Vision: to enhance the experience of teachers and students through the integration of technology.

Mission: to conduct research to determine the best practices of technology in high school, with special attention to communities of practice and after-school programs.

Looking at our vision, we found that it was not enough to look only at afterschool programs for the “integration of technology.” Community Technology Centers provide a wealth of innovative technology practices. Both are important links outside of school that strive to support the whole child.

WWSF Project

A Hybrid Topic: Community Based Educational Technology Programs

Three essential components: Community based Provides enriched activities using

technology Involves teaching and learning as it relates

to student achievement

Afterschool Programs Focus on school-age children, their educational development and

enrichment activities, as they relate to student achievement. This discipline, while often not technology-oriented, provides a theoretical framework for creating a Community EdTech program.

CTC- Community Technology Center A CTC is a generic name given to a computer lab that is open to the

public, driven by and focused on local community needs. It is seen as an essential solution to closing the digital divide and affords students the experience of using technology in innovative ways outside of school. Furthermore, they use technology in enrichment activities that students find highly engaging.

Afterschool Programs

CTCCommunity Ed-Tech

Programs + =

Where and how do “afterschool programs” fit into NCLB?

Title IV: 21st Century Schools

Section 4201 (b.1.a&b) “assists students in meeting State and local academic achievement standards in core academic subjects…by providing…opportunities for academic enrichment activities…during non-school hours…offers families of students opportunities for literacy and related educational development.”

Theory: the way to conceptualize afterschool programs…

A child lives in multiple worlds and research shows that the more these worlds are congruent and continuous, the more likely a child is to achieve academic success and literacy.

- Noam, et al. (2003) Afterschool Education:

Approaches to an Emerging Field. Quote: “Your child acts one way

at home and another way at school. The true child lies somewhere in between.”

- Middle School Principal

Learners often have competing values and beliefs, expectations, actions, and emotional responses that arise from

the multiple worlds that a learner encounters.

Fragmented model

Home

Community School

Peers

Afterschool programs are intermediaries for aligning the worlds of and for the child…

Congruent & Continuous model

AfterschoolProgram

Home

Peers

School

Community

Again…

A child lives in multiple worlds and research shows that the more these worlds are congruent and continuous, the more likely a child is to achieve academic success and literacy.

- Noam, et al. (2003) Afterschool Education: Approaches to an Emerging

Field.

Bridging Afterschool Programs to Schools

Models of Bridging

SchoolAfterschool

Program

interpersonal

curricular

systemic

Five types of bridging intensity:

Enrichment Activities & Informal Learning Environments

•Promote the psychological and emotional development of students• Promote academic achievement by allowing students to pilot their own learning experience•Encourage the growth and development of the whole child and “soft” skills.

What are those “soft” skills

Professor Larson says, “kids are doing the wrong homework for life in the present and future.” Soft skills include:

– A. thinking independently– B. creating structure in unstructured environments– C. taking initiative to organize one’s energies to work

towards achieving a goal– D. working effectively in teams– E. crossing boundaries by functioning effectively across differences in ethnicity, profession, gender, and other factors

Community Technology Centers

Research Drives Policy Standards

Research shows that those 15 million kids that are self-supervised are more likely to participate in risky behaviors. Meanwhile, kids in afterschool programs have improved

grades, behavior and school attendance (Noam, et al). Afterschool Alliance/Mott Foundation says, “afterschool

programs keep kids safe, help working families, & improve academic achievement.”

NCLB says, “Community learning centers are to assist students in meeting State and local academic achievement standards in core academic subjects…by providing…opportunities for academic enrichment activities…during non-school hours…offers families of students opportunities for literacy and related educational development.

Where and how do CTCs fit into NCLB?

NCLBTitle V, Promoting Informed Parental Choice and Innovative Programs

Section 5511 summary: the purpose of the CTC is to promote the development of model programs for children and adults that demonstrate the educational effectiveness of technology.

NCLB sees CTCs as a source for innovation in using technology as a teaching tools.

After School policy is driven by research. It has it’s own discipline. No discipline in academia for CTCs.

Community Technology Center policy often not driven by research, but by needs of the particular community that it serves.

CTCNet defines a CTC as a community service, social action, and/or educational facility that uses technology to provide a range of vital services for those who typically

lack such opportunities.

Overview of

Began in Harlem, NY at Playing to Win in late 1980s. Grass-roots organization, community driven and focused. National network of 600 affiliates with 4,000 locations, including

after-school, church, and alternative schools programs Large community organizations, including National Urban League

affiliates, Boys and Girls Clubs, YMCAs, and public libraries Young people, many from low-income and minority backgrounds,

can use technology in creative learning experiences. CTCs are helping to bridge the digital divide. Provide youth with

both tech access and skills to become their own content creators.

Research on CTCs model programs for effective Ed Tech

Community Technology Centers program, effort of US DOE to bring tech access, and new

opportunities for learning, to Americans who would otherwise lack access.

America Connects Consortium (ACC) is the technical assistance contractor for the CTC program.

SRI evaluation, Summary of Findings from Annual Performance Report

CTC Program Objectives

1. Provide access to computers and technology to adults and children in low-income communities who otherwise would lack that access

2. Support learning outcomes by providing educational program and services to center participants.

Local objective: help children meet educational goals.

3. Develop model programs that demonstrate the educational effectiveness of technology

Two factors associated with effective CTC programs

1. Developing programs that deeply involve participants in their own learning through projects in which they become the authors of tech content (ex. designing web sites, creating digital video).

Prior research (Lazarus & Mora, 2000) has indicated that a key to overcoming the digital divide is developing content that is relevant to underserved Americans.

Second factor associated with effective CTC programming is PARTNERSHIPS

2. Increasing number of partnerships that grantees form to help bring more participants, staff, and volunteers, as well as equipment donations and funding.

Studies of have shown that such partnerships are critical to bringing clients to the centers, helping to meet their needs, obtaining funding, and sustainability (Lazarus & Mora, 2000)

Note: L & M also found connections with schools are important to programs whose aim is to boost student achievement.

CTC Evaluation Challenge

Progress in providing access and educational programs.

CTCs struggled to show progress developing model programs. Would require grantees to demonstrate educational effectiveness of technology

THIS IS A CHALLENGE Demonstrating that participation in CTC programs CAUSES

improvements in outcomes requires a rigorously designed evaluation. NONE did this.

Note: nearly all grantees did report on one aspect of model programs, community partnerships

NCLB sees CTCs as struggle to evaluate, accounting for their effectiveness

SRI Recommendations

standardize program reporting forms for grantees provide clear definitions of reporting numbers of

participants identify ways to support grantees in collecting and

analyzing data encourage grantees to describe program features that

worked share knowledge of model programs increase emphasis on reporting of data related to

sustainability

Early indicators are that the investment in CTCs is paying off in terms of

Access AudienceSustainabilityModel Programs

Additional Research on CTCs

CTC are providing tech access to those who are least likely to have tech access elsewhere (Fowells & Lazarus, 2001)

Low-income Americans and ethnic minorities are among those most widely served at CTCs (Chow, Ellis, Mark, Wise, 1998)

Rose (1997) finds two basic social-service models for CTCs: 1. Free standing and 2. embedded in other service agencies.

Embedded more sustainable. Issues important to CTCs: long-term sustainability, obtaining

funding, link with corporations, link with schools (Clark, 2001)

Large-scale Efforts & Lessons to Be Learned

Recently CLOSED Prominent national initiative to build 1000 youth CTCs. Established

by AOL Foundation, Gateway. It struggled to weave corporate philanthropic goals with local community expectations.

Sustainability Key future concern is sustainability. Power Up paid CTCNet

membership fee for any PowerUp site that was interested in benefiting from the national organization’s resources.

Another large-scale effort…

Morino Institute- effective youth tech programs rooted into strong teaching methods that actively engage young learners.

Developed YouthLearn Guide: A Creative Approach to Working with Youth and Technology, how-to manual for developing effective programs.

Resource and a meeting point to the field.Offer a discussion list, newsletter, tailored training, and youth project ideas.

Successful Because: Embedded in other organizations that serve the community. Link activities to academic achievement. More sustainable bcs of this.

Matrix of Exemplary Community EdTech Programs

Criteria: geographic spread, diff environments, recommended, documented

Components: Location, Partnerships, Technology

 (A framework that links the sites together.)

Common Attributes for Successful Afterschool and CTC Programs

Private and public partnerships for sustainability Offer real-life projects that spark creativity, and relate

learning to student’s interest Connection with school and home Personal and life skills, soft skills, self-esteem, respect Dedicated people who see in youth potential, not

pathology

1 of 2

Common Attributes for Successful Afterschool and CTC Programs

Programs carried out in ways attuned to their adolescent members values and goals

Goal of technology literacy Enrichment activities as vehicles for learning & youth dev. Technology is a tool to enable learning Students are active participants in the learning process Work collaboratively on project based activities

2 of 2

Successful example:

Somerville Computer Community Center (Mass.) Partnerships

• Basics First, adult basic education Brazilian Community Center Cambridge/Somerville Elder Services Elizabeth Peabody House ESL Classes and ESOL Health Team Project. GED classes to achieve the General Equivalency Diploma Haitian-American Education Development Association Head Start MIT Academic Talent Search Program The Open Center for Children Powderhouse Elementary School Somerville Arts Council Somerville Cable Access Television Somerville Community Schools Somer Camp and Day Care Somerville Council on Aging TERC

Challenges

• Sustainability• Schools commonly don’t see the value of community

based programs• Employee retention and professional development• Measuring student achievement and effectiveness of

ed-tech activities• Not enough research on the effectiveness of learning

in less structured environments.• Measuring accountability

Community Based EdTech Programs

Having taken a look at AS and CTCs, we have come up with some recommendations for setting up our hybrid program

Community Ed-Tech Programs

Three essential components: Community based Provides enriched activities

using technology Involves teaching and learning

as it relates to student achievement

Afterschool Programs

CTC =+

Recommendations for Building a Community EdTech program

Consistent sustained leadership Clarity of goals of your organization Private and public partnerships for sustainability Strong curricular link by supporting the academic learning

of the school day Afterschool personnel integrated into the regular school day Commitment to investing in professional development Encouragement of the widest and richest connections with

the community and families

Recommendations continued…

Participants become authors of technology content View technology as a tool to enable learning Workshops for principals to see the value of bridging to

community ed-tech program Designate someone to spend at least 50% or more time

constructing and maintaining a bridge to the school.

Possible Areas of Further Research

How can community ed-tech programs be evaluated vis-à-vis student achievement, as well as intangible “soft skills” that contribute to measurable student success?

How might the advent of online communities and communities of practice fit into local ed-tech programs?

What do unified models look like and where are they located?

Final Thoughts

Given WWS Project vision and mission– Community Ed-tech programs can enhance the experience of teachers and students through the use of technology in enrichment learning environments.As John Dewey reminds us, “Recreation, as the word indicates, is recuperation of energy. Not demand of human nature is more urgent or less to be escaped…If education does not afford opportunity for wholesome recreation and train capacity for seeking and finding it, the suppressed instincts find all sorts of illicit outlets, sometimes overt, sometimes confined to indulgence of the imagination”