August/September
2006
On the ground with...
Stan Kocos
Program Administrator for the Fond du Lac School District's 21st Century
Community Learning Centers
WCCF: Obviously social and economic changes
over the last couple of decades have resulted in more kids being on
their own during non-school hours. Why is it important that they have
something structured to do during that time?
SK: There are several reasons that it is important
for those young people to be in a structured and safe environment.
We know that statistically kids are more likely to be involved in
things that can lead them to at-risk behaviors between the hours of
3 in the afternoon and 8 pm. So getting them into a controlled environment
is going to lessen the likelihood that they will become victims of
crime or perpetrators of crime. But beyond that, once they're in a
safe place, let's utilize that time to create some programming that
can enhance the likelihood that they'll be academically successful
and well-adjusted from a psycho-social standpoint. And you're correct.
A lot has changed. Both parents are more likely to be in the workforce
and more families contain only one parent, and it's important that
we provide support for these working families. One of the ways I promote
afterschool programs in Fond du Lac when I interact with business
and corporate leaders is to emphasize the benefit to their workforce.
A parent who doesn't have to worry about the safety of their child
from 3 until 5 in the afternoon, or often later, is going to be more
productive.
I find it interesting that occasionally there will be
pockets of resistance -- persons who feel that the availability of
supportive programs for kids are just a means by which parents are
able to abdicate their responsibilities. We always counter that by
pointing out that nobody intends for a parent to abdicate his or her
role. What we're talking about is the ability to enhance what an entire
community can offer to young people and their families, which leads
to much better community health overall. We're talking about afterschool
efforts that allow parents to remain in the workforce and allow children
to have extended learning opportunities. We throw so much at them
over the course of a school day that they really do need additional
support, whether it takes the form of homework help, mentoring, or
academic enrichment. It really is a matter of bringing to bear in
the community every available resource and asset. In the end you've
got a community that's totally invested in the success of its children
and families, and therefore becomes an attractive place for people
to come to and live.
It's interesting to me that people who complain about
parental abdication are often the same people who oppose things like
increasing the minimum wage. So they support the very policies that
ensure that parents have to work longer hours at the expense of spending
time with their kids. Kind of a paradox.
Our afterschool program, though primarily geared toward
providing support for children, frequently provides additional support
for parents as well. That support can be extremely broad. We've actually
opened up our computer labs during the day to parents who want to
engage in additional postsecondary education opportunities online,
or do a job search. And occasionally, when working with children we
find that the barrier to their learning can be a barrier that their
parent also continues to encounter. One day I had a father approach
me and indicate that he couldn't assist his child with homework. So
I assumed the parent was struggling with the difference between assisting
the child with homework and doing it himself. Once we were alone in
the office I learned that it was something entirely different. This
was a father who at age 34 was not able to read. Obviously he was
doing a good job of hiding this from his employer. To make a long
story short, we made a referral to Fond du Lac's adult literacy organization.
Fourteen months later, that father was in our afterschool site helping
out with our program and reading with children, and in that period
of time had also received a promotion at work, which increased his
earnings. So the impact of afterschool programs that look at providing
wraparound services for whole families can be very broad and beneficial
to the community as a whole.
You've referred to the research showing that afterschool
hours are when a lot of kids are engaging in high-risk behavior. Aside
from just "storing" kids somewhere so they're not getting in trouble,
has any evidence of additional positive benefits, as opposed
to avoiding negatives, been established through research?
Most certainly. It's important to make a distinction here.
We have what's called "process evaluation" and "outcome evaluation."
From a standpoint of process evaluation, the minute you get a young
person into a secure and safe environment you're instantly getting
a process outcome that in effect creates a strong positive. If they're
not out in an unsupervised setting, they're not likely to be engaging
in activities that result in contact with the juvenile justice system
and so forth. Beyond that, we've taken steps to ascertain whether
a young person's grade point average improves. Not only does it improve,
but does it improve at a rate that exceeds that of children with similar
demographics who aren't involved in afterschool programs? The answer
is yes. We have very clear data to indicate that a young person who
is in an afterschool program is reaching academic proficiency at a
higher level than a similar counterpart of theirs who is not enrolled
in a program.
We try to determine whether young persons, especially
middle school age and teens, have lessened their likelihood of contact
with the juvenile justice system. Are they posing fewer noncompliance
issues in their school behavior? We also try to determine from parents
through pre and post survey whether the child has been more likely
to adjust their behavior at home. Are they less combative, more cooperative?
Do you find that you have to do less monitoring of whether they are
doing their homework? So we do find on a broad range of levels that
afterschool programs, when they are well tied to the established school
day, are showing distinct benefits across the board.
As you look at this demographic data, do you find that
these benefits are more apparent for kids from low-income families
or with other disadvantages?
We know statistically that children in families with fewer
financial resources available are likely to face more challenges.
There's a significant difference between a family with a six-figure
income where a kids struggling in school can go to a commercial provider
for help, versus a family that has no such alternative. What we find
is that we're showing some significant results with children in poverty
because we are able to provide them with those extended resources.
Now for us demographically, we don't look a great deal different from
many other school districts in Wisconsin. Three in 10 children in
the Fond du Lac school district are living in poverty. In our afterschool
program, however, of the 250 children we serve, 90 percent are living
in poverty. And the reason they're in our program is that they are
currently lacking in academic proficiency in key areas. So there definitely
is a statistical tie to lack of financial resources, which is going
to manifest itself in ways such as less parental availability. We
see some distinct challenges for children of color. At any given time
in one of my program sites, 30 percent of children are English language
learners; at any given time, about 35 to 40 percent of enrollees are
children of color. In comparison, 5.8 percent of the 103,000 individuals
who live in Fond du Lac County are persons of color. So we do have
a disproportionately high percentage of children of color enrolled
in our program.
Given what you've just told me, would you say it's
fair to conclude that these kinds of programs are a legitimate weapon
in closing the racial achievement gap in education?
They certainly can be, and I think it's important to note
that one of the key tools in doing so is to always set extremely high
standards and goals. We have a system that frequently makes the mistake
of setting goals that are low, having expectations that tend to perpetuate
some of the long-held stereotypes we have pertaining to persons in
poverty. Our experience has been that the best tool we have for breaking
cycles of poverty is academic achievement and psychosocial wellness.
If we're going to have an impact in the long haul, we need to make
certain that children are academically accomplished and that they
can go on pursue postsecondary experiences with no barriers, either
psychological or based on a lack of skills.
How is Wisconsin doing compared to other states in
terms of making high quality afterschool programming availability
to the kids who need it?
I would be less than truthful if I said that we are where
we need to be. We aren't. Do we do a better job than many other states?
Yes, I believe we do. An example would be the collaborations and partnerships
that occur through entities such as the Wisconsin Afterschool Network,
which is a public-private partnership of local and state organizations
driven now by a gift from the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation. It
allows DPI in collaboration with WCCF and UW-Extension to build relationships
through which we can converge for a common cause--to take a look at
meeting local needs and interests related to providing a safe, positive
environment for children and youth during the hours they are most
at risk. How do we enhance their development and academic achievement?
How do we build community collaborations and family connections and
public-private partnerships that support program quality and sustainability?
We're on a good course. We've got much to be proud of, but we're a
long way from ensuring that all children are in a safe afterschool
environment, and ultimately that should be our goal.
