RRL

The first major benefit of after-school programs is an improvement of children’s health through
physical activities. It is stated that such an environment can deliver “curriculum-based programming
that can afford children the opportunity to accumulate over half of their daily recommended minutes of
moderate-to-vigorous physical activity” (Beighle et al., 2010, p. 30). In other words, one such program
ensures that even the most inactive children are exposed to the necessary dosage of physical activity
each day. In addition, it can complement a school’s curriculum, enabling a more multifaceted approach
toward health and fitness. The result is the fact that children are more protected from developing
obesity and related illnesses, such as cardiovascular diseases (Beighle et al., 2010). Thus, children’s
health and well-being can be greatly enhanced with the use of after-school programs.

The second critical benefit is the development of both academic and non-academic skills. These include
“musical skills, responsibility/discipline, self-efficacy, empowerment, social competence, and family
bonding” (Whitson et al., 2019, p. 426). Among these skills, disciple and responsible behavior should
be highlighted because these qualities can determine a child’s success in many other as well as future
endeavors. It is reported that “children who attended the program more than three times per week were
rated higher on responsibility/discipline than those who attended less” (Whitson et al., 2019, p. 426). In
other words, after-school programs make children more in control of their lives by becoming more
socially competent and self-reliant, which empowers them to work toward meaningful achievements.

The third vital benefit of after-school programs for children is the development of emotional and social
learning capabilities. These include “self-awareness and relationship skills are predictors of academic
success, overall well-being, and avoidance of problematic behaviors” (Wright et al., 2020, p. 125).
There is a strong protective element to after-school programs since they occupy children with healthy
activities and prevent them from engaging in destructive or harmful ones. A social circle formed during
such a program is also beneficial because children are collectively challenged and stimulated, which
translates to a greater development of social skills and emotional awareness, such as empathy.

The fourth major benefit of after-school programs revolves around a child’s inner perception and
positive outlook. It is reported that both frequency and intensity of instructions provided by instructors
determine the extent to which an activity will be beneficial (Hopkins et al., 2017). Thus, more frequent
and highly engaging after-school programs will be more likely to result in the greatest developmental
improvement among children. The multifaceted benefits include “increased learning opportunities,
perceived benefits of discipline, perseverance, positive attitude, and hard work. Instructional challenges
included low attendance, curricular balance, and teacher collaboration” (Hopkins et al., 2017, p. 239).
Therefore, children need to adhere to the schedule of after-school programs and be involved in the
process.
LINK:
https://ivypanda.com/essays/after-school-programs-and-their-benefits/?
fbclid=IwAR10LDG9iYLkftiIihAxyR943ArAg8OxqM7VJ1D4X-nx7sUwzljr_klS50I

REFERENCE:

Beighle, A., Beets, M. W., Erwin, H. E., Huberty, J., Moore, J. B., & Stellino, M. (2010). Promoting
physical activity in afterschool programs. Afterschool Matters, 11, 24-32.

After-school programs face increasing pressure to demonstrate academic achievement of participants,

particularly in programs serving low-income communities. While federal budget cuts to after-school
programming would disproportionately affect low-income communities and students of color, where
demand already outstrips supply (Afterschool Alliance, 2014), spending on after-school programming
among wealthy, White families continues to grow . High-income families have embraced after-school
programming as an enrichment mechanism to prepare students for post-secondary education and
beyond creating an engagement gap between those who can afford to pay for programming and those
who cannot (Snellman et al., 2015). Current research and policy related to after-school programs
suggests we may be overlooking critical functions of these activities and instead suggests reframing
them as developing youth interest, identity, and social capital.
Although historically lauded as effective child care alternatives for working families or for reducing
juvenile crime rates , after-school programs have evolved to serve a variety of student needs ranging
from recreational to remedial to immersive. For example, programs may focus on academic success,
special interests (e.g., theater programs or science camps), or multiple purposes (e.g., Boys & Girls
Clubs offer tutoring, open gym time, and a dance club; McCombs et al., 2017). They may be housed
within public schools, museums, libraries, or zoos, or operate as stand-alone organizations with a
corresponding array of funding mechanisms, including federal and state funds, foundation and
corporate grants, and tuition or fees from participants. Given this programmatic diversity, only some
types of programs can be the primary focus of this article. The following discussion is most relevant for
programs that rely on federal or state funding and that serve a majority of youth from one or more of
the following populations: low socioeconomic status (SES), racial or ethnic minority communities, or
otherwise marginalized or non-dominant identities (e.g., lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer
or questioning [LGBTQ] youth). Opportunities to develop strong personal identities, interests, and
social capital through participation in high-quality after-school programs are more readily afforded to
students from well-resourced families, but all programs have the potential to support these critical
aspects of youth development.

Alongside a large body of research examining the effect of after-school programs on academic
outcomes , more and more programs are tracking academic indicators, perhaps due to pressures for
funding (Baldridge, 2014). However, perhaps after-school programs should not be tasked with
achieving standards that schools are failing to meet. For one, educators who are employed in after-
school programs serving primarily low-income youth provide lower quality instruction than those in
higher income programs (St. Clair & Stone, 2016). Furthermore, after-school programs support the
development of a range of skills and abilities that are not captured by academic indicators alone.
For example, participation in after-school programs can develop “soft” skills, such as leadership and
prosocial behaviors, while decreasing risky behaviors Regular participation in after-school
programming is associated with improved health, civic engagement, and occupational attainment later
in life (Snellman et al., 2015), with often greater effects for low-income youth and youth of color .
Alternative educational experiences found in after-school settings may be particularly important for
young Black males who are disproportionately represented in disciplinary statistics and drop-out rates.
Considering the breadth of evidence for impact, making support contingent solely upon academic
achievement restricts our understanding of what purpose after-school programs can and should serve.
In contrast, wealthy families are increasingly turning to after-school programs to pad student resumes
in an ever more competitive college admissions process. Indeed, extracurricular participation in high
school students is a strategic investment decision with similar motivations found in undergraduate
student volunteerism Alongside documented disparities in rates of participation and access to after-
school activities between low-income communities of color and their wealthier White and Asian peers ,
activities differ based on race and family income of children served. Programs serving majority Black
and low-SES children were more likely to report a focus on academic programming, as well as to be
observed engaging in academic activities, compared with the focus on enrichment enjoyed by more
affluent students (McNamara et al., 2018). These distinctions—what programs should be afforded to
whom—are rooted in societal inequities.
Research, too, is not immune to such bias. For example, much of the peer-reviewed literature
examining after-school programs for low-income, urban youth tends to focus on the promise of such
programs to improve academic outcomes and reduce risks . For suburban, gifted, and affluent youth,
after-school research is more likely to focus on reasons for participation or on the “over-scheduling
hypothesis,” the idea that children face burnout from high rates of participation in out-of-school
activities , reflecting clear differences in the way we both conceptualize and study programs. In other
words, we tend not to question the value of extracurricular engagement for wealthy youth, even
worrying that we are pushing them to take on too much. Yet for youth living in poverty or youth of
color, we tend to ask whether these programs “work” and whether they are worthy of our continued
investment.
High-quality programs do, in fact, work, though effects may be as diverse as the programs themselves.
Conversely, unfavorable academic and social outcomes are higher for children and teens left
unsupervised after school, with affluent youth being especially prone to substance abuse when left
unsupervised . Expanding the definition of effectiveness beyond academic indicators begins to reframe
after-school spaces as more than child care or extended schooling. In short, programs can support youth
interest and identity development and link them to sources of social capital

LINK:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2372732219892647

REFERENCES:
Afterschool Alliance. (2014). America after 3pm: Afterschool programs in
demand. http://www.afterschoolalliance.org/AA3PM/

Arnold M. E. (2017). Supporting adolescent exploration and commitment: Identity

formation, thriving, and positive youth development. Journal of Youth Development, 12(4),
1–15.

Baldridge B. J. (2014). Relocating the deficit: Reimagining Black youth in neoliberal

times. American Educational Research Journal, 51(3), 440–
472. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831214532514

St. Clair L., Stone T. (2016). Who gets the better educators in afterschool? An analysis of
teaching and learning interactions and student economic status. School Community
Journal, 26(2). 71–81