To be or not to be. Service-learning in a higher education institution
INTRODUCTION. Many universities across the world prefer service learning (SL) as pedagogical framework and practice to integrate community engagement in teaching and learning. The pursuit of reciprocal collaborative relationships with society and the prominence of reflection in bridging the gap between theory and practice are characteristic of this framework. Furthermore, the focus of SL on personal growth, academic learning and social responsibility articulate well with the aim of Higher Education to develop student graduate attributes such as professionalism, critical citizenship and employment competencies. This study explores the mutations of SL in one institution where SL was articulated to be the preferred pedagogical framework for practical components of academic programmes. The question became: Is community-engaged teaching and learning a broader evolving practice of multiple pedagogical approaches in one institution or do they still constitute aspects of SL? METHOD. The study took an explorative interpretive approach to determine if SL was the only pedagogy practiced in the institution and examined the concept of collaborative engaged teaching and learning. It started with a rapid survey of all courses that was offered using experiential pedagogy and a report was compiled. In a follow-up study, specific academic programmes were purposively selected and educators were asked to analyse the approaches they were using. This was followed by purposive open-ended interviews with specific course facilitators about their teaching practice. A round table discussion was held where everyone presented his or her work. RESULTS. Content analysis showed a diversity of learning strategies. It was found that not all courses followed specific service learning methodology, but a mixture of practicums, including internships, community-based learning and work integrated learning. Multiple pedagogical approaches and methodologies were used. During interviews and presentations, it was found, however, that all courses followed at least one of the SL tenets namely service, academic learning, reflection, students developing a social responsibility and competencies. DISCUSSION. Although SL was used as a basis for their teaching/learning strategy, many of the respondents felt they did not practice SL as the latter was experienced as prescriptive and not always applicable in its entirety. Community-engaged teaching and learning (CETL) evolved as an inclusive concept that encompass multiple pedagogies that strengthen the notion of engaged teaching and engaged research as engaged scholarship. A typology of student engagement challenges the Furco (1996) depiction of SL and related activities and introduces the new concept of community-engaged teaching and learning.
Astin, A. W. & Sax, L. J. (1998). How undergraduates are affected by service participation. Journal of College Student Development, 39, 251-263.
Barnett, R. & Coate, K. (2005). Engaging the Curriculum in Higher Education. Berkshire: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
Bender, C. J., Daniels, P., Lazarus, J., Naude, L. & Sattar, K. (2006). Service learning in the curriculum. A resource for higher education institutions. Pretoria, South Africa: The Council on Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www.che.ac.za/sites/default/files/publications/HEQC_Service- Learning_Curriculum_Jun2006_0.pdf
Boyer, E. (1996). The scholarship of engagement. Journal of Public Service and Outreach, 1(1), 11-20.
Bringle, R. G. & Clayton, P. H. (2012). Civic education through service learning: What, how, and why? In L. McIlraith, A. Lyons & R. Munck (eds.), Higher education and civic engagement: Comparative perspectives (pp. 101–124). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bringle, R. G. & Hatcher, J. A. (1999). Reflection in service-learning: Making meaning of experience. Educational Horizons, 77(4), 179-185.
Community Interaction (2012). Experiential Learning Survey. Unpublished Report. Stellenbosch University.
Council on Higher Education (2010). Higher Education in South Africa 2008. Retrieved from http://www.che.ac.za/heinsa/
Ehrlich, T. (1996). Foreword . In B. Jacoby & Associates (eds.), Service-learning in higher education: Concepts and practices (p. xi). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Eyler, J. (2002). Reflection: Linking service and learning-Linking students and communities. Journal of Social Issues, 58(3), 517-534.
Felten, P. & Clayton, P. H. (2011). Service-learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 128, 77-84. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tl.470
Furco, A. (1996). Service-Learning: A Balanced Approach to Experiential Education. Expanding Boundaries. Service and Learning, 2-6. Washington DC: Corporation for National Service.
Furco, A. (2003). Issues of Definition and Program Diversity in the Study of Service-Learning. In S. H. Billig and A. S. Waterman (eds.), Studying Service-Learning: Innovations in Education Research Methodology. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ham, C. & Smith-Tolken, A. R. (2014). Work-integrated learning in forestry education in South Africa: from theory to practice. In International Proceedings, DAAD (Deutscher Akademischer Austausch Dienst). Annual Workshop held in Indonesia, April 2014.
Hatcher, J. & Erasmus, M. (2008). Service-learning in the United States and South Africa: A comparative analysis informed by Dewey John and Julius Nyerere. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, Fall, 49-61.
Kennesaw State University, KSU Engage. Retrieved from https://engageksu.kennesaw.edu/engaged-teaching/about.php
Kenny, M. E. & Gallagher, L. A. (2002). Service learning: A history of systems. In M. Kenny, L. A. K. Simon, K. K. Brabeck & R. M. Lerner (eds.), Learning to serve – Promoting civil society through service learning (pp. 15-30). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Le Grange, L. (2007). The “theoretical foundations” of community service-learning: From taproots to rhizomes. Education as Change, 11(3), 3-13.
McNall, M., Reed, C. S., Brown, R. E. & Allan, A. (2009). Brokering community-university engagement. Innovation Higher Education, 33, 317-331.
Millican, J. (2007). Finding commonality among difference – Developing emotional literacy through experiential work (Unpublished document). CUPP, University of Brighton.
Osman, R. & Petersen, N. (eds.) (2013). Service learning in South Africa. Cape Town, South Africa: Oxford University Press.
Sigmon, R. L. (1979). Service-learning: Three principles. Synergist, 8(1), 9-11.
Stellenbosch University (2016). Social Impact Strategic Plan 2017-2022. Retrieved from http://www.sun.ac.za/si/en-za/Documents/SocialImpactStrategicPlan2017-2022_25Nov.pdf
Thomson, A. M., Smith-Tolken, A., Naidoo, A. & Bringle, R. G. (2011). Service learning and community engagement: A comparison of three national contexts. Voluntas, 22, 214-237.