1 / 12

What We Have Learned ? Research & Evaluation Presentation

What We Have Learned ? Research & Evaluation Presentation. Charles Smith, Stephen Baker, Neil Naftzger Leadership Institute Thursday, May 9. What does the research say about how quality afterschool programming makes a difference for youth ?

vivian
Download Presentation

What We Have Learned ? Research & Evaluation Presentation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What We Have Learned?Research & Evaluation Presentation Charles Smith, Stephen Baker, Neil Naftzger Leadership InstituteThursday, May 9

  2. What does the research say about how quality afterschool programming makes a difference for youth? • Why should we invest in evaluating the quality of afterschool programs?

  3. Four Continuous Improvement Practices4Organization Level Setting (Plus 10 hours of TA/coaching for site managers to implement the four CI practices)

  4. Theory of Change Template for Afterschool Outcomes8

  5. l 2012-2013 Dissemination Policy Setting 85 Networks/ Systems Organization Setting >3250 Sites >21,125 Staff Estimate based on mean of 6.5 staff per site in YPQI Study Sample Point of Service Setting >276,250 Child & Youth Estimate based on mean daily attendance of 85 youth per day in YPQI Study Sample

  6. System Accountabilities: Higher Stakes • Higher Stakes • Accountabilities

  7. System Accountabilities: Lower Stakes • Higher Stakes Accountabilities • Interpretive Community • Team Self Assessment • Review external scores • Team Planning and Implementing • Improvement planning • Performance coaching • Lower Stakes Accountabilities

  8. System Supports for CI Practices Policy: Eligibility, Targeting, Low/high stakes Training, TA & Coaching Evaluation External Raters, Program Evaluation

  9. Program Objectives

  10. Content Offerings at Baseline

  11. Conclusions from Qualistar Evaluation Third, the study examined the relationships between the Q-QRIS star ratings, the individual Q-QRIS component measures that yield those ratings, and two commonly used measures of adult-child interaction. (Adult-child interaction is generally agreed to be the most important aspect of childcare quality.) The study found that the star ratings and the Q-QRIS components are generally unrelated to measures of staff -child interaction, but the lack of results may reflect the fact that these latter quality measures were collected in only one classroom per provider. Fourth, according to the logic model underlying QRISs, an improved child-care environment, characterized by more responsive caregiving and enriched content, will lead to better outcomes for children. The researchers examined relationships between the star ratings, Q-QRIS components, and child cognitive and social outcome measures. The researchers found few relationships between individual Q-QRIS components and child outcomes and virtually none between star ratings and child outcomes.

  12. What We Have Learned?Research & Evaluation Presentation Charles Smith, charles@cypq.org Leadership InstituteThursday, May 9

More Related