A conversation about new and challenging real-world learning possibilities
Sponsored by CCRD
Co-sponsored by Camp Fire USA Green Country Council, Career Services and
University Community Services, Community Action Project, Community Service Council, United Campus Ministries at TU & the Women Studies Program at TU
9/16/05
Nearly 75 students, community leaders, and faculty met at the University of Tulsa to learn about discuss service learning. Below is a summary of the presentation and discussion.
Emily Price, TU Student, served as the moderator for the forum and introduced the idea of “Service Learning (SL)” and how the idea for the forum came about. She first heard of SL from a friend in Seattle at the University of Washington. Emily was very interested in the prospects of an SL project, but wondered if SL opportunities are only available in big cities or at big schools. She soon learned that many of her peers share her interest in SL opportunities.
Martha Parrot, Ph.D., Department of Mathematics at Northeastern State University has written and published on the topic of SL. She prepared a packet of information for the audience for further information on SL, but focused her talk on conveying three essential ideas behind SL:
1) The foundation of SL is rooted in philosophy and history. Dewey believed that a true sense of self only fully develops by association with others. Further, Hollander has described SL as resting on the belief that not all wisdom resides on campus, but also resides in the community. This approach links theory and practice using a democratic approach to education.
2) An academic component/objective – SL is not simply a curriculum add-on or volunteer work, it is alignment of service with academic outcomes. Students actively participate in thoughtfully organized service experiences.
3) Reciprocity – SL is a way of meeting community needs while also fulfilling academic requirements/need. Both students and the community partner benefit from the SL interaction. SL is not: a school subject, an activity solely outside of class, an extra-curricular activity, or simply good deeds.
Dr. Parrot closed by outlining a model of phases to expect when creating SL programs:
Preparation phase
Action phase
Reflection phase
Celebration phase
Monica Barczak, Ph.D., Senior Research Analyst for the Community Action Project, spoke about the agency perspective on SL. She quickly pointed out that her experience with Emily Landry as her SL student was an SL project purely by coincidence/accident. Dr. Barczak coordinated the “Walk-a-Mile” program that matched state legislators with low-income constituents for one month, allowing the pairs to learn from each other and to learn what it might be like to “walk” in each others’ shoes through mutual benefit and respect. This event was state-wide and Dr. Barczak sent out a call for an intern to help her. She did not set out to create and SL experience. Many factors came together to provide the SL experience. First off, Emily Landry joined as the intern and saw a new opportunity within the project that another student may not have seen or been motivated to create for herself. Second, materials outlining the program were readily available, allowing Emily to prepare herself for the experience by learning the philosophy behind the project (to develop a participatory democracy and to become engaged in the political process on one’s own behalf). Emily immediately tapped into the philosophy and identified what she could bring to the experience using her academic background. Also, because the event was a novel creation, Emily quickly fell into a reciprocal role with Dr. Barczak as they shared creative ideas and organizational tasks to carry out the event smoothly. The flexibility of a new program and Emily’s trustworthiness propelled the reciprocity that took place.
Dr. Barczak explained that structure is crucial to a successful SL experience. She pointed out the flaws in Emily’s accidental experience. An academic component was missing, and no organized planning took place. A structured plan with resources and materials is much needed, along with a fixed work schedule. The reciprocity component came naturally in this case, but must not be overlooked when designing future SL opportunities.
Emily Landry, TU Student, then spoke of her perspective as a student. She is an English major with a concentration in Women’s Studies and she attributes her curiosity and motivation for the “Walk-a-Mile” intern position to her academic background and tendency to look at how privilege works in institutions. Before her SL experience, she did not have a way to move beyond being upset about the way things are in particular institutions. The possibilities of the project and connection with the community drew her to the position. She was grateful to have materials beforehand that contributed to her informed decision to take the internship. Her basic duties for the project involved working on two spreadsheets regarding poverty and public assistance access statistics. It was exciting for Emily to learn more about the state of Oklahoma and to understand particular aspects of the area. The spreadsheet was an enlightening tool to use. She learned that entire events can be organized this way, keeping up with commitments, schedules, etc. Emily felt trusted and responsible while performing her duties, and she was allowed to take a partnership role in liaison trainings for community agencies. The entire experience helped her to better understand how academic interests can be taken further and move beyond disapproval of institutions to actually doing something about it. “Walk-a-Mile” provided a clear link between Emily’s academic and experiential passions.
Mike Mills, Associate Dean of Students and Director of Career Services and University Community Service at the University of Tulsa, has been receiving several phone calls from community partners looking for student involvement. Current opportunities for students in the community are not set up as SL experiences, but Mr. Mills is hopeful that SL ideas will build and produce better opportunities for students. There are currently two formal ways for students to get involved in community service through TU:
1) College Work-Study – a certain number of these positions must take place in the community. TU has partnerships with 25 community agencies. Forty-nine students have been involved to date.
2) Public Service Internship Program – designed for juniors and seniors to work 3-hour positions at non-profit agencies. Eighty students have been partnered with 20 agencies to date; 9 students last year. However, there are none this term.
The room broke into 3 respective groups (students, faculty, agency representatives) to discuss SL and issues to implementing it in the Tulsa community. All groups gathered for a wrap-up discussion where each group shared their thoughts.
Wrap-up:
Faculty – examined the question of what and whether TU has a commitment to SL, particular in comparison to TU’s commitment to undergraduate research. They also explored structural issues such as funding, staffing, time, etc. and coordinating across all of these areas. They further discussed what it would mean to integrate service and academics in departments and curricula. There is a certain awkwardness of the academic component in that it implies critique of what one observes. Therefore, while students may be grateful for the opportunity to observe and take part in a community agency, the academic component may compel them to critique the organization. What are the implications for this? Faculty were also concerned about professionalism of all parties involved. Would contracts need to be made? Where would legal responsibilities fall? What happens when students fail to meet professional standards while representing TU or the community agency?
Another group of faculty shared their different experiences of what worked and didn’t. They evaluated the pros and cons of journaling, papers, and other academic projects in relation to SL. An important aspect of an SL project would be the relationship between faculty and community partners, knowing it will work and that all parties involved are providing input and commitment. Trust and communication would be key components for success. One concern is how to make the reciprocity principle obvious to students and not have them think it is simply a business, tourism, or charity opportunity.
Students – identified benefits and obstacles to implementing SL. Benefits include involvement in the Tulsa and other Oklahoma communities, which leads to retention of well-educated and qualified persons in this region, due to their investments in SL projects. SL experiences would also help build resumes and improve marketability of students, benefiting different majors in different ways. It further allows students to explore diverse interests and open possibilities for future endeavors. Specific obstacles might include transportation needs, class schedules/time, price/cost of commuting off campus, complicated communication between students, institutions, and academics, and conflicting time-lines (i.e. not all community projects can be started and completed within a semester). Some solutions may be to insert SL into the existing curriculum and providing summer programs with stipends. Graduate students added to the student perspective by discussing community needs and how an SL experience could be successfully implemented into graduate programs. In some cases forms of SL experiences may already take place by way of practicum experiences.
Community Agencies – stressed the structure of SL opportunities compared to volunteerism. SL would be more about teaching a life skill than academics, connecting curriculum with actual work. Supervision, structure, and having a physical area for students are imperative issues. One representative from the agencies suggested they might create a “blue book” for TU and surrounding schools that explains which organizations are willing to take students and would also provide information on what each agency does and what they want from students. Realistic time-lines for students would be semester-long projects, but ideally an SL experience would last 1 to 2 years or longer! Additional comments by agency members suggested that SL experiences can change lives and allow students to experience real work in the field they are considering for a career.
Dr. Parrot concluded by stressing the importance of beginning small, short-term SL opportunities to start, allowing for expansion as we learn, grow, and develop relationships.
Summary compiled by: Sara Tiegreen, TU graduate student