Opportunity for Whom? Understanding Curriculum-Oriented Out-of-School Time Math Learning

  • Ming Yin (Houston Education Research Consortium, Rice University)


Learning opportunities outside of traditional school times can be important factors for cognitive and noncognitive development, as well as for gaps between advantaged and less-advantaged students. Although out-of-school time (OST) education is of great significance in research and practice worldwide, less is known about the ways in which OST learning shapes patterns of educational stratification due to the variety of OST programs and the hidden decision-making processes of participation. The current study focused on curriculum-oriented OST math learning and examined its participation patterns and relevance to academic and non-academic skill development among 15-year-old students in the U.S. Utilizing multilevel ordered logistic regression, the study found that African American students, academically struggling students, and students attending schools with certain teacher and school characteristics were more likely to participate in OST math education. Given the endogenous nature of OST math learning, the study incorporated propensity score weighting in the regression analyses to understand the connections between OST math learning and skills. It is revealed that more hours of OST math learning weekly were related to better skill development in positive study behaviors in math. This study situated the findings within the socio-ecological contexts of education and discussed the interconnected relationships between schooling and OST learning. It is concluded that time and space beyond schooling is a critical component of education and should be included in the discourse of educational justice.

Keywords: out-of-school time math learning, non-traditional classes, math study behaviors, educational disparities, academic performance

How to Cite:

Yin, M., (2020) “Opportunity for Whom? Understanding Curriculum-Oriented Out-of-School Time Math Learning”, Journal of Critical Thought and Praxis 10(1), 1-20. doi:



Published on
04 Nov 2020
Peer Reviewed