Policy Options Brief

TO: Governor Andrew Cuomo; Mayor Bill de Blasio; Carmen Farina, Chancellor of NYC Department of Education; FROM: Grace Drewes, Anny Lam, Desire Menendez and Michael Ng DATE: March 5, 2015

PROBLEM: Lack of after-school programs for low-income families

In New York City today, there is an increasingly large achievement and development gap between students that come from low-income and high-income families. It’s not surprising that there is such a profound gap between socioeconomic classes reflected in education when “the mean income of the top 5 percent of households in Manhattan soared 9 percent in 2013 over 2012, giving Manhattan the biggest dollar income gap of any county in the country, according to data from the Census Bureau.” 1

The income gap, for many reasons, has led students from low-income families to score significantly lower on test scores and to have lower math and reading levels than their high-income peers. It’s concerning that, “two-thirds of students in our state are not proficient in core subjects on the Nation’s Report Card – a figure that has shown little improvement over the past decade. Thirty-five percent of New York’s students are not graduating from high school ready for college or careers, and scores are declining on the SAT and ACT.”2 By the time the students reach the ninth grade, “only one-fifth of low- income students in New York are proficient in math and reading compared to nearly half of higher-income students.”3 Present also is a racial achievement gap. McKinsey’s report on the achievement gap specifically studies New York City students and finds, “87 percent of fourth grade students scoring in the bottom quartile on New York City math achievement tests remained in the bottom half in eighth grade. Students who scored in the top quartile in math in eighth grade had a 40 percent higher median income 12 years later than the students who scored in the bottom quartile. In New York City, higher-achieving eighth grade students also have a much higher likelihood of graduating from high school with a Regents diploma.”4 Based on all of these findings, it is clear that there is a definite gap between the test scores of students in NYC based on income and racial differences.

Another cause in the achievement gap points to the activities of students after school. In a report on city-wide integration of after-school programs, they report that, “in recent years, after-school programs have attracted a new burst of interest in funding. More than 500 municipal leaders surveyed by the National League of Cities ranked after-school programs among the most pressing needs for children in their communities. More households have working mothers, with the resulting need for a safe, wholesome place for children after school, and families are increasingly looking to after-school providers for academic help or to compensate for cutbacks in arts, sports, or other enrichment activities at public schools.”5

Low-income families are not able to afford things such as sport programs and trips to local art museums. This leads to a lack of cultural and social development among students from low-income families. We know that trying to alleviate the extreme class differences by redistributing wealth is quite the undertaking, but what we can undertake is ensuring that all children are exposed to the same cultural and social development opportunities. This will lead them to become excited about learning and they will gain real-life experience into art, music, and higher education.

As the greatest city in the world, we need to work tirelessly to ensure that these children are getting access to the same quality of life that wealthier children are. The voices of these children and students, if they are not nurtured, are going to be missing in the most important institutions, such as politics and business. One way to alleviate the sharp differences in development is to provide funding for outstanding after-school and summer programs.

POLICY OPTIONS

1. Create a Citywide Approach to Quality After-school Programs

This policy option is directly influenced by a report done by The Wallace Foundation. The national foundation is committed to working to improve learning and enrichment for disadvantaged children through testing and research on the most effective solutions and innovative practices. They report on after-school programs and believe that a citywide approach is the most effective solution in producing high quality programs. They are a proponent to a citywide approach because “the more usual program-by-program approaches to improving out-of-school time (OST) frequently leave entire neighborhoods with little or no programming, while sending scarce funding to organizations that may not consistently deliver quality service.” 6

With more coordination and a more unified approach there will be better oversight as to where programs should be placed and if they are going to benefit the poorest children. The elements needed to provide quality and sustainable after-school care is to have committed leadership between the public offices (mayor, local legislators, after-school leaders, private funders, etc.) and the coordinating body (public or private). 7 These bodies could consist of organizations like the Department of Youth and Community Development in NYC or the DC Children and Youth Investment Trust Corporation.8 These bodies can be privately or governmentally funded, and will be in charge of all the logistics and planning, with making decisions as to what nonprofits and programs will receive what amounts of funding.9

The leaders and the coordinating body will work on planning (funding, priorities, and defining roles and responsibilities); reliable information (identifying neighborhoods’ needs, tracking neighborhoods’ needs, and evidence of benefits); participation building (setting targets, monitoring progress, creating incentives to attend and communicating to families); and lastly, promoting quality (developing standards, strengthening OST programs, and adopting assessment tools).10 With a centralized system and implemented pilot programs with specific organizations we can produce more high quality programs, more participation, and more effective use of public/private OST resources.

2. Implement our elementary schools into the Success for All Foundation program

“According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, fourth grade scores in 2009 are only slightly higher than they were in 1992, and in fact have changed little since 1980. Further, reading problems are not evenly distributed. There remain substantial gaps according to social class and ethnicity. Among fourth graders not eligible for free lunch, 45% scored at or above proficient, in comparison to only 17% among fourth graders eligible for free lunch. The percent proficient rates were 42% for White fourth graders, but only 16% for African Americans, 17% for Hispanics, and 20% for American Indians.”11

The Success for All Foundation (SFAF or SFA) is a nonprofit organization devoted to the development, evaluation, and distribution of recognized and improved simulations for preschool, elementary, and middle schools. These models were researched by more than 30 institutions during the last two decades in order to decrease the achievement gap between children based on ethnicity.12 SFA’s work began in 1987 at Johns Hopkins University and still maintains a strong relationship to the school.13 The organization is headquartered in Baltimore, Maryland and due to the success rate of the school reforms and implementation results backed up the University, the foundation was officially established in 1998 in an effort to increase the number of schools that can be served.14

For schools outside of the foundation headquarters, SFA uses their Schoolwide Solutions Teams for schools across the United States. During the first year, new SFA schools “receive approximately 26 person-days of on-site professional development and coaching, as well as on-demand teleconference and email support. A larger number of days are provided if the school is in particular distress. After the program introduction workshops, coaching is provided in frequent visits to the school, with many telephone and email contacts between visits. An online resource center and professional community discussion board provide additional support. After the first year, the number of coaching days diminishes to about 16 in the second year, 12 in the third, and then 5-10 in subsequent years. Coaching visits include classroom visits, reviews of student performance data, meetings with facilitators and principals, meetings with school teams such as the Solutions Team, and planning targets for next steps in achievement.”15

As it was mentioned earlier, during the first year, trainers have to travel to schools to provide coaching and meetings, this is an effective but expensive training model. However, SFA is able to compromise by sending district-based coaches who live in the school area. Therefore, the coaches can spend 160 days per year in schools and can provide more flexible services depending on the schools’ needs. This program can be implemented to 500 elementary students. But, most importantly, this lessens the SFA program price during the first-year to approximately $50,000. Since most of the materials are purchased in the first year, the second year costs are cut down to almost half of the original amount for the first year.16 Currently, the Success for All Foundation “is used in approximately 1,000 schools in 48 states across the US. These schools typically maintain the program for a very long time; the median SFA school has been implementing the program for more than ten years, meaning that the program in most schools has likely survived changes of principals and staff, several superintendents, funding cutbacks, changes in district, state, and federal policies.”17

3. A buddy-program with older students

Extracurricular activities have an increased benefit to the learning abilities of students. On average, students that participate in extracurricular activities tend to have higher grade point averages than those who do not participate.18 Providing students with options for these extracurricular activities is important in forming a well-rounded experience for the child’s after school hours.

The extracurricular activities that the program would consist of would be divided into two sections: A buddy system of advisement from older students in the community tailored after the AmeriCorps model of City Year and a monthly themed activities curriculum that will expose children to different subjects each month.

The first section would include a mentoring buddy system. This program would be tailored around what the AmeriCorps group City Year does with children grade levels 1- 12.19 This organization currently uses in-class mentoring, after-school mentoring and community based engagement to reach out to the most needed students in the community. For our purpose, the mentors that participate in the extracurricular mentoring would be older students in the community. This is called developmental mentoring.20 Because students would already be in the communities that they serve it would be easier to follow- up with the progress of students after the after-school program cases, a practice that is used in the City Year model.

In this approach older students would mentor younger students in their community. This give and take sets up a positive outlook on the community for both participating parties. The effect of community mentoring has been proven to reduce the risk of younger students dropping out of school or engaging in criminal activity in lower-income areas;21 areas where we hope to focus our efforts. As opposed to cross-age touring, cross-age mentoring focuses more on the relationship formed than on developing specific skills.22 This relationship building is what befits the younger children being mentored in the areas of self-esteem, sense of community and academic attitudes.

The second section would be structured on a quarterly basis. In New York City, school is in session from September through June, totaling up to 10 months of instruction in a year. Each quarter would be dedicated to a specific subject; within that quarter (2-3 months each) students would learn about two different topics within a subject. For example the quarter of September and October would be devoted to science. All activities for those two months would only focus on the topic of science, whatever part of science was being studied. It could include a trip to a planetarium for an afternoon if students were learning about our solar system or taking a trip to an arboretum if students were learning about plant life for that month.

4. A three-year pilot program for 4th and 5th graders

This option creates a three year pilot program for 4th and 5th graders in three elementary schools. The schools selected are: - P.S. 13 – Roberto Clemente – District 19 557 Pennsylvania Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11207 - P.S. 192 Jacob H. Schiff – District 6 500 West 138 Street, New York, NY 10031 - P.S. 70 – Max Schoenfeld – District 9 1691 Weeks Avenue, Bronx, NY 10457 These schools were chosen because they all fell below the citywide average on the state Math and English exams and have a high minority population.

The goal is to provide these fourth and fifth graders with new and diverse activities they otherwise would not have experienced. This can be implemented in a variety of ways: (I) During the academic calendar, there will be different theme months that will emphasize a unique subject to the students. Some of the themes include music, art, theater, dance, concentrated science subjects and more. Each month, students will take lessons and go on field trips so they can immerse themselves with a brand new field through first-hand interactive experiences. For example, during a music themed month, students can attend local concerts and meet performers to learn more about the craft. During a theater month, students can work with local high-schools theater programs to either assist in the high-school program or have create a new play for the elementary school. (II) Working with high school and college students who have an interest in serving as a mentor or working in early childhood education, students will attend a 90-minute after-school program twice a week where they will receive tutoring in subjects they are having trouble with. (III) Twice a month, students will temporarily stray from their regular curriculum and spend the afternoon learning about new subjects that will bring new interest and excitement into the classroom. (IV) Integrating pets into the classroom: Having pets in the classroom can improve a child’s classroom experience and teach them about responsibility. Regular curriculum, mainly science, can also be implemented and taught through the use of the pet as a guide.

These options are not mutually exclusive and are meant to be implemented together in some form. All of the activities mentioned above can be provided by organizations like the Brooklyn Academy of Music, Lincoln Center Institute, the Bronx Zoo, the Brooklyn Aquarium, the Brooklyn Botanical Garden, local high school and colleges, all of which already offer education programs for 4th and 5th graders. This Pilot Program is created in a way that is cost-effective by using mainly non-profit organizations and volunteers. The three year program is designed to provide us with two classes of students that have experienced this program both at the 4th grade level and the 5th grade level. Once the three year program is over, we will examine the progress of all the students in the program. We hope to expand the program to more schools and eventually citywide.

1 Sam Roberts "Gap Between Manhattan’s Rich and Poor Is Greatest in U.S., Census Finds," The New York Times, September 17, 2014, nytimes.com, accessed on March 6, 2015, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/18/nyregion/gap- between-manhattans-rich-and-poor-is-greatest-in-us-census-finds.html?_r=0

2 Kara Clifford, Bill Christeson, and Jenn O'Connor, “Not Getting Our Money's Worth,” Rep. Albany, NY: ReadyNation, 2014, Readynation.org, December 2014, Page 4, accessed on March 6, 2015. http://readynation.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/ReadyNation-NY-More-and-Better-Learning.pdf

3 Clifford, “Not Getting Our Money’s Worth,” Page 4

4 McKinsey & Company, Social Sector Office, “The Economic Impact of the Achievement Gap in America's Schools,” McKinsey, April 2009, Page 19, accessed on March 8, 2015 http://silvergiving.org/system/files/achievement_gap_report.pdf

5 The Wallace Foundation, "A Place to Grow and Learn: A Citywide Approach to Building and Sustaining Out-of- School Time Learning Opportunities," The Wallace Foundation, February 2008, Page 1, accessed on March 8, 2015, http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/after-school/key- research/Documents/Sustaining-Out-of-School-Time-Learning-Opportunities.pdf

6 Wallace, “A Place to Grow and Learn,” Page 3

11 Success For All Foundation, “Project Narrative,” 2010, Page 3, accessed on March 6, 2015 https://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/2010/narratives/u396a100050.pdf,

12 Success for All Foundation, Research, accessed on March 6, 2015 http://www.successforall.org/Elementary/Research/ 13 Success for All Foundation, About Us - History, accessed on March 6, 2015 http://www.successforall.org/About-Us/History-of-Success-for-All-Foundation/ 14 Success for All Foundation, About Us – Timeline, accessed on March 6, 2015 http://www.successforall.org/About-Us/Success-for-All-Timeline/ 15 Success, “Project Narrative,” page 7 16 Success, “Project Narrative,” page 8-9 17 Success, “Project Narrative,” page 7

18 James O’Dea, “The Effect of Extracurricular Activities on Academic Achievement,” An abstract of a Thesis by James W. O'Dea, May 1994, Drake University, accessed on March 6, 2015, http://escholarshare.drake.edu/bitstream/handle/2092/453/dt1994%3Cstrong%3Ejwo%3C/strong%3E001.pdf? sequence=1

19 City Year, Our Approach, accessed on March 6, 2015, http://www.cityyear.org/what-we-do/our-approach

20 Michael J. Karcher, “The effects of Developmental Mentoring and High School Mentors attendance on their younger mentee self-esteem, social skills and connectedness,” Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 42(1), 2005, accessed on March 6, 2015, http://adolescentconnectedness.com/media/KarcherPITS_mentoring%26conn.pdf 21 Lynn A. Thomson and Lisa Kelly-Vance, “The Impact of Mentoring On Academic Achievement of At-risk Youth. Children and Youth Services Report”, Vol.23, No.3, pp. 227-242, 2001

22 Karcher, Developmental Mentoring