Meeting Minutes 25-Feb-04
Learning and Development in Out of School Hours

Highlights from February 25, 2004

• Research indicates that quality out-of-school programs create productive, well-rounded individuals who are more likely to contribute to society. These programs build social connections that strengthen communities and benefit both children and adults.
• To develop quality out-of-school programs, resources and training are needed to enable leaders to cultivate safe, caring and age-appropriate activities for youths. Program leaders need to have access to resources both inside and outside their communities.
• Out-of-school time should be a collaborative effort combining government funding with community/parent resources. The University of Minnesota’s Commission on Out-of-School Time is strengthening this effort by providing research and resources to people.

Minutes from February 18, 2004
Representative Randy Demmer convened the session and gave opening remarks. He emphasized the importance of extracurricular activities for youth to be physically and actively engaged in year-round learning. The focus for this Conversation stemmed from public debate between those who feel too much emphasis is placed on keeping youth involved in out-of-school time programs, and those who feel out-of-school time programs are failing to keep youths engaged.

Dale Blyth, Center for 4-H Youth Development, defined out-of-school time as the “gap time” that youth have between school and family hours. Recess, summer-break, evenings, etc. are all out-of-school times. On the average, out-of-school time constitutes 42% of youths’ time in a given year. In Minnesota, alone, there are two billion hours of out-of-school time for five to eighteen year-olds. This is time that can be used to foster growth and development, or time that can be spent learning destructive behaviors. Youth who use this time destructively do have “opportunity gaps” for learning positive social behaviors. Youth who are involved in out-of-school programs, however, will increase their citizenship and leadership skills. Therefore, it is important to continue out-of-school programs to promote positive youth development.

University of Minnesota President Robert H. Bruininks, has launched the Minnesota Commission on Out-of-School Time with a thirty-member panel that will meet five times annually. The goals of the Commission are to increase discussion on out-of-school time, and to create an ongoing dialogue between Minnesota community members and legislators to ensure that both funding and community resources are contributed to out-of-school programs.

Mary Marczak provided an overview of current research on out-of-school time. Reed Larson’s study, using comprehensive time-use diaries for youth to randomly report where they were, who they were with, and how they felt, dispels the idea that youth in America are being over-scheduled. Nationally, on average, between 22% and 30% of youth time is spent productively. In comparison, time spent on maintenance or grooming, doing chores, cooking, etc. is generally 25%. This leaves close to 50% of their time for leisure activities. Today, the majority of youth leisure time is spent watching T.V., talking, and/or playing. Moreover, Jackie Eckles’, MI, longitudinal study traced young people from grade-school to age twenty-three, and found that how youth spend their time can affect the development of risk behaviors. Both studies reaffirm the need to be concerned about out-of-school programs for our youth.

Jodi Dworkin noted two reasons why we should be concerned with out-of-school time. First, many social changes have occurred that affect family life and youth. Second, research says we need to move beyond preventing problems to promoting skills through and ecological model. Within this framework, Dr. Dworkin discussed the long-term goals and challenges of out-of-school programs. Research indicates that youth desire nurturing environments where they can interact with peers and adults. Often, increased mobility, a lack of neighborhood communication, increased television watching and larger school size do not promote nurturing environments. These challenges can also influence out-of-school programs negatively, by affecting the equality of their social structure.

Many out-of-school programs strive to create productive, contributing citizens. Eight features of successful out-of-school programs have been identified: 1.) Promote physical and psychological safety and health awareness; 2.) Have age-appropriate activities, structures and limit setting; 3.) Provide caring relationships with adults based on strong communication; 4.) Provide opportunities for meaningful inclusion and cultural development; 5.) Promote positive social norms and values; 6.) Support efficacy and mattering; 7.) Prepare youth for adulthood through intentional learning opportunities; 8.) Integrate family, school and community efforts.

Corliss Outley focused on the impact of out-of-school programs on poor and/or minority families. The 1992 Carnegie report “A Matter of Time” indicates that there are 17,000 organizations in the U.S. that promote youth development with out-of-school programs. Many of these programs differ greatly in missions and statements, however, because the organizations under which they are housed are diverse; public, private, non-profit, etc. These differences, however, can be positive, because they offer a wide range of opportunities for youth. Out-of-school programs provide alternative means for poor and/or minority youth to develop positive self-identities, become involved with the community, improve academically, and aspire to new levels personally and professionally. Out-of-school programs also reduce risk factors for these youths. Studies indicate that without involvement in out-of-school programs, poor and/or minority youth are three times more likely to use drugs and alcohol, engage in sexual activity, be truant, and commit juvenile offenses. Moreover, students who are not involved in these programs generally have poorer grades and lower standardized test scores.

Open Discussion

Q: When selecting out-of-school programs the most important factor for youth is the element of fun. What does fun mean to youth today and how can we ensure that “fun” out-of-school programs are also quality out-of-school programs?

• Fun out-of-school programs attract youth, while quality programs retain youth. Youth are more likely to stay involved in an out-of-school program if that program consistently makes the youth feel accepted, cared for and listened to, and if the youth can see his or her own skills improving.
• Quality out-of-school programs overcome issues of income, gender, race exclusion, transportation, location, and program instability due to lack of funding. These programs provide a stable and welcoming environment.
• Quality programs do not necessarily need funding. Depending upon the activities offered, many out-of-school programs can function on community resources only, such as a consistent meeting place or a committed program leader.

Q: What is the role of parental involvement in helping youth select out-of-school programs? How can parents encourage adolescents to pursue their personal interests while still supporting family values when selecting programs?

• If parents can get children involved in out-of-school programs at an early age, then children are more likely to continue to be involved as they mature into adulthood. And it is important to find a program consistent with each child’s family values because a bi-directional relationship exists. Youth go to programs with their family’s values and take back the program’s values to their family.
• High school programs, however, do present obstacles for youth as activities become more competitive in nature. Many high school youth also work, reducing the amount of time that they can devote to out-of-school programs. Generally, the jobs that many youth work today do not provide direct adult mentorship, and do not enable youth to cultivate positive social skills.
• Parents can facilitate youth involvement in out-of-school programs by observing their child’s interests. Skills that parents may view as negative, such as physical aggression or verbal out-bursts, can be strengths for appropriate out-of-school programs (athletics or debate team, etc.).
• Many parents may choose to keep youth at home rather than worry about youth engaging in risk activities, however, keeping youth at home contributes to the rise in time youth spend watching television or talking on the phone. Out-of-school programs curb youth risk behaviors and leisure time spent unproductively, as well as involve youth in their communities.
• Many businesses support out-of-school programs and seek employees who have been involved in out-of-school programs because those individuals are more likely to be productive and contributing members of society. Parents and businesses can work together to develop programs that will prepare youths for future careers.

Q: How do out-of-school programs affect rural areas that generally tend to be more resource poor and have greater difficulty transporting youth to and from out-of-school programs?

• Transportation is a critical issue in providing out-of-school programs for rural youth. And, the lack of out-of-school programs for rural communities has resulted in more youth spending time home alone, which can increase the likelihood of risk behavior. Therefore, either funding for rural transportation or for rural communities to develop out-of-school time programs is needed.
• If children are not involved in out-of-school programs, research should be done to determine the types of programs that need to be developed to gain youth interest. Providing more imaginative programs, such as having an adult mentor lead a group of children on a nature hike or fishing, can connect adults and youth without involving funding or major transportation needs.

Q: How does age affect youth involvement in out-of-school programs? How can age-appropriate learning activities be incorporated into out-of-school programs?

• Research on out-of-school programs generally focuses on youth ages ten to eleven and tracks them into their early twenties. Long-term research reveals developmental differences between youth in junior high and high school. Often, it is difficult for out-of-school programs to integrate these age groups because their developmental needs are different.
• It is important for out-of-school programs to provide challenging stimulation and reward youth for their involvement. As kids get older, out-of-school programs can offer an expanding array of choices and liberties for them to explore and test.
• Out-of-school programs can provide a safe environment for youth to explore the various outcomes of risk behaviors and engage in dialogue with adults about those experiences.

Q: Many youth who are not involved in out-of-school programs are happy with their after-school activities, is it necessary to involve these youth in programs?

• Although youth of all ages may appear content to watch television, often, television programs available to youth do not offer life skills development.
• On a whole, TV watching is not productive or constructive. Cartoons are filled with violence, and music videos are laced with sex. Youth involved in Reed Larson’s comprehensive time-diary study reported they generally felt unmotivated and unengaged while watching television.

Q: Few out-of-school programs existed in the past. Why is it important to develop so many new programs today, and what are the driving factors for the change in social attitude toward out-of-school programs?

• Today’s youth are growing up in a very different society compared to the society adults experienced when they were children. Many parents work longer hours, careers take time away from neighborhood cohesion, educational expectations are different, extended family members are often geographically dispersed, and an increase in the risks present in urban areas contribute to more physical risks for youth. Youth who are isolated from their communities are at a higher risk for drug use and sexual activity, and youth who work have more disposable income to purchase risk items. Having out-of-school programs will demonstrate to youth that their communities are concerned and will help to enforce accountability for their behaviors.
• Additionally, programs can have value in and of themselves outside of the cultural values they imbue on the participants. For instance, small group learning, democratic processes, getting to know people who are different from you.

Q: Can out-of-school programs flourish without financial support from the government?

• Currently, federal funds are invested nationally for out-of-school programs. The Minnesota Commission on Out-of-School Time is researching the effects of the loss of funding on out-of-school programs in order to ensure that quality programs can continue. Legislative partnerships are also critical to secure state level funds for out-of-school programs especially in times of scarce resources.
• Funding, however, is just one supportive aspect for out-of-school programs. Family and community resources also contribute toward successful out-of-school programs.

Joyce Walker concluded this session of Capitol Conversations at 9:00am. Please continue to visit the Capitol Conversations web site for future information on the series.

An extensive list of Out-of-school web resources is also posted at the Capitol Conversations website

Home | About CYFC | Policy | Experts Database | Publications

Features | Events Calendar | Community Partnerships

Communities | Early Childhood | School-Age Children | Adolescents

Family Relationships and Parenting | Seniors and Intergenerational Issues

The Children, Youth and Family Consortium's Website is a forum for sharing information and exchanging ideas.
The Consortium welcomes diverse points of view. While we strive to maintain a high level of quality, research based information,
the opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the position of the Consortium or the University of Minnesota,
nor does the Consortium or the University recommend, endorse, verify or confirm information submitted.
Copyright 2002, © University of Minnesota Children, Youth and Family Consortium.