Professional Associations 101

This year, BOSTnet has taken on the role of Massachusetts affiliate for the National Afterschool Association. In this work, we will be expanding our network statewide to strengthen professional development options for OST providers in Massachusetts. While direct member services, including consistent information, resources, training opportunities, networking and conferences will constitute our bread-and-butter activities, there are other, less tangible activities.

In the development and advancement of any profession, the role of the professional association has been a leading force. Individually, there is little we can do to strenthen the identity, status or importance of the field. Professional associations provide a social function, bringing a community of practitioners together to elevate issues that extend beyond more narrow self-interests. Today, for instance, we assume a level of professional autonomy and academic freedom for university professors. At the turn of the 20th Century, however, these were luxuries few professors shared. Most were hired at will by university trusties who could easily dispatch of them if they lectured on topics or presented views deemed unworthy. It was not until the founding of the American Association of University Professors in 1915 that these educators build the social capital and political muscle to make academic freedom a reality. Might it be possible for the out-of-school time field to gain the same measure of academic freedom and professional autonomy to continue to shape our approach to informal education, creative expression and youth development?

While there are various types of advocacy and trade associations, professional associations tend to focus on three key areas:

1. The interests of its individual members (e.g. education, information, professional development, compensation, etc.).
2. The needs of the profession itself (e.g. definition, image, boundaries with other fields, performance standards, research, recruitment to the field, etc.).
3. The needs of the larger society (e.g. protection of the needs of individuals within the association's domain, ethics, relations with governments, universities, local communities, and relations with other fields, etc.).

Beyond providing member services, we want to talk openly about maintaining a clear and meaningful definition of our field. It is critical that practitioners, teachers, children and youth, families, employers, funders and policymakers have a common understanding of what constitutes the field. Only through shared understanding can there be shared expectations. It is important that we elevate the dialogue around how we define the field and its functional domains. This will help ensure that we dialogue effectively with other associations and institutions to find the common intersections of interest on which to build effective partnerships. Ultimately, this effort will improve opportunities for children and youth.

Leadership Development Survey

BOSTnet recently partnered with the Trefler Foundation to gather data on the current state of leadership development opportunities and the perceptions of the field on the opportunities and barriers to developing effective leaders in the field. The study combined a review of the literature on leadership development with a field survey and focus groups during the summer and fall of 2008. The research builds on the work of Roosevelt Smith, former Executive Director of Urban Dreams in Dorchester, who did preliminary field work the previous winter and spring.

In March, we will release the findings of the study as our next State of the Field Report. To get the discussion moving, however, we would like to provide some highlights from the survey.

BOSTnet released a survey on leadership development to about 550 practitioners across Massachusetts on August 6, 2008 and collected responses from 159 individuals. The majority of respondents represent large organizations. Nearly 40% work for organizations with an annual budget over $1 million, while organizations with budgets of $500,000 – 1 million and under $250,000 each accounted for 25% of the respondents. 36% of respondents work for programs with less than 10 employees; 30% work for programs with over 40 employees. Most respondents listed their primary programmatic activities as youth leadership development, academic support, arts & cultural enrichment and general child care, and the majority of respondents noted that their organizations ran programs that served children and youth from Kindergarten to High School. 40% of respondents have worked in their current position less than 3 years and over 50% were promoted into their current position within their organization, indicating some opportunity for upward mobility. Respondents with over 10 years of experience comprised 33% of the sample group. Of all the respondents, 45% classified themselves as “organizational leaders”—I have a senior management role in my organization, such as executive director, president or deputy director. The findings of this diverse group are interesting:

· When asked to identify opportunities that have been helpful in their professional development, nearly 70% selected professional conferences; 58% outside training or class work; and, 55% informal peer networks. Mentors and more formal networks also ranked high.
· The sample group clearly engaged in outside training: over 90% of respondents took part in a training course within the past 12 months, with over 60% taking part in more than 3 trainings.
· Over 50% of outside trainings were paid for by organizations and nearly 40% of internal trainings were provided by organizations free. 20% of respondents said they only attend free trainings; 18% split costs with their organization; and, 22% received scholarships to attend trainings.
· There is evidence that these trainings were more practice focused and not relevant to career advancement. 60% of respondents indicated that NONE of the trainings attended related directly to leadership or career advancement.
· Over 60% of respondents believe they have reached a career plateau in their current organizations with no opportunity for advancement. 15% of respondents are looking to advance within their organizations while 12% are looking to move up to a management role in another youth serving organization. Significantly, 11% aspire to leave the field.
· The majority of respondents (nearly 70%) feel supported by their organizations and nearly 60% believes their organization actively develops leaders from within.
· 77% of respondents feel that their organizational leadership role extends into their communities and nearly 85% actively build social networks with other community leaders.
· Asked to think about the kind of skills they need to develop to advance in their career, the majority of respondents identified fundraising, financial management and strategic planning. Many in the group also identified communications, board management, creative problem solving, marketing and evaluation.
· In selecting courses or trainings, the respondents said that quality of instruction, when and where the course takes place, the reputation of the organization providing training and the cost were the most important factors.
· Significantly, the sample group most often rated whether or not a course counts toward a degree or certificate as NOT IMPORTANT.
· In thinking about the settings most appropriate to leadership development, non-profit training organizations, professional associations, and colleges/universities rated highest. The least preferred settings included community colleges, for-profit training organizations, and online.

If you do not already recieve our State of the Field Reports, please visist www.bostnet.org to sign up.