IARSLCE Annual Conference
Pre-conference sessions
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
Full-Day Sessions: $125
Half-Day Sessions: $70
Pre-Conference 1 (Full Day)
Reinvigorating Community Knowing Through Focus Group Research
Presenters:
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-learning
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 research 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 convenient 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 be 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 conduct 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 organizations to conduct a
forty-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? The
community focus groups will be implemented, taking approximately two hours of time for 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 trends. 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 findings.
1
Pre-Conference 2 (Full Day)
Learning from Community: Community Outcome Assessment Best Practices and Insights in
Global Service Learning
Presenters:
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-Learning
Session Description:
Despite the increased attention to and burgeoning participation in 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, 2010). 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 with and not for communities),
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, and
devise methods of research that capture the experience and voice of the community.
This workshop will: (1) share current lessons learned on community impact assessments within the fields
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-learning 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 economic
development, engineering), and lessons learned through their implementation and iterative
improvements. The session will turn quickly to how this leading edge research supports, 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 attendees can develop their own partnership evaluations, drawing on established best
practices, new insights, and rubrics developed specifically for global service-learning research.
As a result of the session, participants will be able to:
1.
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;
2.
Identify how approaches to community engaged research can be used to assess community needs
and assets, evaluate program impact and inform policy; and
3.
Design a research and/or community assessment plan in collaboration with fellow participants and
facilitators.
2
Pre-Conference 3 (Morning)
Discovering Omaha Community: Reciprocal Partnerships that Inform Service Learning Practice
Presenter:
Lucy Garza Westbrook, UNO Service Learning Academy
Session Description:
Community partners are our greatest resources for co-educating students and faculty about issues and
needs in the community. As on- the- ground experts in their fields, they bring understanding to problems
that go beyond textbook case studies, adding dimensions 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 given 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 marked 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-serving organization and a senior center, highlighting two ends of the immigration integration
spectrum representing the community’s response to growth and neighborhood development. Throughout
the tour participants will learn from community partners about how service learning fits with their
organization’s mission and operations as well as their journey of relationship development with
partners. Project issues include working with youth, services for elders, immigration and integration, civil
rights, the arts, inclusion 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 indigenous youth, guided by
community experts. This program is a recipient of the Nebraska’s First Lady’s 2013 Service Learning
Program award.
3
Pre-Conference 4 (Morning)
Getting the Grant!: Grant Writing for Service-Learning
Presenter:
Joy Doll, Creighton University
Session Description:
The natural reciprocity of service-learning makes it a prime candidate for receiving grant funds; and
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
funding? 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 this 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 practical and engaged approach to grant writing
geared specifically towards individuals involved in service-learning. The session will focus on the
following:
 The process and skills needed to determine when grant funding is appropriate to support a
program or research 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 common
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
 Budgeting
 Evaluation planning
 Program implementation
 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.
4
Pre-Conference 5 (Morning)
Discovery through Dissonance: Investigating Threshold Concepts and Threshold Experiences
Presenters:
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 [where 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 innovative 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 service-learning and community
engagement (SLCE) poses threshold challenges and opportunities for faculty, students, and community
members alike. The first question 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: How do partners
in SLCE learn the TCs associated with undertaking it?
In this highly interactive session, facilitators will share theory on threshold concepts and threshold
experiences--reflective 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, thereby
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] epiphanies” (Ellis, Adams, & Bochner, 2011, para. 3) in their
own process 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
category of partner in SLCE conceptualizes and navigates the challenges of learning to undertake the
pedagogy.
5
Pre-Conference 6 (Morning)
Measuring and Monitoring Collective Impact: Designing Institutional and System-Wide Metrics for
Community Engagement
Presenters:
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 - Boston
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 university 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 communicating, coordinating, and planning. To inform the growth, sustainability, and
improvement 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-study 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
data-grounded conversations. Today, most campuses continue to struggle to collect and use data to in a
consistent manner, over time, as a strategy to inform, improve, and advance infrastructure, practice, and
outcomes related to community-university partnerships.
Facilitators of this pre-conference will ask participants to share their motivations for collecting 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 experiences, strategies, and tools developed by leaders of metrics initiatives
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 procedures 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 assessment were established and were aligned with University-wide
priorities and metric goals. The community engagement metrics were then prioritized and an
action plan for systematizing the data collection procedures was 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
development.” The 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.
6
Pre-Conference 7 (Morning)
Defining Institutional Best Practices of Civic Engagement Within Non-Traditional Academic
Schedules
Presenter:
Rachel Edens, Tusculum College
Session Description:
This 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
College. Tusculum is one of seven North American institutions of higher education 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 18-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 Quarters, 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 ServiceLearning 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
development 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. Participants 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.
7
Pre-Conference 8 (Afternoon)
Investigating Palmer's 'Habits of the Heart that Make Democracy Possible' as Civic Learning Goals
and Democratic Engagement Design Principles
Presenters:
Patti Clayton, PHC Ventures
John Fenner, Center for Courage and Renewal
Session Description:
This workshop leverages Parker Palmer’s participation in the conference by inviting participants to
collaborate with one of his colleagues at the Center for Courage & Renewal and an established
practitioner-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 for
conceptualizing civic learning and for designing civic education.
In 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 - 46):
 An understanding that we are all in this together
 An appreciation of the value of “otherness”
 An ability 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 institutions 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. Participants in this
session will further develop, refine, and nuance the “habits” as potential civic learning goals in and design
features of each of our unique contexts, by (a) unpacking each of the “habits” into constitutive knowledge,
skills, and attitudes and (b)critiquing our own work 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 implementation and cultivation in higher education. This
workshop will launch a community of practitioner-scholars focused on just such theory-generating,
practice-based inquiry. Facilitators invite students, faculty, staff, and community members to join us in
this interactive, reflective, and co-created inquiry.
8
Pre-Conference Session 9 (Afternoon)
Measuring Cognitive Outcomes of Service-Learning: Adapting Tools for Research and
Assessment
Presenters:
Peggy Fitch, Central College
Pamela Steinke, St. Francis University
Session Description:
The purpose of this session is to introduce participants to the Problem-Solving Analysis Protocol (PSAP) and Cognitive Learning Scale (CLS), two instruments that can be used to measure outcomes of
service-learning related to problem-solving, critical thinking, and student perceptions of academic
learning. These two tools are grounded in theory and have been derived from prior research on best
practices in service-learning:
 The P-SAP is based on Eyler and Giles’ (1999) foundational research on outcomes of servicelearning using a semi-structured interview to assess students’ analyses of complex social
problems such as poverty or homelessness that were related to recent service-learning
experiences. The presenters adapted their interview questions and coding categories to create
a written protocol that can be used to measure problem-solving in the context of a particular
course or discipline (Steinke and Fitch, 2003). Moreover, the format of the protocol is such that
it can be adapted to specific problems or issues encountered in service-learning experiences
that are relevant to particular course content.
 The CLS was designed to provide an easy to use, self-report scale that reduced problems
inherent in self-report measures that were often used in research but were highly confounded
with motivation (Steinke & Buresh, 2002). By comparing students’ pre-course ratings of prior
learning experiences with their post-course ratings of recent service-learning experiences, the
CLS provides a more objective analysis of students’ responses. Further, the CLS explicitly
targets those cognitive outcomes that are most relevant to service-learning in previous
research such as application of knowledge and depth and complexity of understanding of
problems and issues.
Specifically, facilitators of this session will:
 Train participants how to score the P-SAP using the Global Coding Rubric.
 Demonstrate how to adapt the P-SAP by developing issue statements about authentic problems
that reflect the intersection between community partners’ needs and relevant course content.
 Demonstrate uses of the CLS.
 Explore ways to analyze the data from each instrument and how to use the results both for
research and for improvement of service-learning practice.
 Help participants plan the development of their own measures of cognitive outcomes of service
learning for research or assessment for improvement.
9
Pre-Conference 10 (Afternoon)
Getting Service-Learning Research and Community-Engaged Scholarship Published
Presenters:
Jeffrey Howard, Steans Center, Depaul University
Barbara Holland, Independent Consultant
Session Description:
As 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! It will build faculty familiarity with
trajectories of service-learning and community-engaged scholarship and build their capacity to undertake
such research and get it published.
There are many directions service-learning research can take, such as research related to student
academic, civic, and multicultural learning outcomes; faculty motivations, perceived impediments, etc.;
community impacts and partnerships; and other contemporary questions. There are also opportunities for
community-engaged scholarship, such as the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL), the
scholarship of engagement in which faculty themselves are involved in research with communities for
mutual benefit, and the scholarship on engagement in which faculty study some aspect of campuscommunity engagement.
Facilitators will illustrate these various research directions and manifestations, demonstrate how they map
onto Boyer’s concepts of scholarship, and provide examples of published articles related to each of these
categories. We will explore the Glassick scholarship assessment criteria and examples of journal review
critieria and then apply those to one or more articles submitted to one of the journals (Michigan Journal of
Community Service Learning and Metropolitan Universities Journal) edited by the two presenters—
articles that will have been sent to attendees prior 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 feedback and
planning process to help them leave with confidence that they can progress their idea.
Participants will leave the workshop with a
1. better understanding of the various potential directions for service-learning research and
manifestations of community-engaged scholarship;
2. clear understanding of how journal article submissions are reviewed;
3. strengthened capacity to review a publication or draft manuscript;
4. strengthened capacity to develop publishable material from their own service-learning and
community engagement work;
5. clear sense of what journal editors’ look for in an article submission;
6. awareness of the journals and book publishers interested in service-learning research and
community-engaged scholarship; and
7. clear idea of where to find additional resources related to this topic.
10
Pre-Conference 11 (Afternoon)
ePortfolio Innovation in Service-Learning and Community Engagement: Leveraging Reflection,
Advocacy, and Assessment
Presenters:
Patrick Green, Loyola University Chicago
Christopher 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 create
space for reflection on experience and allow students to engage in critical reflection in a multi-media
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 is
striking.
This session will review the multi-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
service-learning, academic internships, undergraduate research and the ePortfolio program. Examples of
service-learning course structures utilizing ePortfolios along with community engagement 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 featured in this session.
Upon completion of this interactive pre-conference session, participants will be able to:
1. Increase awareness of electronic portfolios as a tool for teaching and learning in service-learning
courses and community engagement activities;
2. Identify multiple roles for ePortfolios in learning environments, including critical reflection,
integrative learning, formative and summative assessment, and advocacy;
3. Demonstrate the types of “artifacts” or assignments that they would like to see in an ePortfolio of
a service-learning experience;
4. Identify a model of an ePortfolio program embedded with community engagement/servicelearning activities;
5. Increase awareness of potential intersections between ePortfolio research and service-learning
research.
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.
11
Pre-Conference 12 (Afternoon)
Tools of Engagement: Workshop on Preparing Undergraduates for Service-learning and
Community Engagement
Presenters:
Diane Doberneck, Michigan State University
Nicole C. Springer, Michigan State University
Jessica V. Barnes, Michigan State University
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 community
engagement. 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. The
pre-conference workshop also includes an activity 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 invited to contribute to
the future development of materials. In addition to their contribution to this international dialogue, preconference participants will leave the workshop with practical ideas to use on their own college and
university campuses and with 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:
1.
Be familiar with research framing student preparation for service-learning and civic engagement
2.
Develop a list of topics and skills undergraduates need to know
3.
Identify top priorities for topics and skills (from that brainstormed list in #2)
4.
Provide critical, peer review feedback on existing preparation materials
5.
Suggest ideas for additional teaching materials for the future
6.
Establish an international network to advance this initiative collectively
12
Pre-Conference 13 (Afternoon)
The International Center for Teacher Education and Service-Learning: New Models, New
Research, New Strategic Directions
Presenters:
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, high
impact practice? Over one hundred studies have been published that examine the use of servicelearning in preservice teacher education. Aspects of the research base yielded standards for high quality
service learning in K-12 classrooms that became widely 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
potential. 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-learning
practice 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 servicelearning experiences in their schools; increase the self-efficacy of teacher education students to
implement service-learning and enhance the capacity of teacher education programs to include servicelearning pedagogy by connecting practices and outcomes to national accreditation standards.
Several models emerged as entry points for service-learning and teacher education. 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-in, scaffolding coursework, replicable service-learning modules, and
assessing service-learning as an integrated strategy to meet accreditation standards. In the third year,
research projects sprung from faculty interests with implications for theoretical 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.
13