1. UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing Keeping Kids in School: An LA’s BEST Example Denise Huang American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting San Francisco, CA - April 7-11, 2006

2. 2/28 The Purposes of After School Program In the 80s, after school programs were available to students at a much smaller scale The purpose is mainly to provide safety The opportunities for students to engage in enrichment activities Develop healthy habits and citizenship

3. 3/28 No Child Left Behind Act (2002): An emphasis is placed on schools to improve academic achievement, particularly for students at risk Schools that are not performing well can use after school programs as supplemental services to improve student performance More funding becomes available, both from the government and private sector For the last 3 years, the 21st Community Learning Center is working with a budget of $1 billion

4. 4/28 LA’s BEST: Better Educated students for Tomorrow Serving 23,000 students over 147 school sites Focus on developing the “whole” child Education, enrichment, & recreation Community resources Research-based curricula

5. 5/28 Summary of Findings: Academic Performance Overall LA’s BEST students either maintained or improved their SAT-9 /CAT-6 or CST performances Pre-post analyses indicates that students improved their school attendance after participating in LA’s BEST

6. 6/28 Summary of Findings: Social Development concerns about safety conflict resolution academic self-efficacy study habits family involvement future aspirations

7. 7/28 Who Benefited Most : LEP students Female students Students who attended more regularly Students who scored low initially on attitudinal surveys (self-efficacy, work habits, conflict resolution skills) Students with low performance in test scores

8. 8/28 Purpose of this Study: Does participation in the LA’s BEST program have an impact on former participants’ long-term educational behaviors, such as staying in school? What is the minimum number of years of participation in LA’s BEST needed to see an effect on dropout rates? Does participation in the LA’s BEST program have a varying effect on dropout rates for different gender, language, income level, and ethnic groups? When pasting text from another document, do the following: 1.Highlight the text you want to replace 2.Go to the EDIT menu and select PASTE SPECIAL 3.Select “Paste as: UNFORMATTED TEXT”

9. 9/28 Significance of the Study 745,000 students enrolled in LAUSD, a third would not graduate In 2003-2004 academic year only 66.4% LAUSD students graduated vs. 79.3% of LA county rate and 85.3% of CBEDS Provide concrete evidences for the public/private investment in ASP Filled a gap in the current literature Spark the interest for future long-term effect studies to follow When pasting text from another document, do the following: 1.Highlight the text you want to replace 2.Go to the EDIT menu and select PASTE SPECIAL 3.Select “Paste as: UNFORMATTED TEXT”

10. 10/28 Data Source LAUSD longitudinal database LA’s BEST attendance record Four cohorts of LA’s BEST participants (6th through 9th grade in 1998-1999) Three levels of participation examined: 1 year, 2 years, and 3+ years

11. 11/28 Sample All LA’s BEST students were included A stratified random sample of non-participants matched on grade level, gender, ethnicity, and standardized test scores Approximately 6000 participants and 6000 non- participants

12. 12/28 Statistical Approach Descriptive statistics to provide demographic profiles Chi-square analysis Cox survival analysis to examine the effects of participation, gender, ethnicity, low income status, and LEP status

13. 13/28 Demographics Gender, Grade Level, and Ethnicity Total Sample (n = 5,930) LA’s BEST Participants (n = 2,967 ) Non-participants (n = 2,963) Gender Male50.8%50.7%50.9% Female49.2%49.3%49.1% Grade level 6 th grade29.6% 7 th grade29.7% 8 th grade21.1%21.2%21.1% 9 th grade19.5% Ethnicity Hispanic75.5% 75.6% African American20.2% White1.7% Asian/Pacific Islander2.2% Other.4%.5%.4% Free/Reduced Lunch84.6% Language Indicator LEP39.0%

14. 14/28 Results Chi square analysis indicate no difference for 1 year of participation Statistical difference was found with 2 years of participation with the 9th grade cohort in 1998 Difference was strongest for the 3 years+ participants.

15. 15/28 Comparison of dropout rates for LA’s BEST vs LAUSD non participants (3+ years) To adjust the slide numbering, do the following: 1.Go to the VIEW menu, MASTER, and select SLIDE MASTER 2.In the lower right, change the number 28 to your number of slides 3.Do not change the character. It generates the auto-numbers. 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 98-9999-0000-0101-02 Academic Year Percent Dropouts LA's Best LAUSD

16. 16/28 Results of Cox Analysis Male students, Hispanic students, and LEP students were more likely to drop out Participation in LA’s BEST can significantly reduce LAUSD students’ drop out rate This effect is compounded with intensity of participation This effect is also significant with low-income students

17. 17/28 Conclusion It appears that LA’s BEST has provided a supportive structure for the kids to stay in school After school programs that focused on fostering meaningful and substantive activities could lead to positive social and academic development, thereby increasing the likelihood of finishing high school and future success.

18. 18/28 Next Steps Develop strategies to increase high participation and attendance of afterschool programs Develop strategies to recruit the kids most in need e.g. male, LEP students, low income students DOJ study to share more precise findings