Running head: SERVICE-LEARNING PROGRAMS 1

Service-Learning Programs in Higher Education

Hiram Ramirez

Loyola University Chicago

SERVICE-LEARNING PROGRAMS 2

Service-Learning Programs in Higher Education

Institutions of higher education are constantly facing new challenges. Recently,

institutions have been admitting more students with different backgrounds and educational

experience. This diversity has transformed college campuses and opened up new ways of

looking at academia. One of these new ways of exploring education is service-learning. There

are a multitude of ways in which service-learning can be engaged and used as a way to enhance

learning for students. This paper will analyze five institution’s service-learning programs at

different institutions by highlighting components of the programs and generating themes.

Program Overview

The service-learning programs researched included Florida State University, the

University of South Florida, the University of San Francisco, the University of Central Florida

and the University of Georgia. All of the service-learning programs at each of the institutions

had both curricular and cocurricular programs. Like Jacoby (1996) shares, service-learning “is

both curricular and cocurricular, because all learning does not occur in the classroom” (p. 6).

And each of the programs also ensured academic rigor was maintained in the service-learning

experiences, which is an important factor in developing strong service-learning curriculum

(Howard, 1993). The programs were able to keep the rigor in service-learning by intentional

reaching out and developing partnerships with faculty members. Though each institutions level

of engagement with faculty seemed to vary, there was a presence of faculty involvement at each

of the programs. Every service-learning program had their own way of engaging their campus

and community.

The Center for Leadership and Social Change at Florida State University had a large

focus on student development around their identity development and leadership education (The

SERVICE-LEARNING PROGRAMS 3

Center for Leadership and Social Justice, 2015). Their mission statement also expressed an

interest in engaging the community, but there seemed to be less of a focus in this area. The

Center for Leadership and Social Change had a portal for community members to promote

upcoming service opportunities. This portal allows community members to address “the needs

of the community as determined by the members,” but it seemed that it would be hard for

students to immerse themselves in the community (Jacoby, 1997, p. 7). This type of exchange is

more transactional than developmental, and it does not allow for a strong relationship to be built

between the Center for Leadership and Social Change and the community organization. But

through these collaborative relationships with community members, students are able to engage

in various programs. Some of the programs housed in this office were Community Ambassadors

Program, Social Justice Living-Learning Community, Florida State Alternative Breaks, and

many more (The Center for Leadership and Social Justice, 2015). Each of these programs

allowed students the opportunity to not only connect with the community but also process their

learning.

The Center for Leadership and Civic Engagement at the University of South Florida is

another service-learning program. The mission for this office focused on leadership and service

experiences, which is how they connected students to service-learning. Some of the programs

are Bulls Alternative Breaks, Emerging Leaders Institute, Day of Service, and so forth (Center

for Leadership and Civic Engagement, 2015). The cocurricular experiences have a balance of

both leadership and service opportunities for students, but the curricular component is different.

The Center for Leadership and Civic Engagement coordinates the leadership studies minor, so

they focus on leadership education. Though service is infused in some of the courses, the

SERVICE-LEARNING PROGRAMS 4

coursework focuses on leadership theory and models. There are also no other service-learning

courses listed in this office, outside of the leadership studies minor.

At the University of San Francisco the Leo T. McCarthy Center for Public Service and

the Common Good is the institution’s office of service-learning. The mission for this office

shows a focus on not only educating students but also cultivating relationships with community

partners (Leo T. McCarthy Center for Public Service and Common Good, 2015). This

institution’s service-learning office is also very academically focused. Most of its programs are

fellowships like the Global Service-Learning Fellowship program, Robert Holstein Memorial

Scholarship, and so forth (Leo T. McCarthy Center for Public Service and Common Good,

2015). This office also has two masters programs and a minor for undergraduate students. The

masters programs are public affairs and urban affairs. The minor is in public services and

community engagement. All of the courses for each program pays close attention on engaging

the community and resolving issues with them. But since the focus in this office is on the

academic component, there are few cocurricular opportunities for students to engage in service-

learning. In this way, there is less balance in this service-learning office’s programming.

The fourth service-learning office was from the Office of Experiential Learning at the

University of Central Florida. This office’s mission statement shared that they support students’

development of competency, academic study, and they support the community (Office of

Experiential Learning, 2015). This office executes this mission through a service-learning

certificate program, cooperative education, and internships. There seems to be few cocurricular

experiences for students through this office, but there is a focus on academic opportunities for

students. Even the service-learning certificate is a collection of academic courses students take

to complete the certificate, no cocurricular pieces are embedded in this certificate (Office of

SERVICE-LEARNING PROGRAMS 5

Experiential Learning, 2015). But out of the five institutions reviewed, it had the most extensive

list of service-learning courses throughout the institution.

The last institution reviewed was the University of Georgia. At this university, the Office

of Service-Learning’s mission incorporates educating students both inside and outside of the

classroom. The mission statement also discussed the importance of promoting research and the

mutual benefits of community partnerships (The Office of Service-Learning, 2015). This office

had some cocurricular programs like Campus Kitchen at UGA, Get Engaged, Project Hope, and

many more (The Office of Service-Learning, 2015). There were also curricular courses listed

across different disciplines, international service-learning and graduate service-learning (The

Office of Service-Learning, 2015). This service-learning office had a balance between curricular

and cocurricular experiences for students.

Trends and Themes

Throughout the analysis of the five service-learning programs, themes and trends

surfaced. The first trend was that each of the institutions emphasized academic experiences for

students. Each of the institutions had some courses housed within their office. But two

institutions in particular, The Center for Leadership and Social Change and the Center for

Leadership and Civic Engagement, focused on leadership courses. While most of the other

institutions had courses from other disciplines and departments promoted through their office.

Another trend that surfaced was the level of support for faculty around service-learning.

Each of the service-learning offices offered to support faculty in infusing service-learning into

their curriculum. But the level of support and engagement varied. For example, the University

of South Florida was willing to meet one-on-one with faculty. But at the University of San

Francisco, they had a Faculty Service-Learning Seminar. This course was structured to help

SERVICE-LEARNING PROGRAMS 6

educate faculty on how to incorporate service-learning into their courses (Leo T. Center for

Public Service and the Common Good, 2015). The intentionality behind this program not only

helps to develop a faculty members skills in the area but also helps to build a community around

service-learning at the college.

The third trend was that three out of the five institutions reported directly to academic

affairs. While the other two institutions, Florida State University and the University of South

Florida, reported to student affairs. But at both of these institutions, the Vice President of

Student Affairs reported to the Vice President of Academic Affairs. So ultimately all of the

offices fell under academic affairs. But the three service-learning offices that had a more direct

connection with academic affairs had a stronger academic focus in their mission and programs.

While Florida State University and the University of South Florida had a greater emphasis on

cocurricular opportunities for students.

Throughout the review of the service-learning programs, there were many similarities but

a few differences also surfaced. The first difference was in the staffing of each office. For

example, three of the five service-learning programs had a faculty member in their office. These

offices were the Center for Leadership and Social Change, Leo T. McCarthy Center for Public

Service and the Common Good, and the Office of Service-Learning. These three offices also

had more staffing than the other two offices. The Center for Leadership and Social Change had

the highest number of employees with twenty-three staff and one faculty member. All of the

other offices had less than twelve employees. The difference in the number of staff reflects the

number of programs each service-learning office could perform. Another difference between

offices was their cocurricular opportunities. For example, the University of San Francisco

focused more on internships and fellowships. Each of these experiences focused more on

SERVICE-LEARNING PROGRAMS 7

benefiting the student and their learning than service. For these experiences to be service-

learning, there would have to be a balance between both service and learning (Furco, 1996).

Many of the other service-learning programs had a better balance with their cocurricular

programs. Like the University of South Florida, which had many cocurricular programs like

USF Big Brothers and Sisters, Days of Service, Civic Engagement Board, and so forth. These

experiences allowed students short and long term opportunities to engage in service-learning. It

also gave students more time to engage in critical reflection. Structured opportunities are needed

for student to engage in critical reflection so that they can develop a “habit of critical reflection”

(Honnet & Poulsen, 1998, p. 2). The last difference was that each of the offices infused diversity

in different ways. For example, Florida State University had intentional programs that engaged

students in discussing diversity. There were no programs specifically dedicated to conversations

about diversity at any of the other service-learning programs. In all of these ways, each of the

service-learning programs had various differences and similarities.

Conclusion

The five service-learning programs illustrate service-learning in many ways. Each of the

offices focused on service-learning based on the resources at their disposal and their specific

missions at their respective institutions. Each of the service-learning programs had both

curricular and cocurricular experiences for students, but the emphasis in each area varied by

institution. Many of the offices also found ways to include faculty members throughout their

institutions. Some of the ways faculty were incorporated was through hosting workshops,

connecting with faculty one-on-one, and promoting all of service-learning courses at the

institution. In this way, each of the programs helped to promote service-learning at their

institutions.

SERVICE-LEARNING PROGRAMS 8

Each of the service-learning programs also showed some differences. Some of the

offices had a faculty member as a part of the office while others did not. There was also service-

learning offices that had more employees than other offices, which had implications on the type

and number of programs they could perform. There was also no dedicated program around

discussing diversity at four of the five institutions. All of these various differences, illustrate the

multitude of ways that service-learning can be enacted. With that in mind, institutions must

continue to push the envelope and find new ways of engaging students in service-learning.

SERVICE-LEARNING PROGRAMS 9

References

Florida State University (2015). The Center for Leadership and Social Justice. Retrieved from

http://thecenter.fsu.edu/

Furco, Andrew. "Service-Learning: A Balanced Approach to Experiential Education."

Expanding Boundaries: Service and Learning. Washington DC: Corporation for National

Service, 1996. 2-6.

Honnet, E.P. & Poulsen, S.J. (1998) Principles of Good Practice for Combining Service and

Learning, The Johnson Foundation.

Howard, J. (1993).Community service learning in the curriculum. In J. Howard (Ed.), Praxis I: A

faculty casebook on community service learning. (pp. 3-12). Ann Arbor: OCSL Press.

Jacoby, B. & Associates. (1996). Service-learning in higher education: Concepts and Practices.

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

University of Central Florida (2015). Office of Experiential Learning. Retrieved from

http://www.explearning.ucf.edu/index.php

University of Georgia (2015). The Office of Service-Learning. Retrieved from

http://servicelearning.uga.edu/

University of San Francisco (2015). Leo T. McCarthy Center for Public Service and the

Common Good. Retrieved from http://www.usfca.edu/centers/mccarthy/

University of South Florida (2015). Center for Leadership and Civic Engagement. Retrieved

from http://leadandserve.usf.edu/default.php