Increased Partnerships Through Service-Learning: Working With The Demands Of Accountability 1
Lynne A. Bercaw
Teresa Davis
California State University, Chico
The increased pressure of accountability for both K-12 schools and teacher education programs can cause
each level to draw more into themselves to focus on their respective demands. It is the increased demand of
accountability, however, that begs us to strengthen our partnerships to draw on our respective expertise and
resources as a means to increase student and teacher candidate achievement. This inquiry focuses on a K-12/teacher
education partnership to increase civic engagement and civic responsibility for students and teacher candidates
through service-learning. Findings from a pilot project of service-learning in a teacher education program revealed
that resistance from teacher candidates and cooperating teachers were almost entirely based on accountability
demands (K-12 standardized tests and the teacher performance assessment for teacher candidates). This study
focuses on the second year of implementation of service-learning in a teacher education program and is guided by
two research questions: (1) Does the involvement in service-learning influence candidates’ self-efficacy toward civic
engagement? and (2) Is there a difference between the PACT scores of candidates who participate in servicelearning compared to those who do not? The inception of the second question is rooted in findings from the pilot
year of implementation, which was voluntary for teacher candidates—most candidates who chose to not participate
were reluctant to implement service-learning for fear it would negatively affect their achievement on the high-stakes
Performance Assessment for California Teachers (PACT). This study is comprised of two groups—those who
participate in service-service learning and a control group who does not participate. Data will include surveys for
candidates and cooperating teachers, semi-structure interviews, and focus group interviews, as well as data the
program already collects (PACT scores).
Over the past few decades, there have been compelling theoretical and empirical studies that provide
evidence for the benefits of implementing service-learning in teacher education and the K-12 classroom (see
Erickson & Johnson, Eds., 1997 & Ladson-Billings, 2001). Specifically, several studies attest to the effectiveness of
implementing service-learning in preparing teachers toward increasing student achievement and civic efficacy (Bell,
Horn, & Roxas, 2007; Brown, 2005; Karayan & Gathercoal, 2005). However as the testing and assessment measures
for both teacher candidates and K-12 students intensify, the rationale for creating the programmatic space for
service-learning is overshadowed by the requirements mandated by state and national standards. As teachers’
primary role is to prepare students to be thoughtful, active citizens, the mission statement of the School of Education
program on which this paper is based is “…to develop effective, reflective and engaged educators [and] to create a
diverse, democratic, socially responsible society in which every student is valued (School of Education website,
n.d.).
Drawing primarily on a critical pedagogy in teacher education, service-learning calls for active engagement
in one’s community (Dodd & Lilly, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 2001; Root, 1997) and for teachers to be “change
agents” through service (Ladson-Billings, 2001). Service-learning “socializes teachers in the essential moral and
civic obligations of teaching…fostering lifelong civic engagement, being able to adapt to the needs of learners with
diverse and special needs, and being committed to advocacy for social justice” (Root, 1997, p. 43). Further, servicelearning provides teacher candidates with authentic opportunities to participate in the communities in which they
live and teach (Dodd & Lilly, 2000).
Context of the Study. The School of Education in which this study was conducted, is located in a state that
requires a post-baccalaureate year or “fifth year” where candidates must complete a bachelors’ degree prior to
earning their credential. Therefore, the challenge becomes how to scaffold the service-learning experience in a very
short time. In contrast, programs that have an undergraduate degree and licensing program have a bit more time to
build a progression of experiences (see Colby, Bercaw, Clark, & Galiardi 2009). The challenge for 1-year programs
becomes how to provide experiences in service-learning where candidates have the greatest success and confidence
for them to carry into their classrooms once employed.
The School of Education at this state university is participating in a funded national partnership, “Preparing
Tomorrow’s Teachers with Transformative Practice: Engaging All Learners in Service-Learning” (EASL), for two
years. The goal of the project is to build a systematic implementation within each program of the School of
Education (elementary, secondary and special education). Through the current participation in Project EASL as a
sub-grantee of Duke University funded through the Corporation for National and Community Service, the School of
1
This study is funded by The Corporation for National and Community Service to The International Center for SL
in Teacher Education at Duke University and NCATE
Education’s focus has centered on articulating service-learning pedagogy throughout several programs (elementary
and special education programs) in a more systematic, effective manner as well as developing stronger partnerships
with public schools.
One of the greatest challenges from the first semester, as shared by the teacher candidates, was the support
of cooperating teachers. Therefore, the following semester we enlisted a cooperating teacher to be the liaison
between the university and public school partners. Her responsibility was to communicate with cooperating teachers
about service-learning and the opportunities for their teacher candidates and their elementary students. Despite this
addition, the participation in the fall 2011 semester was less than that in the spring. The major reason reported both
by teacher candidates and cooperating teachers was the demand of testing, which occurs near the end of the school
year, usually in April.
As the implementation of service-learning developed in the second year (2011-2012), the challenges for
these three major participants (teacher candidate, cooperating teacher, and teacher educator) become evident, each
with its own set of obstacles. For the teacher candidates it was both their high stakes “teacher performance
assessment” and demands of coursework and student teaching. For cooperating teachers, it was the standardized
testing of their students. For teacher educators, it was the challenge of designing a systematic implementation of
service-learning where the pedagogy can actually be part of candidates’ assessment and to communicate to public
school partners the research showing how this pedagogy increases student achievement.
This study specifically addresses the following two questions:
 What strategies and practices have proven to be most successful in carrying out partnerships between schools
of education and others in the community?
 How can schools of education improve partnerships with K‐12 schools?
The study examines the efforts of a teacher education program and its K-12 partners to increase civic responsibility
and engagement through service-learning. The conditions that support and hinder this collaborative effort are
explored through survey data, teacher performance data and focus group interviews. Findings inform teacher
educators of how best to support and strengthen partnerships between K-12 schools, teacher education programs
toward civic engagement.
References
Bell, C. A., Horn, B. R., & Roxas, K. C. (2007). We know it’s service, but what are they learning? Prospective
teachers’ understandings of diversity. Equity and Excellence in Education, 40(2), 123-133.
Brown, E. L. (2005). Service-learning in a one-year alternative route to teacher certification: A powerful
multicultural teaching tool. Equity and Excellence in Education, 38(1), 61-74.
Colby, S. A., Bercaw, L., Clark, A. M., & Galiardi, S. (2009). From community service to
service-learning leadership: A program perspective. New Horizons in Education, 57(3), 20-31.
Dodd, E. L., & Lilly, D. H. (2000, Fall). Learning with communities: An investigation of
community service- learning in teacher education. Action in Teacher Education, 22(3),
77–85.
Erickson, J. A. & Johnson, J. B. (Eds.) 1997. Learning with the community: Concepts and
models for service-learning in teacher education. Sterling, VA: Sylus.
Karayan, S., & Gathercoal, P. (2005). Assessing service-learning in teacher education. Teacher
Education Quarterly, 32(3), 79-92.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2001). Crossing over to Canaan: The journey of new teachers in diverse classrooms. New
York: Jossey-Bass.
Root, S. C. (1997). School-based service: A review of research for teacher education. In J. A. Erickson & J. B.
Anderson (Eds.), Learning with the community: Concepts and models for service-learning in teacher
education (pp. 42-72). Washington, D.C.: American Association for Higher Education.