 |
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
| |
History of Service Learning
|
"Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself." -- John Dewey
The motivations and practices of SL have developed since its inception in the early 1900s when John Dewey asserted his pragmatic philosophy and experimented within the classroom. He structured learning activities as a microcosm of democratic society in which students actively participated and assumed occupations within the mini-society. Opposing educational traditions that excluded people because of ethnic origin, race, gender, or socio-economic level, he believed that learning environments should be inclusive, and its members should work together to solve common problems. Believing in the inherent curiosity of humans and their desire to learn, his students were free to test ideas, beliefs, values, customs, and institutions for purposes of critical inquiry, investigation, and reconstruction (Ornstein & Levine, 2000). Dewey’s experimental classroom encouraged a scientific, problem-solving environment, and a democratic orientation to life and society, well suited to the American culture. William Kilpatrick (1918) and Dewey’s Democracy and Education (1916) advocated the first ideas behind SL (Fogarty, 1997). Dewey’s ultimate vision for public education was the production of a good citizenry, and it was his influence that created evaluation of, and grades for citizenship (Ryan & Cooper, 1998).
During the rise of the industrial revolution in America, Dewey fell out of favor with other educational theorists who misinterpreted his philosophies, accusing his pragmatic methods of being without structure or lacking rigor. In 1930 Dewey clearly defended his progressive ideas that included both respect for the individual, but also for subject matter, and reemphasized his belief in the need to produce a good citizenry through public education (Wesley, 2000). The momentum of the industrial revolution, however, and the societal institution of its factory model overtook progressive education. This direct influence on public education replaced pragmatic practices with industrial or machine-like pedagogy. Active, individual learning experiences became thought of as less efficient than expository learning that attempted to produce identical commodities (students) by strict deadlines. Good citizenship took on a different meaning than Dewey had intended—“docility and conformity” (Ryan & Cooper, 1998, p. 26), and it degenerated into empty forms. This new direction led to discredit citizenship as an appropriate goal of public schooling.
Student attitudes in the1950s and 1960s changed from the desire to achieve meaningful employment to that which would help them get “ahead” in life, i.e. a well-paying job. Patriotism and attitudes of service waned due to political and social unrest. School reformers of the 1960s and 1970s saw a renewed concern for a relevant curriculum and active leaning strategies, but there was less concern with social conditions and more concern that the curriculum be relevant to the student’s personal needs and interests (Ornstein & Levine, 2000).
The studies of Wiggington (1985), Goodlad (1984), and Boyer (1984) renewed interest in Dewey and Kilpatrick’s ideas, and went one step forward advocating social reform through community-based projects (Fogarty, 1997). SL arose from the challenge to industrial modalities in that
…the primary purpose of education can no longer be socialization, standardization, and synchronization—the shaping of students into clearly defined roles for a predictable future. Rather, in a world marked by pluralism, uncertainty, and variability, we need to move from the idea of students as receptacles, merely receiving deposits of information from teachers to students… (Kielsmeier, 2000, p. 656).
SL in the 1980s was the result of those educational reform initiatives and a concerted effort to bring a sense of responsibility to college students. The founding of the National Center for Campus Compact for Community Colleges helped push forward a national strategy of SL for college undergraduates. The staff at Brown University laid the groundwork, gave financial support to the community colleges, and organized a clearinghouse for best practices in founding programs that promoted civic responsibility and volunteerism. The community colleges took a very pragmatic approach to initiate the effort through student activities involving the community. On many campuses, SL was made mandatory for certain courses, SL programs were staffed and funded, and resources and training were provided to support SL projects. Today, Campus Compact continues to hold annual conferences to discuss programs, issues, and practical matters of SL, and is committed to building volunteer services to promote civic responsibility as not just an episodic experience for students, but as a long-term behavior construct (Elsner, 2000).
It was not until the development of constructivist theories of learning in the 1990s that Dewey’s ideas resurfaced and were embraced at all levels of public education. Grounded in the prior work of Piaget, Vygotsky, and the Gestalt psychologists, Bartlett and Bruner, constructivist perspectives emphasize the shared, social construction of knowledge. Dewey’s philosophy added the dimensions of democracy and social responsibility (Woolfolk, 1998). In 1990, the National and Community Service Act redefined federally supported national service by including school-based SL along with funding for full-time service. Senator Ted Kennedy advocated in Congress for SL being a central component of educational reform efforts, and during President Bill Clinton’s administration, the Corporation for National Service (CNS) was created. In 1995 Secretary of Education Richard Riley and Eli Segal, then Chief Executive Officer of CNS, signed a joint declaration linking national service and education, and it became the basis for similar partnerships between the agencies of service and schools at state and local levels. In 1999 the W. K. Kellogg Foundation began a four-year, thirteen million dollar investment to infuse SL into K-12. Eighty-five percent of entering college freshmen now report that in high school they had a “significant” service experience education (Kielsmeier, 2000).
In 1992, Project Citizen was developed in California by the Center for Civic Education and the National Conference of State Legislatures. Today, over fifty countries are host to this educational program at the college and university level. “Research over many decades has shown that the undergraduate experience does have a socializing effect on political beliefs and other values, and that outcomes such as maturity of moral judgment, racial and religious tolerance, and civic and political participation are positively associated with educational attainment” (Oakes, 2002).
With governmental and private sector support, SL continues to evolve, be promoted, embraced, and studied. Current literature exposes a dichotomy currently developing within the SL experience that continues to be debated. Kahne & Westheimer (1996) divide the motives for service learning into the concepts of service and change. They assert that if the driving force for SL is charity, the moral element is about “giving, the political bent is about civic duty, and the intellectual experience is considered an enhancement of the general curriculum” (Fogarty, 1997, p. 107). If, however, the rationale for SL is about change, the morality is about “caring, the politics about social reconstruction, and the intellectual element about transformation” (p. 107). McAleavey & Pickeral (1998) further classify the hierarchical motivations for SL in the following categories: charity, philanthropy, social justice, and social transformation (Elsner, 2000). | |
|
|
|
