So how does service-learning differ from internships?

At its core, service-learning is an active experiential learning opportunity that places students within local or international communities.  Service-learning is therefore not unlike the more common internships, field placements, or co-op’s that students are already engaged in. 

So how does service-learning differ?  Reciprocity and Reflection.

Reciprocity: Service-learning assumes that a balance must exist between the service students are providing to the community and the learning that students are receiving from the community (Furco, 1996) (Eyler & Giles, 1999).  Essentially students engage with and solve community issues in partnership with community organizations (Jacoby, 1996). 

Reflection: A second key differentiator is the essential role of reflection in service-learning practice (Jacoby, 1996).  Reflection is the key in helping students make the connection between in class concepts and theories with hands-on experience in the community. 

Andrew Furco (1996) further explains that the difference between service-learning and other experiential learning methods lies with who the beneficiary is, and what the focus of the service is.  As we can see in Figure 1, when the community is the main beneficiary the experience more closely resembles a volunteer opportunity.  Conversely, when the student stands to benefit the most the experience is classified as an internship.  For example, students who are placed within a community agency focusing on gaining career related skills would be engaged in an internship.

Also, when the focus of the activity is on the actual work that students do, the experience resembles volunteerism.  For example, students may choose to volunteer at a food bank sorting food to complete a specified set of volunteer hours.  The work is of value to the organization, and the student may feel good about their contribution, but without a focus on in-class concepts, a discussion on poverty for example, the experience is volunteerism.  Furco (1996) also explains that the lines between each category are fuzzy and that an experience can often lie between categories (p. 6).

Some scholars and faculty also differentiate between academic service-learning and community service.  Weigart (1998) explains that there are six essential ingredients that must be included in an academic service-learning course (p. 6-7):

• ·     The student provides meaningful service
• ·     Members of a community define the need
• ·    The service provided by the student flow from course objectives
• ·    Service is integrated into the course by means of an assignment (or assignments)       that require some form of reflection
• ·    Assignments rooted in the service must be assessed and evaluated accordingly

Along the same lines, Howard (2001) reminds faculty to ensure learning objectives are closely tied to the service experience, and that assessment methods are tied to the learning and not to the service.  Faculty and scholars working within service-learning pedagogy often cite the importance of tying the service to learning objectives as a means to ensure accountability and measurable outcomes.  Guided and structured reflection is the main vehicle for uncovering this link, and as we will explore in later posts, reflection has the power to help students develop personal growth, appreciation for diversity and the ever sought-after critical thinking skills.

References

Eyler, J., & Giles, D. E. (1999). Where's the learning in service-learning? San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Furco, A. (1996). Service-learning: A balanced approach to experiential education. In B. Taylor, & Corporation for National Service, Expanding Boundaries: Serving and Learning (pp. 2-6). Cooperatie Education Association.

Howard, J. (2001). Service-learning course design workbook (Vol. Companion volume to "Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning"). Ann Arbor, MI: Edward Ginsberg Center for Community Service and Learning.

Jacoby, B. (1996). Service-learning in higher education: Concepts and practices. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Maas Weigert, K. (1998). Academic service learning: Its meaning and relevance. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 73, 3-10.

Authentic Community Partnerships - How do you acknowledge community partners?

The Ontario regional CSL network is a great source of support, ideas and innovation for CSL practitioners. As my colleague from Georgian mentioned, it is a great place to harvest ideas, share tools and processes, and collaborate with one another.  It is also a network where traditional boundaries between college and university, faculty and staff dissolve to allow for open and honest conversation about student engagement.  

The focus on yesterday's meeting was on Authentic Community Partnerships and the question was asked "how do you acknowledge community partners?"  Some of the ideas shared by the group include:

- A shout out on social media 
- Thank-you card(s) written by the student(s)
- Holiday e-Cards
- End of term celebration
- Professional development workshops, institutes 
- Sharing info, resources, databases, or offering space on campus

Remembering to thank our community partners is one way for us to acknowledge that service-learning is:

            Reciprocal - there is potential for learning and impact for the student, community and practitioner. A thank-you acknowledges the community partners time and commitment to our students learning  (Mintz & Hesser, 1996)

           Collaborative - both community and institution work together to establish needs and goals, each contributing a unique set of knowledge and skills.  A thank-you acknowledges the community partners contribution of knowledge and skills toward student learning (Mintz & Hesser, 1996)  

How do you acknowledge community partners? Share your ideas below:

References:

Mintz, S. D., & Hesser, G. W. (1996). Principles of good practice in service-learning. In B. Jacoby, Service-Learning in Higher Education: Concepts and Practices (pp. 26-52). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Alternative Spring Break (ASB) Toronto 2015

ASB Toronto - Habitat Restore, Etobicoke

Along with CSL resources and research, I hope to share a few posts dedicated to the anecdotal, the qualitative, the immeasurable and the emotional side of community service learning.  In other words the part that makes practitioners and students "feel good".  

Last night we celebrated with the student volunteers who engaged in the Alternative Spring Break 2015 program.  Throughout the week students volunteered with Habitat for Humanity, The Knights Table, and The Redwood shelter.  Some students were motivated by a need to complete volunteer hours for a course while others saw it as a way to learn more about their local community.

Reflecting on their experience, students described the week as "inspirational", "thought-provoking", and "fun" .  One student commented that after she had posted a photo of herself volunteering on instagram, her friends messaged asking if they could join her next time.  A second student shared that she had volunteered 10 years prior at the Knight's table, and found it upsetting to see how the need had not changed in the past decade.   

ASB Toronto - Celebration Dinner

Service learning is not without its challenges and it is important that students understand the "why" in order to ensure a valuable learning experience that extends beyond the "feel good".  

Service-Learning and Learning Outcomes

Service-Learning and Learning Outcomes

Having had the opportunity to coordinate both curricular and co-curricular CSL experiences I have had the privilege of seeing the transformational, developmental and emotional impact CSL can have on students.  For some it is a life changing experience, and for others a glimpse into a social reality that hits close to home.  Aside from the obvious “feel-good” stories there is theory and research available that ties CSL to effective learning outcomes.

Within higher education learning outcomes are meant to “articulate what students should be able to do after finishing the course or program” (Lennon, et al., 2014, p. 5).  In this sense, they serve as a quality assurance function for the institution highlighting the alignment between teaching practices and student learning (p. 10).  Outcomes however, can also refer to a change or shift in thinking, attitudes, values and/or behaviours that an individual experiences after having engaged in a particular activity (Gemmel & Clayton, 2009).    

How then does CSL translate into tangible and measurable learning outcomes? 

To answer this will require exploring learning outcomes from various angles and frameworks.  For now I will focus will be on the general learning outcomes often highlighted in CSL literature:  

1. In A Comprehensive Framework for Community Service-Learning in Canada, Gemmel and Clayton (2009) provide a list of general learning outcomes for service learning divided into three broad categories: a) academic, b) societal/civic, and c) personal growth (p. 21-2). Follow the link to access the public PDF file:

http://www.communityservicelearning.ca/en/documents/AComprehensiveFrameworkforCSL.pdf

2. In, Where’s the Learning in Service-Learning, Eyler and Giles (1999) offer a comprehensive, research based analysis of learning outcomes within the following categories: a) personal and interpersonal development, b) understanding and applying knowledge, d) psycho-social and ethical development and e) citizenship.

3. In the document Learning Reconsidered 2, service learning is listed as one of several activities that enhance the following student outcomes a) knowledge acquisition, integration and application, b) humanitarianism, and c) civic engagement. The following link provides access to the report, the Table is found on page 21-22:

https://www.naspa.org/images/uploads/main/Learning_Reconsidered_Report.pdf

4. Although less formal, McEwen (1996) divides service learning outcomes into learning and developmental categories. Learning outcomes include cognitive development and critical thinking, while developmental outcomes include psycho-social and identity development (McEwen, 1996, p. 87)

As service learning practitioners it is important to consider our personal attitudes and values toward service learning as it will impact our choices toward developing learning outcomes (Chambers, 2009).  For example, do you believe that the purpose of service learning is to have an immediate impact on the community? Or, do you believe that service-learning should have a transformational effect on students and the community?  Chambers (2009) describes the former view as the philanthropic approach, the latter as the social transformation approach (p. 79).

References

Chambers, T. (2009). A continuum of approaches to service-learning within Canadian post-secondary education. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 39(2), 77-100. Retrieved from www.ingentaconnect.com/content/csshe/cjhe

Eyler, J., & Giles, D. E. (1999). Where's the learning in service-learing? San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Gemmel, L. J., & Clayton, P. H. (2009). A comprehensive framework for community service-learning in Canada. Canadian Alliance for Community Service-Learning.

Jacoby, B. (1996). Service-learning in higher education: Concepts and practices. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Keeling, R. P. (2006). Learning reconsidered 2: Implementing a campus-wide focus on the student experience. ACPA.

Lennon, M. C., Frank, B., Humphreys, J., Lenton, R., Madsen, K., Omri, A., & Turner, R. (2014). Tuning: Identifyng and measuring sector-based learning outcomes in postsecondary education. Toronto, ON: Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario.

McEwen, M. K. (1996). Enhancing student learning and development through service-learning. In B. Jacoby, Service-Learning in Higher Education (pp. 53-91). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.