school leadership team meetings. 63%

My building principal and I discuss planning content. 79%

Shared space issues are discussed. 91%

Enrollment levels are discussed regularly. 85%

Principal is aware of policies and procedures of the program. 95%

Student discipline policies are discussed. 92%

Program staffing issues are addressed. 85%

The school supports the afterschool program in general. 95%

My afterschool program supervisor, and/or principal have observed my program at least 90%once this year.

There are planned organizational meetings for myself and other directors with my 88%administration team.

The program budget is periodically adjusted based on resource needs. 82%

There is a long-term financial plan in place for sustaining the program and maintaining 83%program quality.

We have an internal method for evaluating program activities. 86%

Percent who Agree or Strongly

Agree

35

SuccessesProgram leaders were asked to list thesuccesses of their program over the pastyear. Increased overall attendance,increased number of regular attenders,improved programming, familyengagement and programmatic use ofSTEM activities were some of the mostmentioned successes.

ChallengesBy far the most challenging aspect forprogram leaders was staffing, includingfinding quality staff members and dealingwith frequent turnover of staff. Beingshort staffed creates a number ofchallenges, from staff to student ratio, toprogramming, to having consistent

expectations and routines for students.Additional challenges included funding,having adequate space, communication/engagement with parents andunderstanding how to support studentswith academic and behavioral needs.

Preparing forTransitionDuring the 2015-2016 school year, multiplechanges occurred at the federal and statelevels requiring programs and the NDEmanagement team to be flexible and lookto make changes heading into the 2016-2017 school year. The 21 APR federalwebsite came out in 2015 and programshad to adjust their way of reportingoutcomes. The statewide evaluatorchanged mid-year as did the databasecoordinator. The decision was made tomove to all electronic surveys beginningin 2016-2017. During 2016-2017, allcomponents of the evaluation plan will beexamined by an evaluation workgroup.This group will provide feedback and inputon the current components.

In 2016-17, sites will be using a new onlinesystem for program managementpurposes. Guidance will be posted on thesite for programming, databases, the 21APR, the continuous improvementprocess and the evaluation.


1. Programs serve a diversepopulation of students.

2. Programs were of high quality andoffered a wide array ofprogramming for students.

3. Teachers rated students asshowing improvements in all areasbut especially in academics,homework completion, classparticipation and classroombehavior.

4. Parents were highly satisfied withthe programming.

5. Student outcomes showed high

levels of proficiency in all academicareas, but particularly in science.

6. Students reported being motivatedto do well in school and to developfuture plans.

7. Afterschool staff and programleaders are highly educated anddiverse.

8. The programming and futuredirection of the 21st CCLCprograms in Nebraska are alignedwith AQuESTT tenets and thegoals of the Nebraska Departmentof Education.

Summary of Key Findings

37

1. Evaluate all components of theevaluation plan with input from theevaluation workgroup.

2. Consider adding a communitypartner collaboration tool.

3. For new programs and programs

with new leadership, an externalfacilitator is recommended.

4. Provide ongoing professionaldevelopment considering the areasof positive behavior managementand programming.

Recommendations and Future Plans


ReferencesLearning Point Associates (2004). Teacher Survey for 21st Century Community Learning

Centers. Naperville, IL.Pianta, R., Hamre, B., & Mintz, S. (2012). Classroom assessment scoring system (CLASS).

Charlottesville, VA: Teachstone.Pianta, R., LaParo, K., & Hamre, B. (2008). Classroom assessment scoring system (CLASS).

Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.St. Clair, L. (2014). Nebraska Quality Out-Of-School Time Program Self-Assessment Rating Tool.

Nebraska Department of Education, http://www.education.ne.gov/21stcclc/Index.html.St. Clair, L. (2008). Parent surveys. Nebraska Department of Education,

http://www.education.ne.gov/21stcclc/Index.html.St. Clair, L. (2008). Student surveys (elementary & secondary versions). Nebraska Department

of Education, http://www.education.ne.gov/21stcclc/Index.html.U.S. Department of Education. (2014). 21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC)

analytic support for evaluation and program monitoring: An overview of the 21st CCLCperformance data: 2012-13.

Youth Development Executives of King County. (2015). Youth Engagement Survey. Seattle, WA.

39

Appendix


Intersection of the Six Tenets of AQuESTT and Nebraska 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program

for Nebraska

STUDENT SUCCESS AND ACCESSPositive Partnerships, Relationships and Student Success

Transitions

Educational Opportunities and Access

21st CCLC programs are implemented through a strong foundation of positive partnerships between formal and informal educators, families, community organizations, and local businesses. Through these partnerships, students are provided with hands-on, enriching learning opportunities afterschool, on non-school days, and during the summer that are aligned to, and reinforce school day learning objectives.

21st CCLC programs provide students with transitional support from school year to school year, and during the summer. Because students are provided with opportunities to attend programs each school year, and the summers in-between, students are intentionally provided with support during key transitional periods. Program staff, school day staff, older students, families, and community members work together to provide orientation, mentoring, and programming that prepares students for the next phase of their educational experience.

support time to learn outside the regular school day through engagement in student-centered opportunities aligned to school day learning objectives. Through partnerships with formal educators, families, and community organizations, students are allowed unique opportunities for community engagement, college and career exploration, homework support, activities that promote physical well-being, and social emotional development.

21st CCLC program indicators:

unique learning opportunities to students

and deeper learning

needs and interests

educators, families, community partners, and local businesses enhance student learning

and families across calendar years

opportunities support positive youth development


from school year to school year and during the summer

transitions (e.g., entering kindergarten, across grades, across buildings)

grade levels and throughout the summer

youth transitions


between school day and afterschool educators

expanded, student-centered learning projects

through integrated projects

choice of activities offered, which can lead to a more engaged learner

68198-5605

68509-4987

P (402) 471-0876F (402) 471-2371W

TEACHING AND LEARNINGCollege and Career Ready

Assessment

Educator E�ectiveness

*21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC) support quality expanded learning opportunities when students are not in school (afterschool, summer, and days when school is not

For more information about Nebraska’s 21st CCLC program, visit www.education.ne.gov/21stcclc.

10/21/2015

21st CCLC programs provide time outside of the regular school day for students to connect in meaningful ways with local business and industry, colleges, school day educators, and program staff to develop interests and skills for future success.

21st CCLC programs employ sound data collection and management practices focused

internal and external) allow program staff to know students not only as learners but as

school day partners, and families for ongoing program improvement.

21st CCLC programs employ both formal and informal educators who partner to provide

to grow positive relationships with students, families, and community partners. The overall

and mentors for students.


develop interest in and awareness of postsecondary educational opportunities

interests and skills necessary for future careers

as collaboration, communication, problem solving, critical thinking, and creativity

pathways


formal and informal educators, students, families to guide program improvement

development

staff, but also school day educators in knowing students and families more holistically


implementing student-centered, experiential learning opportunities

school day staff, afterschool staff, volunteers, community partners)

for more engaged learning

students

partners across school years and during the summer promotes high program quality

Documents

Jolene Johnson, Ed.D. - Nebraska...6 21ST CENTURY COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTERS – 2015-16 EVALUATION REPORT NDE 21st CCLC provided technical assis-tance and professional development