RUNNING HEAD: GIRLS ON THE RUN 1

Organization Profile: Girls on the Run

Anthony Arciero

Jordan Goffena

Dallas Hensley

Kelsey Marron

&

Jennifer Tate

George Mason University

GIRLS ON THE RUN 2

Table of Contents

Overview……………………………………………………………………. 3

Theory of Action……………………………………………………………. 4

Below the Surface ………………………………………………………….. 8

Conclusion ………………………………………………………………… 11

References …………………………………………………………………. 13

Appendix A: Program Manager Interview Notes………………………...... 15

Appendix B: Coach and Participant Interview Notes …………………….. 19

GIRLS ON THE RUN 3

Overview

Girls on the Run (GOTR) is a non-profit, international organization that utilizes running

as a platform for teaching young girls life skills and development of their social, psychological,

and physical well being. GOTR has over 225 councils across the United States and Canada, with

each council representing local communities. Our local Northern Virginia Council represents

Fairfax, Arlington, Loudoun, and Prince William Counties, plus the Cities of Alexandria,

Manassas, Manassas Park, and Falls church. Washington D.C. also has a council, which covers

all eight wards in the district. The program aims to help girls understand themselves, learn to

value relationships and teamwork, and understand their connection with and how to shape the

world at large (GOTR Website, “Who We Are”). This is accomplished through before or after

school, “experience-based” lessons which culminate with the members running a 5K together.

Girls in grades three through eight participate in small teams of eight to 20 members, meeting

twice a week at their school in the Fall and Spring.

GOTR seeks to empower young girls by “making the seemingly impossible, possible, and

teaching girls that they can” (GOTR website, “Who We Are”). In addition, each GOTR council

takes part in community service through an activity of the girl’s choosing at the start of each

season. These key values have earned GOTR many recognitions and awards throughout the

community. Our home chapter of GOTR, Northern Virginia, has been featured in the

Washingtonian Magazine’s annual “Doing Good” article in recognition of GOTR’s contribution

to the community. This chapter has also been given the top prize at the GOTR summit in 2013

for strategic planning and design, been recognized as the Non-Profit of the year by Fairfax

County Chamber of Commerce in 2013, and has recently been placed on the Rodale 100 list in

recognition of GOTR’s “Fitness with a Focus” mission.

GIRLS ON THE RUN 4

Theory of Action

The guiding mission of GOTR is to inspire girls to be joyful, healthy and confident using

a fun, experience-based curriculum which creatively integrates running. The success of this

mission is apparent through the numerous rewards, recognitions, and positive feedback provided

by the coaches, students, and community. The mission can be seen enacted in various “sample

lessons” provided on the website, where GOTR curriculum tackles tough topics like peer

pressure and integrates it into an interactive learning experience.

The vision of GOTR is a world where every girl knows and activates her limitless

potential and is free to boldly pursue her dreams. These guiding principles of GOTR align with a

sociocultural perspective of learning, where the participants learn through experience and active

participation in their world. This situated cognition, or learning through a cultural lens, is seen in

GOTR when the participants engage in active learning of social skills and competencies. From

this, GOTR mission and vision hopes that the students will transfer this learning to other areas of

their lives. This transfer of knowledge is a key component of GOTR philosophy and is firmly

rooted in a sociocultural perspective of cognition and learning (Rogoff, 2003).

The sociocultural perspective of GOTR is embodied through it’s members, with leaders

like Devoria Armstead, the the Washington, D.C. GOTR Program Manager, who passionately

enacts the GOTR mission on a daily basis. In a personal interview for this profile, Armstead

stated, “to me it is about the people-- the coaches, and the staff—and seeing girls succeed.” She

is working with an organization and people who are volunteering because they are enthusiastic

about helping young girls grow into healthy and confident young women through life skills

training that involves team building, relationships, self-care, and learning how to overcome

obstacles; which she insightfully ties together by stating that these are “all the things we do as

GIRLS ON THE RUN 5

adults.” GOTR and Armstead are interested in helping girls think about the challenges they will

face in life and to develop strategies to navigate those challenges. Pointedly, Armstead describes

that the running is merely a focusing activity that helps bring the group together; the real learning

and development takes place in the lessons, in the group interactions, and in the family support

each girl receives. When asked to describe the best part of her job, Armstead relayed a story

about “when a girl crossed the finish line with her dad and he swept her up in his arms and gave

her a big hug to celebrate her accomplishment. That was the essence of what we are about—

setting a goal, having the support along the way, and accomplishing that goal.” Armstead’s

personal anecdotes and internalization of GOTR’s mission exemplifies the sociocultural

perspective of learning and how a student’s interactions can shape cognitions.

5C’s + 1 theoretical framework. GOTR uses a Positive Youth Development-based

approach guided by a plan for Positive Action, operating under the assumption that “all young

people have strengths that may be capitalized on to promote thriving across the adolescent years”

(Lerner et al, 2011). The Interagency Working Group on Youth Programs (2010) defined

Positive Youth Development as “an intentional, pro-social approach that engages youth within

their communities, schools, organizations, peer groups, and families in a manner that is

productive and constructive; recognizes, utilizes, and enhances youths' strengths; and promotes

positive outcomes for young people by providing opportunities, fostering positive relationships,

and furnishing the support needed to build on their leadership strengths” (p.19). Positive Action

is a “comprehensive, school-based social-emotional and character development program

designed to apply integrative and social-ecological theories of health and well-being” (Lewis et

al., 2016, p. 17). The five C’s + 1 are derived from the collective research in positive youth

development from Lerner and Lerner (Lerner et al., 2005; Lerner and Lerner, 2006). These

GIRLS ON THE RUN 6

include character, competence, confidence, connection and caring, which are considered key

developmental markers. Each of these is directly addressed in the GOTR curriculum. The sixth

‘C,’ contribution, is operationalized as a community project in GOTR.

GOTR’s 5Cs + 1 guiding framework for empowerment, increasing self-awareness, and

advancing psychological and physical competencies has roots in theory. Lerner and Lerner

(2006) developed the 5C’s + 1 which indicates that competence, confidence, connection,

character, and caring are important along with contribution when it comes to positive youth

development for physical activity participation. Holistically, GOTR has created an impact

process consisting of four steps: training, teaching, 5Cs + 1, and promotion. First, proper

training for GOTR coaches and volunteers is provided. Second, the coaches and volunteers

deliver the developed curriculum as intended. Third, coaches and volunteers use the 5Cs + 1

framework to provide the girls the life skills as intended in the curriculum. Fourth, coaches and

volunteers promote healthy outcomes such as physical, mental, social, and spiritual well-being

while simultaneously actively preventing unhealthy behaviors and risky outcomes (Riley &

Weiss, 2015).

Interestingly, this guiding theoretical framework is not only used as their theory of action,

but also a framework for research. In order to assess the promotion of healthy behaviors and

prevention of unhealthy behaviors, GOTR’s research team conducts evaluative research. In the

2015 Spring Evaluation Report (Riley & Weiss, 2015), they assessed the components of the 5Cs

framework for a total of 5,124 participating girls. Assessment of confidence, connection, and

character was done using the Self-Perception Profile for Children; caring was assessed using the

Caring Behaviors Scale; and competence was assessed through the completion of the final 5K

run. These measures were taken pre-season and post-season with the aim that there would be a

GIRLS ON THE RUN 7

positive increase in scores. It was found that there was not a significant increase from pre- to

post-season scores. It was suggested that the non-changes could be attributed to the way in

which the surveys were collected (from the coaches) and that there could be variability in the

delivery of the program. However, it was suggested that the girls who may be in the most need

for a positive youth development program showed statistical and meaningful differences from

pre- to post-season assessments.

We find this research quite interesting as methods such as pre- to post-season testing can

be a valuable indication of desirable changes. Moreover, participating in research to assess their

outward impact is beneficial to track the progress of the girls as the program has become quite

popular over the course of its development since the organization first started. However,

statistical analyses can only tell us so much. Though it was indicated that there could have been

meaningful differences from pre- to post-season scores for the girls who need the program the

most, further research is needed to explore the extent of this claim. Perhaps implementation of

qualitative research would be more authentic given the nature of GOTR.

Below-the-Surface

In order to gain a more in-depth understanding of GOTR, interviews were conducted with

the Washington D.C. program manager, a NOVA coach, and a NOVA participant. These

interviews provided insightful information not found on the websites and gave us a more detailed

picture of the enacted mission of GOTR, areas of improvement, and the perceived effectiveness

as described candidly by coach and participant. They also raised important theoretical constructs

which might challenge GOTR such as SES, identity development, and group exclusion.

For the Washington, D.C. program manager, targeting lower income areas was an

important objective. She believes there is a need in Wards 5, 7, and 8, and that GOTR is a way to

GIRLS ON THE RUN 8

add value to young girls’ lives in places that needed it most. She felt the girls in those

neighborhoods could truly benefit from participating in GOTR, but family income is a factor in

how well she can reach out into that community. The program costs $185 and most families in

lower-income neighborhoods cannot afford that fee. In light of our class discussion on

considering new ways to frame SES and think about what that concept means, we believe this

situation provides an example of a different way of thinking about SES—call it situative SES.

According to Sirin (2005), SES describes a person or family’s ranking on a hierarchy according

to access to or control over some combination of valued commodities such as wealth, power, and

social status. Whether it is based on family income or wealth, parents’ education or occupation,

or some other measure, SES may be more effectively explored from the perspective of how it

impacts a given situation. For GOTR, it does not matter whether a girl lives in a single family

home or in a government housing project, in a single-parent household or a family headed by

same-sex partners; where SES comes into play is in addressing whether the GOTR tuition is an

actual barrier to the girl’s participation. In this particular situation, SES can be categorized as

low if it is a barrier to participation in GOTR, high if it is not.

An interview with a GOTR coach found that while there are positive aspects of the

program, not all chapters have as much of an encouraging outcome as described on the website.

The interview was conducted with a coach for 3rd-5th graders from an elementary school in

Prince William County, Virginia. The coach was open about what she believed went well and

her dislikes. The coach found that the curriculum the GOTR organization created has a lot of

really great lessons and activities to go along with them. A majority of the lessons addressed

important topics such as picking others up, standing up for your friends, rumors and spreading

rumors, and girl empowerment. Following the lessons, the girls would participate in a scenario

GIRLS ON THE RUN 9

about the lesson, and then go running. Throughout the 12-week program, the girls were training

to run a celebratory 5k race. According to GOTR curriculum overview, “the topics covered

during the program are based on research which documents problems expressed by students that

fall into three classifications: lack of identity, lack of connectedness, and powerlessness over

one’s life” (GOTR website, Curriculum Overview). The overarching goal is to have the girls

transfer the knowledge they gain from the lessons into real life situations they may encounter in

school and in further developing their identities as a female. It has been established that identities

develop through social interactions and cultural expectations and norms (Nasir, Rowley, &

Perez, 2015), making experienced based learning like GOTR a great opportunity for identity

development and refinement. The GOTR lessons work to deepen participants’ understanding of

how their own identity as a female forms in a friendship and their own actions regarding social

drama.

While the lessons had great team building activities, the coach reported her team

atmosphere and cohesion was lacking. This particular group had two coaches and the maximum

number of participants (twenty). This size of a group proved to be difficult for this coach. There

was cohesion with the younger girls, especially the third graders; however, cliques formed in the

older fifth grade girls. The older girls only liked to talk or run with each other. Additionally,

there were a select number of girls with “bad attitudes.” While the GOTR takes a “Positive

Action” approach clique formation can create exclusion of some girls and ultimately undermine

the positivity GOTR strives for. Corno & Anderman (2015) describe that exclusion can lead to a

decrease in life satisfaction, increased stress, negative mental health outcomes, and lower self-

esteem. Given these effects, exclusion and clique formation should be strongly avoided, possibly

by enforcing smaller group sizes and encouraging cohesion. In this instance, the coaches would

GIRLS ON THE RUN 10

often attempt to separate the fifth graders; such as telling them they had to pick a new running

buddy, someone that wasn’t in their grade; however, that would not last more than a few

minutes. It should be noted that although girls in this group had some cohesion problems,

overall, the girls had an opportunity to interact with demographically diverse students they

otherwise may not typically spend time with. GOTR provides this opportunity, if no more than

mere exposure to new social situations, in which girls can learn to interact with new people in an

informal environment.

Similar to reports from the Washington D.C. program director, the coach interviewed

also felt that the GOTR program was overpriced. To participate at this school, each girl had to

pay $175, plus the cost of the 5k. Participants are required to have a parent or other volunteer run

the race with them, and those individuals had to pay to run the race as well. Although

scholarships and fundraising opportunities are available, GOTR on a whole is perceived as

overpriced for the services it provides and may be more beneficial to the community if offered at

a lower price point. Overall, the coach felt that the GOTR group was overpriced and that group

cohesion was difficult, but could possibly be better managed with smaller group sizes. On a

positive note, she believed that the curriculum lessons and activities were very well put together

and the girls appeared to benefit from them.

Lastly, a short interview with a GOTR participant was conducted. The student

participated in the organization as a third grader and provided insight regarding her own

experience with the program. The participant reported that throughout the 12 weeks, she did not

make any new friends. She knew a majority of the girls in third and fourth prior to starting the

program and the fifth graders were “kind of mean and really only talked to themselves.” While

the participant did not like running during the practices, she had fun during the 5k and ran the

GIRLS ON THE RUN 11

entire time. Her favorite part of the program was the lessons, while she reported she did not learn

anything new, her overall take away of the lessons was to be nice to everyone and always have

your friends back. Although not gaining as much out of the experience as touted by the website,

the participant did gain some positive strategies for peer interactions and had an overall positive

experience.

Conclusion

We investigated an organization that is staffed overwhelmingly with volunteers who

already work with young people in the schools—usually teachers. These volunteers genuinely

care about the growth and development of kids into healthy adults. It appears that they see their

involvement with GOTR as a way to extend their service to children beyond the lesson plan and

outside the classroom, into a different context. It is their chance to fulfill, in another setting, their

original reason for becoming teachers—to have a positive impact on children’s lives.

GOTR is providing great services for the community by way their after school programs

for the girls and the community service projects they undertake. The organization is providing an

outlet for girls to exercise and socialize, while teaching psychological and social skills through

experience-based learning. GOTR conducts program evaluation through research, which does

not point to has positive of results as described through participant and program managers.

Results from research did not show significant changes in the participant's confidence, caring, or

amount of connection, however there is little replication or exploration of other benefits of the

GOTR program on the participants overall wellbeing. Direct reports from coaches and

participants shed light on the realistic strengths and weaknesses of the program, with overall

positive feedback but some problems and areas for improvement.

GIRLS ON THE RUN 12

These areas of improvement are recognized by organizations leaders, who hope to bring

the program to those in most need, through a scholarship program. The Washington, D.C.

Program Manager’s next goal is to more fully serve Wards 5, 7, & 8 in The District. These areas

are mostly low income and she believes GOTR can have a positive impact on girls in those

neighborhoods. The challenge will be fundraising since most low-income families cannot afford

the tuition for the course. The ultimate goal is to be able to fill the needs in these areas by

providing the GOTR program on a scholarship or reduced fee basis for all girls who wish to join.

GIRLS ON THE RUN 13

References

Corno, L. & Anderman, E. M. (Eds.) (2015). Handbook of Educational Psychology, 3rd edition.

Routledge.

Dion, R., Bradley, M.C., Gothro, A., Bardos, M., Lansing, J., Stagner, M., & Dworsky, A.

(2013). Advancing the self-sufficiency and well-being of at-risk youth: A conceptual

framework. OPRE Report # 2013-13, Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research

and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health

and Human Services.

Interagency Working Group on Youth Programs (2010). Interagency Working Group on Youth

Programs and FindYouthInfo.gov: Working together to improve youth outcomes.

Presentation dated 5 Aug, 2010. Retrieved from: http://www.google.com/url?

sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwip3e_EsqfLAhUpnIMKH

XXhCh0QFggfMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Ffriendsnrc.org%2Fcomponent%2Fjoomdo

c%2Fcbcap-annual-meeting-news-and-archive%2F2010-grantees-meeting-materials%2F

LNT_Potter_slides.pdf%2Fdownload%3FItemid%3D55&usg=AFQjCNFiIDZYcYfiG_c

dqFy4BEGaL9qJDA&sig2=ZhrUB-86aasB7d23Kf9TGA.

Jeynes, W.H. (2002). The challenge of controlling for SES in social science and education

research. Educational Psychology Review, 14(2), 205-221.

Lewis, K.M., Vuchinich, S., Ji, P., Dubois, D.L., Acock, A., Bavarian, N., Day, J., Silverthorn,

N., & Flay, B.R. (2016). Effects of the positive action program on indicators of positive

youth development among urban youth. Applied Developmental Science, 20(1), 16-28.

DOI: 10.1080/10888691.2015.1039123.

Lerner, R. M., & Lerner, J. V. (2006). Toward a new vision and vocabulary about adolescence:

GIRLS ON THE RUN 14

Theoretical, empirical, and applied bases of a “Positive Youth Development” perspective.

In L. Balter & C.S. Tamis-LeMonda (Eds.), Child psychology: A handbook of

contemporary issues (pp. 445-469). NY: Psychology Press.

Lerner, R.M., Lerner, J.V., Almerigi, J.B., Theokas, C., Phelps, E., Gestsdottir, S., Naudeau, S.,

Jelicic, H., Alberts, A., Ma, L., Smith, L.M., Bobek, D.L., Richman-Raphael, D.,

Simpson, I., Christiansen, E.D. & Eye, A.V. (2005). Positive youth development,

participation in community youth development programs, and community contributions

of fifth-grade adolescents: Findings from the first wave of the 4-H study of positive youth

development. Journal of Early Adolescence, 25(1), 17-71. DOI:

10.1177/0272431604272461

Lerner, R.M., Lerner, J.V., Eye, A.V., Bowers, E.P., & Lewin-Bizan, S. (2011). Individual and

contextual bases of thriving in adolescence: A view of the issues. Journal of Adolescence,

34, 1107-1114.

Nasir, N.D., Rowley, S. J., & Perez W. (2015). Cultural, Racial/Ethnic, and Linguistic Diversity

and Identity. Handbook of Educational Psychology, 186.

Sirin, S.R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of

research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417-453.

Riley, A., & Weiss, M. R. (2015). Summary report: Spring evaluation. Girls on the Run

International.

Rogoff, B. (2003). Thinking with the Tools and Institutions of Culture. In Cultural Nature of

Human Development (pp. 236-281).

Who We Are. (n.d.). Retrieved February 28, 2015, from https://www.girlsontherun.org/

GIRLS ON THE RUN 15

Appendix A: Program Manager Interview Notes

1. Philosophy

Devoria is the program director for the DC GOTR just joined 4 months ago, former teacher,

math specialist, curriculum coach, wanted a non-school based change of pace. As program

director, she oversees the program, budgeting, scholarships, recruits new sites, ensures program

quality, train new coaches.

The best part of her job: The team (coaches), great environment, a focus on the girls. Memorable

experience: at the 5K in Dec ’15; Father and daughter crossed the finished together and he

scooped her up in his arms and gave her a big kiss—proud of her accomplishment and sharing

her joy.

Girls meet twice a week for 75-90 minutes. Lot of girls are on scholarship (a sliding scale to

reduce the cost of participating based on family income). They have to conduct fund raising to

make up the difference.

Devoria reads the mission and vision statements. We ask: What does the philosophy mean to

her?

“Life skills, team building, giving back to the community, relationships, self-care “all the things

we do as adults,” problem solving, goal setting, making connections and friendships, overcoming

obstacles.”

Current: 93,000 volunteers, 225 cities, 49 states, and Canada

2. Psychological well-being.

GIRLS ON THE RUN 16

5Cs +1: caring, confidence, character, connection, competence + contribution. Each day of the

curriculum focuses on one or more of those skills.

Look to nurture the entire girl—mind, body and spirit.

Life skills, caring, connection, confidence, compassion

Curriculum focuses on each of these; leads to psychological growth

Compassion/connectedness: Different demographics—come together, learning about each

other—they might not have had the opportunity to interact outside of this program—learn about

each other, their cultures, their differences, their upbringings and finding that although they may

be different in those respects, they have a connectedness as part of the program.

3. Research

It is an evaluative program. Surveys are conducted pre and post participation.

Older survey was too long for the girls…being rewritten. UPDATE: 2014 used a 24-item survey.

****Will send us the data—UPDATE: we have the 2014 research report.

Is the research used to modify the structure of the program? The Girls on Track was completely

revamped into Heart and Sole? And she believes that might be a result of the research results.

4. New sites.

Do you focus on any particular communities? Currently in all 8 DC Wards. Ward 3 schools are

mostly “full fee.” Lower participation in Wards 5, 7, and 8. It is mostly scholarships and they

need to get more “penetration” in those wards, but it requires more fundraising. Want to saturate

all of D.C. Part of her job as director is to advocate and advance the program. In Wards 5, 7, & 8,

GIRLS ON THE RUN 17

lots of kids there may be struggling with academics and the extra-curricular activities may get

pushed aside for after-school tutoring.

68 teams at 62 sites throughout all 8 Wards of D.C.

Note: The D.C. GOTR just completed 5 training sessions (3 hours total for each new coach) for

over 160 new coaches (approx. 45 coaches per session) in preparation for the new season. Total

of 350-375 coaches on average. Majority of coaches are from the schools, some are volunteers

from the community. All but 3-5 coaches are women. All coaches are volunteers. Most are

teachers and may find it difficult to volunteer after a difficult day in class.

Men are usually supporting fathers and significant others and often participate in the 5K with the

girls.

Trying to build site liaisons – site champions those who will carry the program forward at the

school, despite the personnel changes.

5. Challenges

Not many. Provide strategies for the coaches, best practices…how to ensure you are prepared for

the session (limit downtime), be clear with the girls from the beginning, lead by example, model

for them.

The coaches are trained on behavior management techniques and she has never had anyone come

to her to say that a kid has to be removed from the program. “If any problems arise, the coaches

probably take care of it in the practices.”

For the Heart and Sole program—they try to give more flexibility, while trying to maintain high

expectations. Give the older girls some leadership roles. Praise in public, correct in private

GIRLS ON THE RUN 18

They provide best practices in the training sessions—standard leadership and classroom

management techniques.

6. Future goals

Increase enrollment. Current enrollment is 1900 girls, want to get to 2400 by 2020

They want to change the run venue from Anacostia park to somewhere else--???

7. Personal goals

Increase penetration inwards 5,7, & 8. She thinks it would be most helpful there

In 2015 GOTR served its one millionth girl.

In 2016 GOTR celebrates its 20th year and DC GOTR celebrates its 20th year (will hold a sneaker

soiree to celebrate)

Season begins on the 29th of February, we can come and observe in the middle of March if that is

helpful to the group.

GIRLS ON THE RUN 19

Appendix B: Coach and Participant Interview Notes

Coach Interview

● 3rd grade-5th grade GOTR group

● Met twice a week at 8am before school for about an hour

● We had about 20 girls I think…whatever the max was

● A typical practice was divided into two parts. The first half was working on curriculum,

which taught them about anti-bullying skills, sticking up for friends, and not following

the crowd. Things like that. The curriculum itself was actually pretty good.

● There were a lot of good teamwork and team building activities.

● A lot of the lessons were about picking others up, how it is good to stand up for your

friends, rumors and spreading rumors, and girl empowerment.

● One of the big lessons we did was about how if you choose to ignore a person being

bullied and not help them, you’re just as bad as the bully. That was a tough one for a lot

of the girls; a lot of them didn’t see it that way.

● So we would do a lesson with the girls and then they would have to do a team activity

related to it. A lot of the activities had to do with feelings. We would give them scenarios

like “how do you feel when your BFF is sick and can’t come to school?” or “What do

you do if you see XYZ getting picked on by a bunch of girls?”

● Some other activities we would do after lessons were giving the girls scenarios and

asking them how they would handle it and playing the game Telephone to show how

rumors start and where they can get. We also divided the girls up into groups and gave

GIRLS ON THE RUN 20

them skits to act out. The other groups that weren’t acting had to determine what the

“actors” were feeling.

● The second half of the practice/session would be about physical activity and preparing for

the run. We would try and make it fun by giving them “challenges”, such as running a lap

and then find someone new and give them a compliment.

● At the beginning of the season the girls had to set goals, such as running 5 laps in 10

minutes. Each week they would chart to see how much closer they were getting to their

goal.

● The girls also did a community service project. As a group they had to pick what they

wanted to do and the strategies that went along with it. Our group picked to collect food

and donations for the local animal shelter. As a group they had to figure out how and

when they were going to get the donations, and how they were going to drop it off. They

made signs to hang up in the school asking for donations. But on the drop off day, only 6

girls showed up to bring the donations to the animal shelter, so that was really

disappointing.

● There was cohesion with the younger girls, especially 3rd graders. There were 4 or 5 girls

in 5th grade who were extremely cliquey. One girl was so nasty and had such a bad

attitude; the girls she hung around seemed to take on her behaviors.

● We would try to separate the 5th graders; such as telling them they had to pick a new

running buddy, someone that wasn’t in their grade. That would work for the first couple

of minutes, but then they would ditch their running buddy and just run with their friends.

● Also, some girls didn’t care about running. Sometimes they would try and hide so they

didn’t have to run. That was frustrating to deal with because as a coach, you want to

GIRLS ON THE RUN 21

encourage the girls running and run with them but I would have to stop and try to get

some girls to do what they’re supposed to be doing

● At the end the girls did a 5K. They (the organization) did a really good job with it. Race

day was well put together ad very organized. It was a good atmosphere.

● Each participant HAS to have someone run the 5k with them, usually their parents. There

are volunteers who will run with the girls if their parents don’t want to/can’t.

● I think GOTR is really overpriced for what it is. It was about $175 per girl. Plus the cost

of the 5K. You had to pay for that too. Even the volunteer runners/parents who to run

with the girls have to pay.

● Overall the curriculum they’ve created has a lot of really good lessons and the activities

to do with them. Obviously that was the main point of it. It is a good concept.

● At our school GOTR got such great reviews that they started a boys on the run.

● We had two coaches for our group. I think it would have worked a lot better as far as the

group togetherness if we had a smaller group. Like 10 girls. It was really hard with a

group of 20 to have really good cohesiveness. The cliqueyness was the worst part. That

brought down the group a lot. It was hard split them up and have them get to know other

girls.

Brief Participant Interview

● I didn’t really make any new friends. I knew all of the girls in 3rd grade and some in 4th

grade. The 5th graders were kind of mean and only really talked to themselves.

● My mom was one of the coaches so yeah I liked her but I liked our other coach too, she

was really nice.

GIRLS ON THE RUN 22

● I didn’t really like it that much. I liked the lessons like everything we did before the

running. I didn’t like the running. I had fun at the 5k though. I ran the whole thing.

● My favorite part was finishing the 5k.

● I didn’t really learn anything new, just be nice to each other and always have your friends

back