Swift & Change Able

As we said in an earlier post, “The Psychology of Social Change“:

“When children getting tutoring outside of regular school hours was called “21st Century Learning” or “after-school” and was pushed by a centrist President (Bill Clinton) and a liberal Congressman (David Obey) liberals loved it and conservatives hated it. When it was called “supplemental educational services” (SES) beginning in 2001 with passage of NCLB, everybody pretty much switched sides.”

Cases in point:

This from Tampa, where the glass is half full, “No Child Left Behind Offers Help".

And this, from UCLA, where the glass is half-empty, “Supplemental Educational Services under NCLB:
Charting Implementation.”

In the latter report, it is emphasized that students aren’t availing themselves of after-school tutoring opportunities. For insight into why this might be, we suggest the seminal report from the Citizens’ Commission on Civil Rights, which focuses on school choice, but does so from a consumer perspective and illustrates many of the ways in which districts have fallen short in making options under NCLB known to students and parents.

Tutoring and choice have provided millions of children with new opportunities for additional instruction and adult supervison (aka “child care") in after-school settings. As with any change in education policy, there are bugs to be worked out. The three reports cited above illustrate a myriad of avenues to pursue as work on ESEA, aka NCLB, reauthorization continues.

Update: More from Florida. In Daytona, in contradiction of the UCLA study, demand seems to be outpacing supply. Maybe if SES were better publicized and marketed, the gap between supply and demand asserted in the UCLA report might be narrowed. I don’t remember reading that in the UCLA report….