|
|
The nature of engagement between American campuses and communities is contested. This article is an invi-tation to reconsider why community-campus partnerships often look so different and have diverse and some-times negative outcomes. Using a cultural theory approach (Thompson, Ellis, & Wildavsky, 1990) to eluci-date the four main cultural frames that inform human behaviorÑhierarchist, individualistic, fatalistic, and egalitarianÑthis treatment maps these frames onto the broad terrain of community-campus partnerships. This exploration enables service-learning and other partnership building practitioners to more clearly rec-ognize and understand the preconceptions that influence partners' approaches. Because service-learning rhetoric is heavily biased toward egalitarian (reciprocal, mutual) relationship building, it does not neces-sarily ensure that all entities on and off campus understand or accept this approach. This application sug-gests several areas for future research as service-learning practitioners Òunlearn a belief systemÓ and work to build a new system in its place.
This article applies theories of giving from philanthropic studies to enhance understanding of service-learning relationships between students and community partners. Focusing on the participation motiva-tions, outcome expectations, and satisfaction levels of community partners who have recently completed work with service-learning students, the authors find that organizations and staff supervisors engaged in service-learning are motivated both by altruistic and self-serving factors. Staff supervisors and commu-nity partner organizations are motivated to give time, training, and a laboratory to enhance student learning. In return, community partners expect and generally receive valuable service from the students. The results suggest that the service-learning relationship be viewed as reciprocal in nature, as with other donor-recipient situations.
Supervisors from 40 community agencies working with a university-based service-learning program were interviewed regarding the extent of their input in service-learning program planning and implementation (Agency Voice), Interpersonal Relations with service-learning students, Perceived Benefit of the service-learning program to the agency, and their Perceptions of the University. Issues of diversity in the context of service-learning were considered. Support was found for two hypotheses: First, agency members' indi-cating more voice in program planning saw more benefits to their agency from taking part in the service-learning program. Secondly, the perception of benefits predicted agency members' positive perceptions of the university as a whole. Representatives of agencies with a longer history of participation in the ser-vice- learning program and from agencies involving larger numbers of service-learning students were more positive about some aspects of the relationship.
Service-learning researchers and practitioners agree that reflection is the essential link between community experience and academic learning: Òreflection is the hyphen in service-learningÓ (Eyler, 2001, p. 35). The theoretical and pedagogical foundations for service-learning reflection pay scant attention to the emotional content and context of student service experience or to the positive role emotion may play in helping students connect experience with academic study. This neglect needs to end. Recent research in cognitive psychology and neuroscience reveals emotion's central role throughout the thinking and learning process. We explore how inattention to emotion has molded service-learning research and practice, and then suggest ways to re-orient an approach to reflection to acknowledge the continuous interplay between the intellectual and the emotional throughout the reflective learning process.
This paper introduces a conceptual model for supporting the continued development of service-learning as a pedagogy of engagement. A logic diagram is used to facilitate understanding of service-learning. The model illustrates the (a) complex elements involved in creating or sustaining a strong program, (b) potential tensions within the field, and (c) evaluation requirements at the level of a program or campus. The logic model also identifies tensions and issues that merit ongoing discussion amongst those com-mitted to the continued development of service-learning in higher education.
Last Updated November 30, 2006
