|
-Curtis
Ogden
Community service learning is recognized by many teachers, students, policy makers,
youth workers, and community activists to be one of the most exciting educational
and social initiatives sweeping this country. In this article the author describes
the successes and challenges of ImPACT, a community-based service learning program,
and how it may compare with and inform school-based programs.
For anyone who has had their ears tuned to the current discussions around school
and social reform in this country, it should be no news that community and
service are buzzwords. Fewer people may know about the growing service learning
movement, which has engaged millions of K-12 and college students in service activity
tied to their education.
Service Learning Overview
The antecedents to the current service movement are many and go back as far as
the Civilian Conservation Corps of the 1930s. The last 30 years have witnessed the
birth of volunteer initiatives such as VISTA and the Peace Corps. In 1988, George
Bush called for a new volunteer service movement, which he dubbed "A Thousand
Points of Light." The National and Community Service Acts of 1990 and 1993 sought
to create a nationwide service system to engage Americans of all ages in meaningful
service to their communities. This legislation was intended to renew the ethic of
civic responsibility, create more volunteer opportunities, and remove barriers for
citizens to involve themselves in increased volunteer activity [5]. An integral part of this was a push for
service learning.
Service learning has been defined in numerous ways and through different forms of
implementation. In general, however, service learning refers to both a kind of education
and a philosophy. The kind of education it embodies is experiential and includes
both action (service) and reflection (writing or thinking about the service performed).
The pioneers of the service learning movement emphasized the need for practical application
of academic skills in real life situations and in meeting actual community needs
[1].
Service learning as a philosophy holds the ideals of community, citizenship, and
democracy as goals for engagement. In a school-based setting, service learning is
looked to as a revitalizing tool for curricula and young minds. According to Carol
Kinsley, in her article "Community Service Learning as Pedagogy,"
"Many educators have noted that American youth are isolated and alienated
from society and they recommend community service learning as part of their schooling
as a way to reconnect youth and help them gain a sense of community." [4]
Community-based service learning is implemented by community agencies and organizations
and shares many of the same goals.
As more schools and agencies embrace service learning, some practitioners (including
myself) worry that it might lose its potential as a tool for social change.* In this
article, along with presenting ImPACT, I will also discuss how a youth-centered and
holistic approach to service learning is effective in achieving profound individual
and social transformation.
The Roots of ImPACT
In 1994, I returned to the United States having spent 18 months in southern Africa
doing community and youth development work. While working with "street children"
in Harare, Zimbabwe, I was introduced to an educational approach which built on the
strengths of individuals and developed their consciousness of the world around them.
I learned that many of the children on the streets of Harare had developed remarkable
street-smarts, and were nothing like the helpless objects of charity that many people
made them out to be. Most of these youth were very skilled, and our aim was to tap
into their strengths.
We worked with these young people and their communities to identify problems in their
lives and help them to come up with their own solutions. The empowering techniques
I learned were inspired by the writings of the Brazilian popular educator, Paulo
Freire, whose work validated disenfranchised people and helped them to take control
of their own lives. One result of our efforts was a community school, which used
local resources and designed its own curriculum to develop appropriate skills to
meet real life needs.
Through this experience I began to look critically at my own education in the United
States. Like many of my generational peers, I was alienated from my ability to be
self-directed, or to analyze and act upon my world. This insight, along with lessons
learned in Harare, inspired me to apply my experiences to youth work here at home.
When I discovered The Learning Web in Ithaca, New York, it was clear that I had found
the right place to build on my vision.
The Learning Web was founded in 1972 as a project of the Center for Religion, Ethics,
and Social Policy (CRESP) at Cornell University. Now independent, its mission is
to provide young people, who may be disengaged from school and society, with experiential
learning opportunities. The Learning Web apprenticeship program was designed to connect
young people with adult mentors in the community for the purpose of learning about
and interacting with their surroundings. Through a guided process of exploration,
young people not only learn work skills, but also are empowered to be more self-directed
and confident in their learning and lives. Essentially, it is the young participants
who define each experience by expressing their interests and curiosities to staff,
who then find an appropriate placement. This youth-centered approach carried over
into the development of a service learning program in 1992. From 1994 until 1998
I was coordinator of this program, which came to be known as ImPACT (or the Importance
of Participating, Acting, and Coming Together).
ImPACT Essentials
The Learning Web's philosophy meshed well with my vision of empowering young
people to contribute to and change their community. But as I plunged into local high
schools, to muster enthusiasm and participants, I discovered a potential source of
student resistance: many young people were turned off by school and participation
in their community because they lacked a voice in either setting. Furthermore, I
repeatedly heard negative comments about education and community service, which were
identified as boring, forced, and even forms of punishment.
When I asked the young people what might be done to change their feelings, many raised
the issue of choice. They had little say in their classes and did not feel connected
to their community. When comunity projects were assigned, they felt little personal
investment. Very rarely were they asked for their thoughts and opinions; many felt
they were treated as if they had nothing to offer.
Our first
goal was to redefine "participation" to include discussing feelings, thoughts,
and experiences before carrying out a prescribed service learning project--thus making
service work relevant to the experiences of the participants.
This is where ImPACT began: voice and choice. Our first goal was to redefine
"participation" to include discussing feelings, thoughts, and experiences
before carrying out a prescribed service learning project--thus making service work
relevant to the experiences of the participants. I started off with two questions:
"What does community service mean to you?" and "What is your ideal
form of service?" There was always a vast array of different responses to these
questions. As we discussed the reasons for the differences between people's choices,
the youth raised issues of impact, intimacy, immediacy, and sustainability. They
also identified emotional, cultural, moral, intellectual, and physical factors. I
attempted to acknowledge all perspectives and experiences, hoping to increase student
investment and set the stage for a youth-driven approach to service learning.
ImPACT ran as an extracurricular after-school program, which met twice a week for
three hours over a five-month period. Students participated in the program as volunteers
and, though they did not get course credit for their involvement, many used the experience
to complete assignments for their classes or get extra credit. Part of my role was
to keep participants' teachers informed of our activities in the event that an academic
connection might be made. Each group numbered between 10 and 12 students. Overall,
the program included the following five stages, which are discussed in the sections
that follow:
- Recruitment and introduction
to service
- Group building
- Conducting community research
- Selection and implementation
of project(s)
- Evaluation and celebration
Recruitment and introduction
to service
Recruitment usually entailed classroom presentations or student assemblies and
was followed by an informational meeting for interested students. During this meeting
I showed a video presenting young people throughout the U.S. taking action
in their communities. Because the video was produced by, for, and with teens, it
appealed to the youth. Afterwards, discussion often led to comparisons between the
communities and issues portrayed in the video and those of the viewers. This process
helped students to identify issues that might be addressed by the new group, and
began to make the program relevant to their lives.
Group building
Once a small group was formed, we proceeded with group building exercises,
including activities focusing on personal interests and skills. To further validate
the youth, we explored such questions as:What do you do well and how can you apply
your talents to service work? What are you interested in and how can we channel these
interests into our work? These discussions were open-ended, and expanded the
realm of possibilities for action.
Early on in the team-building process, I organized a project to give everyone "a
taste of service" in the area of housing renovations. Facilitators introduced
each new group to painting or basic maintenance work in low-income housing units.
This experience became an opportunity for reflection, when we later discussed reactions
to the project. Many youth enjoyed the experience because they liked working as a
group, or they enjoyed painting or doing demolition work. Others were less enthusiastic,
claiming that it was only "busy work," or that working for a couple of
hours was not much of a contribution. In one case, a young woman raised the question
of whether we might be doing free work for a deadbeat landlord. These discussions
raised participants' awareness of the complexity of service work as well as potential
considerations in the selection of future projects.
Conducting community research
The next step, community investigation, allowed participants to develop a meaningful
context for their work and appreciation of the issues at play in their community.
Various techniques, including observation exercises, walking tours, attending public
events, skimming local newspapers, conducting "on the street" interviews,
handing out surveys, talking to local historians and elders, and studying maps, contributed
to the research initiative. Participants also became familiar with "asset mapping"--i.e.,
identifying resources in the community such as social service agencies. Together,
these initiatives helped to deepen our knowledge of the community and focus our efforts.
Selection and implementation of project(s)
After two or three weeks of research, the time arrived for the group to decide
which project(s) it wished to pursue. Our goal was to achieve consensus, and the
decision-making process focused on factors such as time, resources, impact, and feasibility.
The number and nature of projects varied from group to group and from community to
community. Some included joining ongoing initiatives; others were original undertakings.
They ran the gamut from the political to the "warm and fuzzy." The list
included:
- Lobbying for and establishing
a youth chair on a local government committee
- Organizing a benefit concert
for family social services
- Producing a magazine on ways
youth can contribute to their community
- Restoring historic cemeteries
and monuments
- Planting and cultivating a garden
for a soup kitchen
- Doing trail work for state parks
- Removing graffiti from a playground
- Leading workshops with younger
children about community service
The process of selection and implemention
of projects also includes ongoing reflection on the part of both students and staff.
As has been widely noted in the literature on service learning, reflection is key
to growth through service experiences. ImPACT students thought, talked, and wrote
about their experiences throughout the program in a number of ways:
- Participating in discussion circles
- Keeping journals of their experiences
- Watching movies related to projects
and discussing the relevance to their experiences
- Speaking with invited journalists
about their experiences
- Writing newspaper articles
- Presenting to and sharing ideas
with college service groups
The fact that ImPACT functioned
in a group setting generated many informal and spontaneous opportunities for reflection.
Often these moments occurred during car rides or walks to and from projects. The
fashion in which these discussions developed contributed to the wide-ranging connections
made between our work and the lives of the participants. Through this process the
youth were encouraged to invest their full selves in the program and to look at service
and those with whom they worked (or served) in a holistic light.
Evaluation and Celebration
By the end of the program cycle, each group developed many insights into the
needs of their community which they were unable to address in our time together.
In an effort to capture these insights, I used an evaluative process to not only
rate and review our accomplishments, but also make recommendations for future work
and projects in the community. Written and verbal evaluations also focused on ways
in which the overall program could be improved. Some participants actually helped
plan and give presentations for recruitment at other schools, which brought the process
full circle.
I also worked with each group to plan a celebration of our accomplishments. Ultimately
each group planned its own celebration, though I asked that it relate in some way
to their service work. One group decided to hold a pot-luck dinner at an elementary
school where it had done a project. We invited local community leaders, family, and
friends, and presented a video tape of our efforts and handed out achievement awards
to the participants. We also presented a list of recommended community changes to
local officials.
I was always struck by the transformations that occurred in the participants and
the community. Many adults were impressed by the accomplishments of the group and
their desire to take action. City and town officials began to call on group members
to offer their insights on community issues, a process that created new roles and
confidence for many of the youth (see the sidebar "Reflections on the Learn
and Service America Conference"). Perhaps more than anything else, however,
ImPACT left participants with a sense of new possibilities. Community service was
no longer drudgery or duty, but a very personal and meaningful undertaking.
I was always
struck by the transformations that occurred in the participants and the community
... Community service was no longer drudgery or duty, but a very personal and meaningful
undertaking.
|
|
| |
Challenges in Facilitating
ImPACT
One of the mixed blessings of ImPACT was that participants often wanted to continue
their service work beyond our five months together. In fact, part of my vision in
developing the program was to give youth the tools and motivation to organize projects
on their own. But this process was not without its challenges, such as the following:
- Lack of leverage on the
part of youth. In some instances I was able to work with the group to recruit
a teacher, parent, or youth worker to serve as an advocate. Other groups attempted
to go it alone, but without an adult representative, inevitably ran into obstacles
such as lack of meeting space, transportation, and resources.
- Lack of time. The
grant I received to run the program stipulated that I move around the county's six
school districts in five-month periods. This truncated the time we had for developing
skills and building momentum for independence.
- Lack of continuity.
Throughout each year I organized a number of retreats and reunions, which brought
current and older groups together to undertake big projects and share experiences.
These were often powerful gatherings and seemed to provide some sense of continuity
for old participants, but they did not replace weekly meetings and ongoing projects.
Obviously, this also speaks to the challenge of limited funding for community-based
projects.
Community-Based Versus School-Based
Service Learning Models
In fact, because of unfortunate funding priorities, the ImPACT program is now
defunct. Over the years, emphasis from the program's funding source was placed
on academic connections and ultimately moving toward a school-based program. The
last year of the program, we obliged by teaching ImPACT as a class in an alternative
school setting. Though the program functioned well, it was only a step toward locating
the model more firmly within a school structure that would squash its community-based
vitality. The funders viewed integration into the school curriculum as a more legitimate
and effective educational enterprise. In my opinion, however, this attitude devalues
the capacity of community-based organizations (CBOs) like the Learning Web to provide
powerful learning and development opportunities for young people.
The act of absorbing ImPACT (and other programs like it) into school structures is
risky business. Problems include serious limitations posed by accountability structures,
state curriculum mandates, insurance regulations, scheduling, and faculty time. In
addition, the introduction of service learning in many schools has become a carrot,
to make classroom learning more interesting, rather than a tool for real social change.
CBOs often occupy positions in their communities that give them a unique ability
to guide young people in a more holistic manner [3].
This is not to invalidate school-based learning, but simply to point out the value
of maintaining community-based models. As one of my students said in response to
the suggestion that ImPACT become part of school, "You should keep it separate
because the community creates a wider spectrum to work in. I like the freedom."
The introduction
of service learning in many schools has become a carrot, to make classroom learning
more interesting, rather than a tool for real social change. CBOs often occupy positions
in their communities that give them a unique ability to guide young people in a more
holistic manner.
The psychologist Jerome Bruner once wrote that,
"Education must . . . be not only a process that transmits culture but also
one that provides alternate views of the world and strengthens the will to explore
them." [2]
This, in my mind, is what truly transformational education is all about. The power
of ImPACT was that it encouraged young people to creatively invest their complete
selves in the community. Students often criticize schools because they believe there
is no place for their thoughts, ideas, and opinions. They do not feel whole or inspired
to learn. This is a potential limitation for school-based service learning as well.
I hope that this presentation has indicated the importance of maintaining community-based
service learning programs. However, I do believe that there is room for partnerships
between schools and CBOs to carry out the vision of the service learning pioneers.
I also hope that across all learning environments there will be a stronger push to
make service learning relevant to the lives and experiences of youth of all backgrounds,
to encourage young people to ask difficult questions about their communities and
society, and to maintain an awareness of life beyond the classroom as the ultimate
teacher.
References
1. Alliance
for Service-Learning in Education Reform. (1995). Standards of quality for school-based
and community-based service-learning. Alexandria: ASLER. (back)
2. Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press. (back)
3. Heath, S.B. and McLaughlin, M.W. (1994). The best of both worlds:
Connecting schools and community youth organizations for all-day, all-year learning.
Educational Adminstration Quarterly. 30 (3): 278-300. (back)
4. Kinsley, C. (1993). Community service learning as pedagogy. Equity
and Excellence in Education, 26 (2): 53-59. (back)
5. Sagawa, S. and Halperin, S. (eds.). (1993). Visions of service:
The future of the national and community service act. Washington, D.C.: National
Women's Law Center and American Youth Policy Forum. (back)
Author Bio
Curtis Ogden currently works for the Center
for Teen Empowerment in Boston. Prior to this position, he was Coordinator of the
ImPACT service learning program at The Learning Web in Ithaca, New York. He has also
worked with youth in Harare, Zimbabwe. He holds a B.A. in anthropology from the University
of Michigan and has written and presented on the topics of service learning, youth
empowerment, and social change. Most recently he co-edited a book with Jeff Claus
entitled Service Learning for Youth Empowerment and Social Change (Peter Lang,
1999). This fall he will begin pursuing a Master's degree at the Harvard Divinity
School and Harvard Graduate School of Education.
|
|
