Running Head: School Programs1

After School Programs: A Necessity of Change (Rough Draft)

Randall L. Noggle

ABS417: Community Organizing & Development

Dr. Beverly Gardner

7/7/2014

School Programs2

Community and progressive organizing are very powerful concepts and have been seen throughout our American history. The definition provided for progressive social change in Community Organizing and Development is as follows: “Progressive social change is about defending the weak from the strong, gaining resources to reduce human hardship, and striving to promote an equitable society. It is about battling for economic and social justice, working to protect and enhance civil liberties, and respecting the environment” (Rubin & Rubin, 2008, p. 433). This definition provides a blending of community and progressive organizing with clear cut goals. While this definition does provide a broad scope of intent, it can be summed up in “…striving to promote an equitable society” (Rubin & Rubin, 2008, p. 433). This statement is essentially the main goal of community and progressive organizing from which all other goals are derived. This ideology is the main proponent and conceptual basis for after school programs. The necessity of change is more imperative than ever with America falling behind educationally and practically on a global scale. According to Finding Funding: A Guide to Federal Sources for Out-of-School Time and Community School Initiatives, “…public understanding of the importance of quality care and activities to children’s healthy development—not only for young children but also for older children in the hours they are not in school—is growing” (Reder & Finance Project, 2000). After school programs and their increasingly essential nature is the cause in which I wish to enact change. My motivation towards completion of certain goals, the role I would take in this process, the ways I would mobilize and involve the community, the policy actors I would try to involve and the challenges I would face are all elements that must be considered to enact this change.

1. Body Paragraph #1—Topic Sentence #1: a. My motivation to enact change in the area of after school programs is because of the

trend of the American educational system in focusing more on standardized test scores as opposed to practical application of ideas which allow students to fully grasp these concepts.

b. Supporting Evidencei. Through after-school programs, students learn how to collaborate and

communicate with their peers and teachers in ways different from their interactions in regular classrooms (Mahoney, Cairns, & Farmer, 2003). “After-school program activities have become a means for students to better understand scientific concepts, processes, and procedures.” (Sahin, Ayar, & Adiguzel, 2014, p. 311).

c. Explanationi. This is the main form of my motivation—that what is being taught in schools is

actually understood by students, especially those who are underprivileged in various forms.

d. So what?i. If supplemental after school programs are utilized so “drive home” what is being

taught in school, students have a much better chance at retaining and truly learning as opposed to material that is only present long enough to pass a test.

e. Supporting Evidencei. A major conflict is whether the purpose of after school programs is to use

traditional instructional methods expanding upon the school day, or whether to provide a holistic and developmental experience of discussing the day and contemplating (Brecher, Brazil, Weitzman & Silver, 2010).

f. Explanationi. This is one of the problems that is faced with education-based after school

programs, to determine which course is taken regarding the structure of the program.

g. So what?

School Programs3

i. It is my opinion that these after school programs are more concerned with the latter idealism of contemplation and discussion which can lead to divergent thinking and practical application and understanding.

2. Body Paragraph #2—Topic Sentenc #2a. In order to enact change, there needs to be boundaries as to who has power over what. b. Supporting Evidence

i. “…educational policy-making in the United States occurs by means of a multilayered and largely decentralized system in which both decision-making processes and the boundaries of authority are unclear” (Karen, 1998).

c. Explanationi. This is almost a call of accountability for our educational system. In order to

begin change, those involved need to understand who needs to be addressed with the issue at hand. Whether it be on a local, state, or national level.

d. So what?i. Without knowing who is the deciding factor regarding policy of after school

programs, we cannot be certain of which policy actors to involve or what path needs to be taken in order to enact change.

3. Body Paragraph #3—Topic Sentence #3a. The role I would be taking is to create public awareness and identify what current policy

is in place by interviewing essential policy actors. b. Supporting Evidence

i. I would contact the local School Board, Principals, the Superintendent, my local legislature (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislators/find) and Educational Appropriations Subcommittee (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/committees/committee?ga=85&groupID=675).

ii. So What? 1. By contacting all these policy actos and questioning, it would be

providing information that some people may not know how to attain and are ignorant of, and it would also be the first steps of including and attaining support from those who can bring about policy change/creation.

4. Body Paragraph #4—Topic Sentence #4a. The mobilization of others to help me will be through personal contact and social media

relying on the emphasis on child development in the current societal landscape and necessity of community involvement.

b. Supporting Evidencei. “…there is an increasing sense that many families and communities need an

array of supporters and service to help them in raising children who can succeed in the economy and society, and that these needs can best be met in a comprehensive fashion at the community level.” (Reder & Finance Project, 2000).

c. So What?i. This idealism not only includes those who could be helpful, but also ties them

directly to the children of community and their role in the development of America’s future.

5. Body Paragraph #5—Topic Sentence #5a. Community involvement needs to be regarding the process of policy change and only a

limited involvement in the actual educational process in programs. b. Supporting Evidence

i. “…those who proceed to invite parental participation often note the difficulty of trying to accommodate so many differing belief systems within an institution

School Programs4

whose professionals must be both accountable to standardized expectations and organizationally efficient due to restrictions” (MacKinnon, 2000).

ii. Over the course of the twentieth century, state funding has risen to not only meet its local funding, but also has surpassed it. This has also lead to the states expanded authority in all domains of education (standards, curriculum, special needs, etc) (Meyer, Scott, & Strang, 1987).

c. Explanation i. These two quotes may seem contradictory to community involvement. This is not

the case. They provide support for the educational to manage these programs because potential conflict in personal vs public idealism.

d. So What?i. This is essential the reality of the current setup of school programs. By inhibiting

the personal factor that parental educational involvement entails, there is a more socially broad approach in education that may be devoid of cultural, religious, and socio-economic bias.

6. Body Paragraph #6 – Topic Sentence #6a. There are definitely going to be roadblocks and challenges on the projected path of social

change. b. Supporting Evidence

i. “As state governments have found it necessary to reduce funds available for education due to a waning economy, many schools and school districts find themselves with increasing needs and decreasing resources” (Brown & Schenck, 1993).

c. Explanationi. Financial capability to enact social change is the biggest challenge present. The

educational system is already being forced to cut programs during the school day, let alone those programs that are supplemental and “nonessential” to the process.

d. So What?i. This will be the biggest issue to overcome. Gaining support can be relatively easy

with the popularity of social media. Even gaining political support can be, for lack of a better phrase, less difficult than gaining funding. Even is districts where grants and outside funding have been attained, there are still shortcomings present (example of school system here, I just don’t remember where I saved it to, I wasn’t full awake when I started my research).

Improving and creating quality after school programs that foster an inquisitive, informal environment for communicating thoughts, ideas, and concepts that are learned throughout the school day are advantageous in helping our youth become more adequately skilled in areas that will help them be not only functional, but successful in their future. My primary goal is to make our educational system be useful to all children, not just those who have the resources to make the best use of what is learned during the day. This is the key so creating an equitable social structure in which children from all demographics and socioeconomic statuses can thrive. Horace Mann said, “Adapting to the Changing Needs of Students Education, then, beyond all other devices of human origin, is a great equalizer of conditions of men-the balance wheel of the social machinery” (Karen, 1998). With my motivation, the role I would take, how I would realistically involve the community, and the policy actors I would involve, the challenges could be overcome in order to enact the necessary change in after school programs.

School Programs5

References

Brecher, C., Brazill, C., Weitzman, B. C., & Silver, D. (2010). Understanding the Political

Context of “New” Policy Issues: The Use of the Advocacy Coalition Framework in the

Case of Expanded After-School Programs. Journal Of Public Administration Research &

Theory, 20(2), 335. doi:10.1093/jopart/mup008

Brown, D. N., & Schenck, R. A. (1993). Use of Alternative Funding by Rural Schools for

Supplemental Programs Which Address Current Social Issues and Special Education

Needs. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?

accno=ED358984.

Karen, S. L. (1998). "A light feeling of chaos": Educational Reform and Policy in the United

States. Daedalus, 127(4), 13-40. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/210572289?accountid=32521

MacKinnon, C. T. (2000). The Politics of Community Participation in a Public School.

Educational Studies, 31(3), 225.

Meyer, J., Scott, W., & Strang, D. (1987). Centralization, Fragmentation, and School District

Complexity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32(2), 186-201.

Reder, N. D., & Finance Project, W. C. (2000). Finding Funding: A Guide to Federal Sources for

Out-of-School Time and Community School Initiatives. Retrieved from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED448939.pdf.

School Programs6

Rubin, H. & Rubin, I. (2008). Community organizing and development (4th ed.). Boston, MA:

Pearson. Textbook ISBN: 9780205408139.

SAHIN, A., AYAR, M. C., & ADIGUZEL, T. (2014). STEM Related After-School Program

Activities and Associated Outcomes on Student Learning. Educational Sciences: Theory

& Practice, 14(1), 309-322. doi:10.12738/estp.2014.1.1876