1. Running Head: School Programs 1
After School Programs: A Necessity of Change (Rough Draft)
Randall L. Noggle
ABS417: Community Organizing & Development
Dr. Beverly Gardner
7/7/2014

2. School Programs 2
Community and progressive organizing are very powerful concepts and have been seen throughout
our American history. The definition provided for progressive social change in Community Organizing
and Development is as follows: “Progressive social change is about defending the weak from the strong,
gaining resources to reduce human hardship, and striving to promote an equitable society. It is about
battling for economic and social justice, working to protect and enhance civil liberties, and respecting the
environment” (Rubin & Rubin, 2008, p. 433). This definition provides a blending of community and
progressive organizing with clear cut goals. While this definition does provide a broad scope of intent, it
can be summed up in “…striving to promote an equitable society” (Rubin & Rubin, 2008, p. 433). This
statement is essentially the main goal of community and progressive organizing from which all other
goals are derived. This ideology is the main proponent and conceptual basis for after school programs.
The necessity of change is more imperative than ever with America falling behind educationally and
practically on a global scale. According to Finding Funding: A Guide to Federal Sources for Out-of-
School Time and Community School Initiatives, “…public understanding of the importance of quality care
and activities to children’s healthy development—not only for young children but also for older children
in the hours they are not in school—is growing” (Reder & Finance Project, 2000). After school programs
and their increasingly essential nature is the cause in which I wish to enact change. My motivation
towards completion of certain goals, the role I would take in this process,the ways I would mobilize and
involve the community, the policy actors I would try to involve and the challenges I would face are all
elements that must be considered to enact this change.
1. Body Paragraph #1—Topic Sentence #1:
a. My motivation to enact change in the area of after school programs is because of the
trend of the American educational system in focusing more on standardized test scores as
opposed to practical application of ideas which allow students to fully grasp these
concepts.
b. Supporting Evidence
i. Through after-schoolprograms, students learn how to collaborate and
communicate with their peers and teachers in ways different from their
interactions in regular classrooms (Mahoney, Cairns, & Farmer,2003). “After-
school program activities have become a means for students to better understand
scientific concepts, processes,and procedures.” (Sahin, Ayar, & Adiguzel, 2014,
p. 311).
c. Explanation
i. This is the main form of my motivation—that what is being taught in schools is
actually understood by students, especially those who are underprivileged in
various forms.
d. So what?
i. If supplemental after school programs are utilized so “drive home” what is being
taught in school, students have a much better chance at retaining and truly
learning as opposed to material that is only present long enough to pass a test.
e. Supporting Evidence
i. A major conflict is whether the purpose of after school programs is to use
traditional instructional methods expanding upon the school day, or whether to
provide a holistic and developmental experience of discussing the day and
contemplating (Brecher,Brazil, Weitzman & Silver, 2010).
f. Explanation
i. This is one of the problems that is faced with education-based after school
programs, to determine which course is taken regarding the structure of the
program.
g. So what?

3. School Programs 3
i. It is my opinion that these after school programs are more concerned with the
latter idealism of contemplation and discussion which can lead to divergent
thinking and practical application and understanding.
2. Body Paragraph #2—Topic Sentenc #2
a. In order to enact change,there needs to be boundaries as to who has power over what.
b. Supporting Evidence
i. “…educational policy-making in the United States occurs by means of a
multilayered and largely decentralized system in which both decision-making
processes and the boundaries of authority are unclear” (Karen,1998).
c. Explanation
i. This is almost a call of accountability for our educational system. In order to
begin change, those involved need to understand who needs to be addressed with
the issue at hand. Whether it be on a local, state,or national level.
d. So what?
i. Without knowing who is the deciding factor regarding policy of after school
programs, we cannot be certain of which policy actors to involve or what path
needs to be taken in order to enact change.
3. Body Paragraph #3—Topic Sentence #3
a. The role I would be taking is to create public awareness and identify what current policy
is in place by interviewing essential policy actors.
b. Supporting Evidence
i. I would contact the local School Board, Principals, the Superintendent, my local
legislature (https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislators/find) and Educational
Appropriations Subcommittee
(https://www.legis.iowa.gov/committees/committee?ga=85&groupID=675).
ii. So What?
1. By contacting all these policy actos and questioning, it would be
providing information that some people may not know how to attain and
are ignorant of, and it would also be the first steps of including and
attaining support from those who can bring about policy change/creation.
4. Body Paragraph #4—Topic Sentence #4
a. The mobilization of others to help me will be through personal contact and social media
relying on the emphasis on child development in the current societal landscape and
necessity of community involvement.
b. Supporting Evidence
i. “…there is an increasing sense that many families and communities need an
array of supporters and service to help them in raising children who can succeed
in the economy and society, and that these needs can best be met in a
comprehensive fashion at the community level.” (Reder & Finance Project,
2000).
c. So What?
i. This idealism not only includes those who could be helpful, but also ties them
directly to the children of community and their role in the development of
America’s future.
5. Body Paragraph #5—Topic Sentence #5
a. Community involvement needs to be regarding the process of policy change and only a
limited involvement in the actual educational process in programs.
b. Supporting Evidence
i. “…those who proceed to invite parental participation often note the difficulty of
trying to accommodate so many differing belief systems within an institution

4. School Programs 4
whose professionals must be both accountable to standardized expectations and
organizationally efficient due to restrictions” (MacKinnon, 2000).
ii. Over the course of the twentieth century, state funding has risen to not only meet
its local funding, but also has surpassed it. This has also lead to the states
expanded authority in all domains of education (standards, curriculum, special
needs, etc) (Meyer,Scott, & Strang, 1987).
c. Explanation
i. These two quotes may seem contradictory to community involvement. This is not
the case. They provide support for the educational to manage these programs
because potential conflict in personal vs public idealism.
d. So What?
i. This is essential the reality of the current setup of school programs. By inhibiting
the personal factor that parentaleducational involvement entails, there is a more
socially broad approach in education that may be devoid of cultural, religious,
and socio-economic bias.
6. Body Paragraph #6 – Topic Sentence #6
a. There are definitely going to be roadblocks and challenges on the projected path of social
change.
b. Supporting Evidence
i. “As state governments have found it necessary to reduce funds available for
education due to a waning economy, many schools and school districts find
themselves with increasing needs and decreasing resources” (Brown & Schenck,
1993).
c. Explanation
i. Financial capability to enact social change is the biggest challenge present. The
educational system is already being forced to cut programs during the school day,
let alone those programs that are supplemental and “nonessential” to the process.
d. So What?
i. This will be the biggest issue to overcome. Gaining support can be relatively easy
with the popularity of social media. Even gaining political support can be, for
lack of a better phrase, less difficult than gaining funding. Even is districts where
grants and outside funding have been attained, there are still shortcomings
present (example of school system here, I just don’t remember where I saved it
to, I wasn’t full awake when I started my research).
Improving and creating quality after school programs that foster an inquisitive, informal
environment for communicating thoughts, ideas, and concepts that are learned throughout the school day
are advantageous in helping our youth become more adequately skilled in areas that will help them be not
only functional, but successfulin their future. My primary goal is to make our educational system be
useful to all children, not just those who have the resources to make the best use of what is learned during
the day. This is the key so creating an equitable social structure in which children from all demographics
and socioeconomic statuses can thrive. Horace Mann said, “Adapting to the Changing Needs of Students
Education, then, beyond all other devices of human origin, is a great equalizer of conditions of men-the
balance wheel of the social machinery” (Karen,1998). With my motivation, the role I would take,how I
would realistically involve the community, and the policy actors I would involve, the challenges could be
overcome in order to enact the necessary change in after school programs.

5. School Programs 5
References
Brecher, C., Brazill, C., Weitzman, B. C., & Silver, D. (2010). Understanding the Political
Context of “New” Policy Issues: The Use of the Advocacy Coalition Framework in the
Case of Expanded After-School Programs. Journal Of Public Administration Research &
Theory, 20(2), 335. doi:10.1093/jopart/mup008
Brown, D. N., & Schenck, R. A. (1993). Use of Alternative Funding by Rural Schools for
Supplemental Programs Which Address Current Social Issues and Special Education
Needs. Retrieved from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED358984.
Karen, S. L. (1998). "A light feeling of chaos": Educational Reform and Policy in the United
States. Daedalus, 127(4), 13-40. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/210572289?accountid=32521
MacKinnon, C. T. (2000). The Politics of Community Participation in a Public School.
Educational Studies, 31(3), 225.
Meyer, J., Scott, W., & Strang, D. (1987). Centralization, Fragmentation, and School District
Complexity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32(2), 186-201.
Reder, N. D., & Finance Project, W. C. (2000). Finding Funding: A Guide to Federal Sources for
Out-of-School Time and Community School Initiatives. Retrieved from
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED448939.pdf.

6. School Programs 6
Rubin, H. & Rubin, I. (2008). Community organizing and development (4th ed.). Boston, MA:
Pearson. Textbook ISBN: 9780205408139.
SAHIN, A., AYAR, M. C., & ADIGUZEL, T. (2014). STEM Related After-School Program
Activities and Associated Outcomes on Student Learning. Educational Sciences: Theory
& Practice, 14(1), 309-322. doi:10.12738/estp.2014.1.1876