| Article Index |
|---|
| Why Service Learning is Such a Good Idea |
| A Good Idea pg.2 |
| All Pages |
The Link to Service learning
How does this all link to service learning?
The answer is obvious. Service learning, when done well, has all of the characteristics associated with engaged learning. High quality service learning, defined as service learning aligned with the K-12 standards for high-quality service learning (National Youth Leadership Council, 2009), asks students to engage in setting goals to meet community needs; offers students choices and voice; provides many opportunities for teamwork in the planning and provision of service; engaging in reflection that reduces social comparisons of achievement and increases self-assessment; teaches time management; allows self-paced instruction; rewards students for goal attainment, all of which were cited by Maehr and Midgley (1991) as being highly associated with engagement.
Consistent with other researchers cited previously, service learning gives young people greater autonomy and control over their learning when they select the need to be met and design and deliver the services to meet the need. Students who participate in service learning report that they feel a sense of self-efficacy and competence, and they develop connections with peers and adults outside of school and family (Billig, Jesse, & Grimley, 2008). Eccles and others consider this essential for engagement. Clearly, service learning also relates to students' lives and helps them to apply their learning to real-life situations, helping them to feel that their work is important and valuable to others.
When done well, service learning also helps students engage in challenging tasks, and they measure their own abilities to impact others and themselves (Billig & Weah, 2008). They typically become more curious about the service learning topics they tackle and engage in interdependent, reciprocal learning. Finally, their work is, by its nature, about caring. Service learning, then, has nearly all of the characteristics needed to engage students in learning. Even better, once students are engaged in service learning, they most often want to continue to volunteer in the future (Corporation for National and Community Service, 2006). The research on the benefits of volunteering illuminates why.
The Benefits of Volunteerism
Simply stated, volunteerism accrues considerable benefits for most of its participants, young and old alike. The Corporation for National and Community Service (2006), for example, found that students that participated in high quality service learning reported that they thought they could make a great deal of difference in their communities, took a greater interest in current events, and talked more frequently with others about politics than their nonparticipating peers. High school studies showed that young people that engaged in high quality service learning felt good about giving back, making a difference, and seeing their place in the wider social world (Root & Billig, 2008).
Benefits accrue with continuing service. Thoits and Hewitt (as cited in Grimm, Spring, & Dietz, 2007), for example, conducted a longitudinal survey of adults and found that those who volunteered reported higher levels of happiness, life-satisfaction, self-esteem, sense of control over life, and physical health than those that did not volunteer. Further, several other longitudinal studies (see Musick, Herzog, & House, 1999, Rogers, 1996, and Sabin, 1993, as cited in Grimm et al., 2007) showed that individuals who volunteered had lower mortality rates than those that did not, even when factors such as physical health, age, and socioeconomic status were taken into account.
While these researchers also found that a certain "volunteering threshold" (variously defined as 40 to 100 volunteer hours per year) must be reached to derive such benefits (Lum & Lightfoot, 2005, and Luoh & Herzog, 2002 as cited in Grimm et al., 2007), the conclusion is inescapable. Volunteerism is good for you.
Conclusion
The research seems pretty clear that service learning is a good idea. Service learning has the characteristics of effective teaching and learning approaches for student engagement, and leads to lifelong benefits. No wonder service learning works and is good for you. Shouldn't it be offered to every student?
About the Author
Dr. Shelley H. Billig is Vice President at RMC Research Corporation. She has extensive experience both as a researcher and professional development provider in service learning, and recently facilitated the project that led to the formation of the new K-12 standards and indicators for service learning quality. She is currently Principal Investigator for a national study of the impacts of service learning on high school students. She has authored or coedited over 15 books and dozens of articles on educational innovations.
References
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms, goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3). 261-271.
Anderman, L. H., & Midgley, C. (1998). Motivation and middle school students [ERIC digest]. Champaign, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 421281)
Anderson, B. T., Pruitt, H., & Courtney, R. (1989). Science interests of urban seventh graders. Paper presented at the meeting of the Eastern Educational Research Association, Savannah, GA.
Bartko, W. T. (1999). Student engagement and development. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
Billig, S. H. (2000, May). Research on K-12 schoolbased service learning: The evidence builds, Phi Delta Kappan, 81(9), 658-664.
Billig, S.H. (2010, February). Five rules separate high-quality service learning from community service. Principal Leadership, 10(6), 26-31.
Billig, S. H., Jesse, D., & Grimley, M. (2008). Using service learning to promote character development in a large urban district. Journal of Research in Character Education, 6(1), 21-34.
Billig, S. H., & Root, S. (2006). Maximizing civic commitment through service learning: Case studies of effective high school classrooms. In K. McKnight Casey, G. Davidson, S. H. Billig, & N. C. Springer (Eds.), Advances in service learning research: Vol. 6. Advancing knowledge in service-learning.
Billig, S. H., & Weah, W. (2008). K-12 service learning standards for quality practice. In J. C. Kielsmeier, M. Neal, N. Schultz, & T. J. Leeper (Eds.), Growing to greatness 2008: The state of service learning project (pp. 8-15). St. Paul, MN: National Youth Leadership Council.
Brewster, C., & Fager, J. (2000, October). Increasing student engagement and motivation: From timeon- task to homework. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
Brooks, S. R., Freiburger, S. M., & Grotheer, D. R. (1998). Improving elementary student engagement in the learning process through integrated thematic instruction. Unpublished master's thesis, Saint Xavier University, Chicago, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 421274)
Brophy, J. (1987). On motivating students (Occasional Paper No. 101). East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED276724)
Dev, P. C. (1997). Intrinsic motivation and academic achievement: What does their relationship imply for the classroom teacher? Remedial and Special Education, 18(1), 12-19.
Eccles, J., Midgley, C., & Adler, T. F. (1984). Graderelated changes in school environment: Effects on achievement motivation. In J. G Nicholls (Ed.), The development of achievement and motivation (Vol. 3, pp. 282-331). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Ekstrom, R. B., Goertz, M. E., Pollack, J. M., & Rock, D. A. (1986). Who drops out and why? Findings from a national study. Teachers College Record, 87, 356-373.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004, Spring). School engagement: Potential of the concept: state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109. Furco, A., & Root, S. (2010). Research demonstrates the value of service learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(5), 16-20.
Glanville, J., & Wildhagen, T. (2006). School engagement and educational outcomes: Toward a better understanding of the dynamic and multidimensional nature of this relationship. Paper presented at the 2006 Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association, Montreal, Canada.
Grimm, R., Jr., Spring, K., & Dietz, N. (2007). The health benefits of volunteering: A review of recent research. Washington, DC: Corporation for National & Community Service. Retrieved April 12, 2010, from http://www.nationalservice.gov/ pdf/07_0506_hbr.pdf
Lippman, L., & Rivers, A. (2008, October). Assessing school engagement: A guide for out-of-school time program practitioners (Research-to-Results Brief Publication #2008-39). Washington, DC: ChildTRENDS
Lumsden, L. S. (1994). Student motivation to learn (ERIC Digest No. 92). Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 370 200)
Maehr, J. L., & Midgley, C. (1991). Enhancing student motivation: A schoolwide approach. Educational Psychologist, 26(3/4), 399-427. McDill, E. L., Natriello, G., & Pallas, A. M. (1985, Winter). Raising standards and retaining students: The impact of the reform recommendations on potential dropouts. Review of Educational Research, 55(4), 415-433
McDill, E. L., Natriello, G., & Pallas, A. M. (1986). A population at risk: Potential consequences of tougher school standards for school dropouts. American Journal of Education, 94, 135-181. National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine. (2004). Engaging schools: Fostering high school students' motivation to learn. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
National Youth Leadership Council, 2009. K-12 Standards and Indicators of High Quality Service learning, St. Paul, MN: National Youth Leadership Council.
Noddings, N. (2000). Educational standards in a liberal democracy. Presentation at the 55th Annual Conference of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA. Policy Studies Associates (1995, August). Raising the educational achievement of secondary school students: An idea book. Volume 1 Summary of promising practices. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved April 12, 2010, from http://www.ed.gov/pubs/Raising/ vol1/
Reyes, M. de la Luz, & Laliberty, E. A. (1992). A teacher's "pied piper" effect on young authors. Education and Urban Society, 24(2), 263-278.
Root, S., & Billig, S. H. (2008, November). Service learning as a promising approach to high school student civic engagement. In J. S. Bixby & J. L. Pace (Eds.), Educating democratic citizens in troubled times: Qualitative studies of current efforts (pp. 166-196). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Skinner, E., & Belmont, M. (1991). A longitudinal study of motivation in school: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement. Unpublished manuscript, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.
Spring, K., Dietz, N., & Grimm, R., Jr. (2006, March). Educating for active citizenship: Service learning, school-based service and youth civic engagement (Youth Helping America series, Brief 2). Washington, DC: Corporation for National and Community Service.
Steinberg, L. (1996). Beyond the classroom: Why school reform has failed and what parents need to do. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Stipek, D. (1988). Motivation to learn: From theory to practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Strong, R., Silver, H. F., & Robinson, A. (1995). What do students want? Educational Leadership, 53(1), 8-12. Wagenaar, T. C. (1987). Changes in postsecondary educational choices: 1972 to 1980. (Contractor Report). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Research and Evaluation, Center for Education Statistics. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED284481)
