The “big idea” of supplementary education, as developed in the collection of papers edited by Gordon, Bridglall, and Meroe (2005), recognizes the health, human, polity, cultural and social capital required to enable schools to succeed at promoting student achievement. Many of the contributors to this argue that key to understanding the role of schooling in modern society is and recognizing that inequality of education and educational opportunity limits these forms of capital and, therefore, places constraints on the effectiveness of schools. Central to this view of supplementary education is the assumption that high academic achievement is closely associated with exposure to family and community-based activities and learning experiences. There is broad consensus that supplementary education programs can achieve a range of beneficial academic and social and developmental outcomes. In recent years private and public investments have fueled the growth of the out-of-school, after-school youth development programs. And not surprisingly, as public demand for all forms of supplementary education initiatives grows, so does the demand for quality assurance and accountability. More and more stakeholders are asking, what is the quality of these programs? Which ones work best? In this paper we will attempt to describe the landscape of supplementary education programs—for the most part, referred to as after school programs—and look closely at those that have been subject to evaluation..
Paper