IARSLCE Annual Conference Pre-conference sessions Wednesday, November 6, 2013 Full-Day Sessions: $125 Half-Day Sessions: $70

middleweightscourgeΠολεοδομικά Έργα

29 Νοε 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 6 μήνες)

59 εμφανίσεις


IARSLCE Annual Conference

conference sessions

Wednesday, November 6, 2013

Day Sessions: $125

Day Sessions: $70


(Full Day)

Reinvigorating Community Knowing Through Focus Group Research


Robert Shumer,
University of Minnesota

Jeffrey Howard, Depaul University

Session Description

While much focus has been on student learning, student behavior, and institutional change and impact,
Giles and Cruz (Fall 2000) suggest the “lack of research on the community
dimensions of service
is a glaring omission in the literature.” They recommend developing a model for doing research with
community partners should include a focus on the process and outcomes of service
learning and civic
engagement. The researc
h should be directed at the university
community partnership and the
methods/approach should include a participatory action research approach. While there are many
approaches to doing participatory research, conducting focus groups is an especially conveni
ent and
effective way of gathering information from community participants. Developed as a method to conduct
special group interviews, it can be effectively used by relative novices to collect information through
informal means and then data analyzed to b
e responsive to those who participate (Krueger, 1988;
Fontana and Frey, 1994).

In this session Shumer and Howard will convene a group of researchers from around the country to
review the basic principles of focus group methodology and then to actually c
onduct a series of focus
groups throughout the City of Omaha to determine what impact such programs are having and to
generate a list of new efforts desired by the organizations to improve their effectiveness. The team will
spend approximately one to one
and one
half hours at the beginning of the session discussing the
process of conducting focus group research, partially conducting a mock interview for the participants.
After the initial training, the participating teams will then travel to community org
anizations to conduct a
five minute/one hour focus group to address three major areas: 1) what is the nature of the
involvement of university/secondary school students with the organization, 2) what are the three major
impacts that occur as a result
of these programs, and 3) what additional action/services would you like
universities/secondary schools to provide in order to improve the operation of your programs?

community focus groups will be implemented, taking approximately two hours of time fo
r the meetings
and a short break for lunch. Then, researchers will return to the conference to debrief and to begin to
assess/analyze the notes taken at the meetings. Group analysis will reveal some preliminary findings
about general activities and trend
s. Further analysis will be conducted by the organizing team

and plans
for reporting the results will be developed.

The pre
conference presenters will arrange with active
researchers/evaluators in Omaha to continue the assessment and to report on the fin



(Full Day)

Learning from Community: Community Outcome Assessment Best Practices and Insights in
Global Service



Eric Hartman, Providence College

Richard Kiely, Cornell University

Cynthia Toms Smedley,
Notre Dame Center for Social Concerns

Nora Reynolds, Temple University

Mireille Cronin Mather, Foundation for Sustainable Development

Micah Gregory, Amizade Global Service

Session Description:

Despite the increased attention
and burgeoning par

Global Service Learning (GSL)
, there
has been very little effort to systematically determine how well and in what ways short
term, immersive
volunteerism and various forms of global service
learning contribute positively to community development
(Ruiz, Warchal, Chapdelaine, & Wells, 2

While reciprocity, partnership, and respect for community
are salient within the mission of GSL (Chisolm, 2003; Kiely & Nielsen, 2004) and many of these programs
consider participatory approaches in their program design (i.e., working

and not
there remains very little research to evaluate its actual effects on host communities. Thus, the ethical
practice of global service learning and global volunteerism requires participants and institutions to
examine their potential impacts
on host communities

particularly in developing country settings

devise methods of research that capture the experience and voice of the community.

his workshop will: (1) share current lessons learned on community impact assessments within the field
of service
learning and international development, and (2) offer participants the opportunity to
collaboratively workshop, advance, and strengthen their own research and evaluation designs for
community impact assessment within immersive global service
earning programs. The day will begin by
demonstrating how four recent global service
learning research and evaluation efforts were developed
(Cronin Mather, 2013; Hartman & Chaire, 2012; Toms Smedley, 2013; Reynolds, 2013), how they drew
from insights from

the service
learning field as well as from other fields (i.e., community and eco
development, engineering),
and lessons learned through their implementation and iterative
improvements. The session will turn quickly to how this leading edge research s
upports, complicates, or
negates assumptions regarding best practices in global service
learning (Bringle, Hatcher, & Jones, 2011;
Hartman, Kiely, Friedrichs, & Boettcher, 2013) and then focus the majority of the time in the afternoon on
how workshop atten
dees can develop their own partnership evaluations, drawing on established best
practices, new insights, and rubrics developed specifically for g
lobal service
learning research.

As a result of the session, participants will be able to:


Describe and

explain diverse research methods and pedagogical tools for assessing how global
and immersive service
learning programs impact communities in a variety of contexts;


Identify how approaches to community engaged research can be used to assess comm
unity needs
and assets, evaluate pro
gram impact and inform policy;


Design a research and/or community assessment plan in collaboration with fellow participants and




Discovering Omaha Community:
Reciprocal Partnerships that Inform Service Learning Practice


Lucy Garza Westbrook, UNO Service Learning Academy

ession Description:

Community partners are our greatest resources for co
educating students and faculty about issues and
needs in the community. As on


ground experts in their fields, they bring understanding to problems
that go beyond textbook case studies, adding dimen
sions of learning that are best explored outside of the
classroom. Oftentimes community partners are overlooked as active participants in the development of
service learning projects and may be seen solely as the recipients of service. Little notice is giv
en to how
their partnership serves our students and our institution through providing the space for professional and
civic learning.

Our excursion will explore the still pronounced lines of segregation within Omaha, following routes that
represent the mar
ked limits of city development. We begin the tour by skirting the fine line between the
conference area in newly developed “NoDo” and moving into the predominately African American North
Omaha community. We will visit the historical birth site of Malcolm X
, and partake in a “coffee break” at
the Joslyn Art Museum, Omaha’s high art space. We will make our way to the revived old stockyards
neighborhood in South Omaha, Omaha’s historical hotbed for human mobility waves. In South O we will
visit a youth

organization and a senior center, highlighting two ends of the immigration integration
spectrum representing the community’s response to growth and neighborhood development.
the tour participants will learn from community partners about how ser
vice learning fits with their
organization’s mission and operations as well as their journey of relationship development with

Project issues include working with youth, services for elders, immigration and integration, civil
rights, the arts, in
clusion and working with diverse groups. Each stop will also touch on the
interdisciplinary nature of the site’s service learning projects.
We end the tour with lunch and a chat with
partners from a signature project that seeks to build community with indi
genous youth, guided by
community experts.

This program is a recipient of the Nebraska’s First Lady’s 2013 Service Learning
Program award.




Getting the Grant!: Grant Writing for Service


Joy Doll, Creighton


Session Description:

The natural reciprocity of service
learning makes it a prime candidate for receiving grant funds

historically, there have been funding streams specifically available to support service
learning projects.
But how do you find the grants? Then, how do you design and write a proposal that is likely to receive
With the grant process becoming
more competitive and funding less available, grant writers
need to be strategic and creative in researching, networking, and program development to ensure finding
the fulfillment between the funder’s priorities and the proposed services (Doll, 2010).

In t
his workshop, we will focus on how innovative ideas can be the foundation for garnering external
funding to support the development and implementation of service
learning programs that address
societal needs (Doll, 2010).

This session will provide a pract
ical and engaged approach to grant writing
geared specifically towards individuals involved in service
learning. The session will focus on the

The process and skills needed
to determine when grant funding is appropriate to support a
program or r
esearch project (Falk, 2006)

Discuss the needs and how
to of developing collaboration both with colleagues and community
partners to seek external funding (CCPH, 2006)

Exploration into the world of grants including grant models, searching for grants and co
terminology used with grants (Dahlen, 2001)

Instructions and ideas for completing a community assessment

Grant writing techniques and procedures including:

Drafting the problem statement or statement of need


Evaluation planning

Program imp

A summary of the grant review process

Discussion on accountability measures one funding is granted

The next steps if a proposal is rejected

Sample grants will be provided along with discussion of the lessons learned from an experienced grant
writer in the area of service
learning that has been through the process of searching, writing and
implementing local and federal funding.




Discovery through Dissonance: Investigating Threshold Concepts and Threshold


Barbara Harrison, Brock University

Patti Clayton, PHC Ventures

Session Description:

Threshold concepts (TCs) are the “jewels in the curriculum” (Land, Cousin, Meyer & Davies, 2005, p. 57)
that lead to significantly different ways
of thinking about a subject; understanding them is requisite to
thinking from the perspective of that subject. These concepts are referred to as TCs because “if we
[understood them] different things would come into view, … but there is a space between [whe
re we
currently are and that understanding] where we have to integrate new things and let go of old things”
(Land, 2011)
Although developed in the context of student learning within disciplines, TC theory is being
applied to faculty as learners of innovat
ive pedagogies and is shedding light on difficulties experienced by
instructors as they navigate transitions in their understanding of and approaches to teaching and learning
(e.g., Bunnell & Bernstein, 2012; Harrison & Clayton, 2012; King & Felten, 2012).

It is our contention that
learning how to teach, learn, serve, and generate knowledge through
learning and community
engagement (

poses threshold challenges and opportunities for faculty, students, and community
members alike. The first quest
ion we are investigating is:
What is it about the nature of SLCE that might
function as TCs for those learning to undertake it meaningfully?

Our second question is
: H
ow do partners
in SLCE learn the TCs associated with undertaking it?

In this highly inter
active session, f
acilitators will share theory on
threshold concepts

encounters with dissonance through which such concepts may be learned.
Participants will join ongoing examination of the relevance of this theory to students, faculty, and
community members as they teach, learn, serve, and generate knowledge through SLCE

contributing to the development of the theory and its implications for research and practice in SLCE.

Participants will experience the method used in our inquiry, engaging in autoethnography to
“retrospectively and selectively [reflect on] epiphan
ies” (Ellis, Adams, & Bochner, 2011, para. 3) in their
own proces
s of learning to undertake SLCE.

Autoethnography reveals the threshold
ness of TCs and
deepens understanding of the process of TEs. It allows investigation of such questions as how each
ory of partner in SLCE conceptualizes and navigates the challenges of learning to undertake the




Measuring and Monitoring Collective Impact: Designing Institutional and System
Wide Metrics for
Community Engagement


Emily Janke, University of North Carolina at Greensboro

Andy Furco, University of Minnesota

Barbara Holland, Portland State University, University of Sydney, University of North Carolina at

Greensboro, IUPUI

Kristin Medlin,
University of North Carolina at Greensboro

John Saltmarsh, University of Massachusetts


Session Description:

Why is it important to collect data on community engagement? What aspects of community engagement
are most important to collect? What strategies are most effective to capture data that describes the
collective activity and impact of an institution or a uni
versity system?
Gaining a better sense of who is
doing what, where, when, with whom, for what purposes, and to what ends is important for efficient and
effective communicati
ng, coordinating, and planning.
To inform the growth, sustainability, and
nt of community engagement, institutions must have accurate and comprehensive data for
internal prioritization and planning, as well as for external reporting and image management.

An effective
strategy facilitates institutional self
assessment and self
udy and provides a way to bring the disparate
parts of the campus together in ways that advance a unified agenda through greater data
collection and
grounded conversations. Today, most campuses continue to struggle to collect and use data to in a
istent manner, over time, as a strategy to inform, improve, and advance infrastructure, practice, and
outcomes related to community
university partnerships.

Facilitators of t
his pre
conference will ask participants to share their motivations for collect
ing data, what
types of data they would like to collect, and the planned uses for data. Presenters will describe the state
of the field, share contemporary trends and theories that inform the process of collecting data on
engagement, and share the experien
ces, strategies, and tools developed by leaders of metrics initiat
at two university systems:

The University of Minnesota (U of M) has charged an Accounting and Assessment Task Force to
explore the development and implementation of protocols and proced
ures that can systematically
account for the number of public engagement project activities, levels of participation, and overall
impacts of activities on students, faculty, staff, the community, and the institution. Key areas for
community engagement asse
ssment were established and were aligned with University
priorities and metric goals. The community engagement metrics were then prioritized and an
action plan for systematizing the data collection procedures

put in place.

The University of North

Carolina has charged a Community Engagement Metrics and Economic
Development Metrics Task Forces to develop

concise sets of indicators, or metrics, that all 16
UNC campuses could use to assess “progress in community engagement and economic

he Task Force established six common metric areas and tested the feasibility
and utility of the metrics and measures through a trial phase prior to establishing final
recommendations for annual, system
wide collection.




Defining Institutional Best Practices of Civic Engagement Within Non
Traditional Academic


Rachel Edens, Tusculum College

Session Description

workshop stems from a research initiative begun in November 2010 by then AmeriCorps VISTA
Rachel Edens, who now serves as Director of the Center of Civic Advancement at Tusculum

Tusculum is one of seven North American institutions of higher educa
tion operating on a
Focused Calendar, or “Block” scheduling system.

On this schedule, students take one class at a time,
3.5 hours per day, for an
day period, commonly referred to as a Block
As an institution operating on
this unique schedule,
Tusculum College seeks to initiate a dialogue, lead research

and build community
around addressing how academic service
learning can be most effective, not only among her Focused
Calendar peers, but also at institutions of higher education that employ Qua
rters, Winter Terms, Summer
Sessions and Alternative Breaks.

The workshop addresses this issue not only from an Institutional perspective, but also from the
perspective of partnering organizations and the community at large.

Drawing on the article “Why
Learning Is Bad” (Eby, 1998)
along with resources from current scholarship, including those of Campus
Compact and the American Association of Colleges and Universities, participants will collaborate to
define Best Practices and their implementation

While addressing technical course construction
considerations, the workshop delves further into examining the greater role of civic education in higher
education and emphasizes campus
community partnerships

including a strong community economic
ent element.

Building on the current research of Campus Compact (Wittman & Crews, 2012),
the workshop models how non
traditional institutions can utilize place
based community outreach as a
way to build continuity across shortened academic terms.

ants in this workshop will come away
with tools and resources for faculty training, syllabi creation

and community partnership building specific
to the unique needs of faculty members and service
learning practitioners at Focused Calendar
institutions, as

well as those whose programming includes Winter Terms, Summer Sessions, or
Alternative Breaks.




Investigating Palmer's 'Habits of the Heart that Make Democracy Possible' as Civic Learning Goals
and Democratic Engagement
Design Principles


Patti Clayton, PHC Ventures

John Fenner, Center for Courage and Renewal

Session Description

This workshop leverages
Palmer’s participation in the conference by inviting participants to
collaborate with one of his co
lleagues at the Center for Courage & Renewal and an established
scholar in SLCE in developing applications of the “habits of the heart that make democracy
possible” to research and practice in our field

specifically, using them
as a framework
conceptualizing civic learning and for designing civic education.

Healing the Heart of Democracy
Palmer posits the five “habits” as “deeply ingrained ways of seeing,
being and responding … [that] … are critical to sustaining a democracy” (pp. 44


An understanding that we are all in this together

An appreciation of the value of “otherness”

An a
bility to hold tension in life
giving ways

A sense of personal voice and agency

A capacity to create community

Palmer asserts that our becoming “intentional, not accidental, citizens” (p. 46) depends on cultivating
these habits and that educational insti
tutions are among the primary venues in which they are “formed or
deformed (p. 120). He calls for approaches to cultivating them that “practice what they preach” (p. 131)
and points to service
learning as an example.

In this session we will explore what
it means for the democratic pedagogies and partnerships at the heart
of democratic community engagement to both embody
and cultivate these habits.
articipants in this
session will
further develop, refine, and nuance the “habits” as potential civic learnin

goals in and design
tures of each of our unique

, by


each of the “habits” into constitutive knowledge,
skills, and attitudes
and (b)

our own

in terms of the ways in which we and our partners do
and do not walk the talk of the “habits” in our work together

and generate concrete ideas for enhancing
our practice accordingly
. We will also develop questions to guide an associated research agenda.

The discussion
may give rise not only to deeper understanding of the “habits” as Palmer presents them
but also articulation of both previously unacknowledged dimensions of them and additional “habits” as
well as recommendations related to their implementat
ion and cultivation in higher education. This
workshop will launch a community of practitioner
scholars focused on just such theory
based inquiry.

Facilitators invite students, faculty, staff, and community members to join us in
interactive, reflective, and co
created inquiry.


Conference Session


Measuring Cognitive Outcomes of Service
Learning: Adapting Tools for Research and


Peggy Fitch, Central College

Pamela Steinke, St. Francis

Session Description

The purpose of this session is to i
ntroduce participants to the Problem
Solving Analysis Protocol (P
SAP) and Cognitive Learning Scale (CLS), two instruments that can be used to measure outcomes of
learning related t
o problem
solving, critical thinking, and student perceptions of academic

se two

tools are grounded in theory and have been derived from prior research on best
practices in s

SAP is based on Eyler and Giles’ (1999) found
a瑩潮慬⁲敳敡rc栠hn 瑣潭es ⁳敲eice
structured interview to assess students’ analyses of complex social
灲潢p敭s⁳畣栠hs⁰ v敲eyr⁨ m敬敳s湥ss⁴ 慴aw敲攠牥e慴敤⁴漠牥o敮琠t敲eice

T桥⁰牥 敮瑥rs⁡ 慰瑥搠dhe
ir i湴敲eiew q略s瑩o湳⁡ 搠d潤i湧⁣慴agori敳⁴ ⁣r敡t攠
愠wri瑴敮⁰ 潴ocol⁴ 慴ac慮 扥⁵ e搠d漠o敡s畲攠灲u扬em
s潬vin朠g渠nh攠e潮t數琠tf⁡ 灡rtic畬慲a
c潵rs攠er⁤ sci灬i湥
p瑥i湫攠en搠䙩瑣栬′ 〳F.

䵯r敯v敲Ⱐ瑨e⁦潲o慴a潦⁴ 攠er潴oc潬 is⁳畣栠h桡琠
i琠t慮 b
攠慤a灴pd⁴ ⁳p散ific⁰牯扬敭s爠 ss略s⁥ c潵湴nr敤 i渠n敲vice

T桥⁃䱓 睡w⁤ si杮e搠d漠灲潶i摥 慮 敡sy 瑯t畳攬es敬f
桡琠睥w攠潦瑥t⁵ 敤⁩渠牥n敡rc栠h畴uw敲攠ei杨ly c潮f潵湤e搠
S瑥i湫攠e B畲敳栬h㈰0㈩2

By comparing students’ pre
c潵rs攠牡ei湧s ⁰物潲o
l敡rnin朠gx灥ri敮c敳 睩瑨⁴桥ir⁰潳t
c潵rs攠牡瑩湧s ⁲散敮琠t敲eice
l敡rni湧 數灥ri敮c敳Ⱐ瑨攠
䍌C 灲p
vid敳⁡ m潲攠潢j散瑩v攠en
alysis of students’ responses.

c畲瑨敲Ⱐ瑨e⁃ p 數灬ici瑬y
瑡牧整t⁴ 潳攠e潧湩tiv攠e畴u潭敳⁴ 慴a慲攠a潳琠牥t敶an琠瑯⁳敲eice
l敡rni湧 i渠灲pvi潵s
r敳敡rc栠h畣栠hs⁡ 灬ic慴io渠nf湯wl敤g攠en搠d数t栠慮搠d潭灬數ity ⁵ 摥rs瑡湤i湧

灲潢p敭s⁡ 搠dss略s

p灥cificallyⰠI慣ili瑡瑯牳 ⁴ is⁳敳si潮 睩llW

Tr慩渠n慲瑩ci灡n瑳⁨ w 瑯tsc潲攠瑨o⁐
SAP⁵ i湧⁴桥⁇l潢al⁃ 摩n朠g畢ric.

䑥D潮s瑲慴a⁨ w⁴漠o摡灴 瑨t P
SAP by 摥vel潰in朠gss略⁳瑡t敭敮瑳⁡ o畴ua畴u敮瑩c 灲潢l敭s
intersection between community partners’ needs and relevant course content.

䑥D潮s瑲慴a⁵ 敳 ⁴ 攠e䱓.

E灬潲攠ways⁴ 慮alyze⁴ 攠e慴愠ar潭⁥ c栠h湳瑲畭敮琠t湤⁨ 眠瑯w畳攠eh攠牥e畬瑳⁢ 瑨⁦潲o
le慲湩湧⁰ 慣瑩c攮

䡥Hp⁰ rticip慮瑳⁰l慮⁴ e⁤敶elo灭敮琠tf⁴ 敩r睮敡s畲敳 ⁣潧ni瑩v攠潵瑣omes ⁳敲eic攠
l敡rnin朠g潲⁲敳敡rc栠hr⁡ s敳sm敮琠t潲⁩m灲潶敭敮琮


10 (

Getting Service
Learning Research and Community
Engaged Scholarship


Jeffrey Howard, Steans Center, Depaul University

Barbara Holland, Independent Consultant

Session Description:

s faculty reinvigorate their scholarship, they need to better understand how they can increase their
chances to get this work published. This workshop will do that!


will build faculty familiarity with
trajectories of service
learning and community
ged scholarship and build their capacity to undertake
such research and get it published.

here are many directions service
learning research can take, such as research related to student
academic, civic, and multicultural learning outcomes; faculty moti
vations, perceived impediments, etc.;
community impacts and partnerships; and
other contemporary questions.
There are also opportunities for
engaged scholarship, such as the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL), the
nt in which faculty themselves are involved in research with communities for
mutual benefit, and the scholarship

engagement in which faculty study some aspect of campus
community engagement.

will illustrate these various research directio
ns and manifestations, demonstrate how they map
onto Boyer’s concepts of scholarship, and provide examples of published articles related to each of these

We will

the Glassick scholarship assessment criteria and example
s of journal revie
and then apply those to one or more articles submitted to one of the journals (
Michigan Journal of
Community Service Learning

Metropolitan Universities Journal
) edited by the two presenters

articles that will have been sent to
attendees pri
or to the workshop. We will then turn to the attendees’
work. In advance of the conference, we will ask expected attendees to submit to the workshop facilitators
their idea for an article or other publication.

The facilitators will engage the group in a f
eedback and
planning process to help them leave with confidence that they can progress their idea.

Participants will leave the workshop with a


better understanding of the various potential directions for service
learning research and
manifestations of c
engaged scholarship;


clear understanding of how journal article submissions are reviewed;


strengthened capacity to review a publication or draft manuscript;


strengthened capacity to develop publishable material from their own service
learning and
community engagement work;


clear sense of what journal editors’ look for in an article submission;


awareness of the journals and book publishers interested in service
learning research and
engaged scholarship; and


clear idea of where to find add
itional resources related to this topic.


11 (

ePortfolio Innovation in Service
Learning and Community Engagement: Leveraging Reflection,
Advocacy, and Assessment


Patrick Green, Loyola University Chicago

Skrable, Loyola University Chicago

Session Description

As a tool for teaching and learning, ePortfolios have the capacity to harness student learning in unique
ways in regard to academic service
learning experiences and community engagement. EPortfolios
space for reflection on experience and allow students to engage in critical reflection in a multi
format. EPortfolios also encourage formative and summative assessment, providing opportunities for
course, program and institutional evaluation.
Finally, ePortfolios may emerge into tools for advocacy in
community engagement.
As ePortfolios have grown in usage internationally, the intersections with
community engagement/service
learning have yet to be articulated clearly and outwardly, although it

This session will review the

dimensional roles of ePortfolios in teaching and learning. Participants
will be able to view a variety of sample student portfolios across all of these purposes. The Loyola
University Chicago model will be
featured, including the robust Center for Experiential Learning with
learning, academic internships, undergraduate research and the ePortfolio program. Examples of
learning course structures utilizing ePortfolios along with community engage
ment programs will
be showcased. Embedding ePortfolios within an engaged learning university requirement will serve as a
case study of assessment and evaluation. The evaluation research of the Inter/National Cohort on
ePortfolio Research will also be featu
red in this session.


completion of this interactive pre
conference session, participants will be able to:


Increase awareness of electronic portfolios as a tool for teaching and learning in service
courses and community engagement activities;


Identify multiple roles for ePortfolios in learning environments, including critical reflection,
integrative learning, formative and summative assessment, and advocacy;


Demonstrate the types of “artifacts” or assignments that they would like to see in an
ePortfolio of
a service
learning experience;


Identify a model of an ePortfolio program embedded with community engagement/service
learning activities;


Increase awareness of potential intersections between ePortfolio research and service

The session
will foster the learning and growth of members who are seeking information on this topic in
relation to service
learning, as well as create dialogue among members who are using it to identify
promising practices.


nce 12

Tools of Engagement: Workshop on Preparing Undergraduates for Service
learning and
Community Engagement


Diane Doberneck, Michigan State University

Nicole C. Springer, Michigan State University

Jessica V. Barnes, Michigan State Uni

Burton A, Bargerstock, Michigan State University

Session Description:

The purpose of this workshop is to convene an international dialogue with leading researchers and
practitioners about the preparation of undergraduates for service
learning and

The approach is dialogic, seeking to build upon the knowledge and experience of the
participants and to identify concrete next steps that emerge from the collective wisdom of the group.

conference workshop also includes an a
ctivity to critically peer review existing preparation materials,
thereby strengthening the scholarship associated with undergraduate preparation for service
learning and
community engagement.

As the workshop concludes, interested individuals will be invi
ted to contribute to
the future development of materials

In addition to their contribution to this international dialogue, pre
conference participants will leave the workshop with practical ideas to use on their own college and
university campuses and wit
h access to an international network of colleagues interested in collaborating
with them on the future development of preparation materials.

Specifically, by the end of the pre
conference workshop, participants will:


Be familiar with research
framing student preparation for service
learning and civic engagement


Develop a list of topics and skills undergraduates need to know


Identify top priorities for topics and skills (from that brainstormed list in #2)


Provide critical
, peer review feedback on existing preparation materials


Suggest ideas for additional teaching materials for the future


Establish an international network to advance this initiative collectively


13 (

The Interna
tional Center for Teacher Education and Service
Learning: New Models, New
Research, New Strategic Directions


Kathy Sikes, Duke University

Joseph Erickson, Augsburg College

Amy Anderson, Duke University

Jeffrey Anderson, Seattle University

Andrew Furco, University Of Minnesota

Session Description:

When high stakes testing, teacher assessments, and accreditation are sector mandates, how do we
make the case to colleagues, administrators, and students that service
learning is a manageable, hig
impact practice?

Over one hundred studies have been published that examine the use of service
learning in preservice teacher education.
Aspects of the research base yielded standards for high quality
service learning in K
12 classrooms that became widel

accepted by the field.

However, unless teacher
education programs embrace service
learning as a high impact practice and a legitimate pedagogy, the
promise of service
learning as a civic and academic engagement strategy will never reach its full

Join the International Center for Service
Learning in Teacher Education to explore practical
models and current research projects for the field.

The Engaging All Learners in Service Learning (EASL) Project proposed to deepen the service
ctice and commitment of teacher education programs across the country.

Through Learn and Serve
America, Higher Education, ICSLTE was able to fund six colleges and universities seeking to increase
their service
learning practice
Our primary goals for the
project were threefold:

Increase the academic
engagement for P
12 children in our partner communities by providing additional, high quality service
learning experiences in their schools; increase the self
efficacy of teacher education students to
t service
learning and enhance the capacity of teacher education programs to include service
learning pedagogy by connecting practices and outcomes to national accreditation standards.

Several models emerged as entry points for service
learning and teacher


Two campuses
explored deepening, strengthening, and focusing community partnerships to increase the impact and
reciprocity of service
learning partnerships. Other campuses strengthened internal capacity through
explored issues of faculty buy
n, scaffolding coursework, replicable

learning modules, and
assessing service
learning as an integrated strategy to meet accreditation standards.

In the third year,
research project

sprung from faculty interests with implications for


frameworks, marginalized
and disenfranchised students, and connection to the common core.

Presenters will bridge the gap between theory and practice through discussion of different but connected
initiatives and conclude the session with an introduction to
collaborative projects available through the
Center’s “e
learning” community.