Transcript Distinguished Research Award_Reciprocity Of

Reciprocity of Service-learning Research and
Practice at Tulane University
Barbara Moely and Vincent Ilustre
Building Strong Communities Through Civic Engagement
International Association for Research on Service Learning and Community
Engagement, Indianapolis, IN, October 2010
Today’s Presentation
 Historical perspectives
 The development of Tulane’s community engagement
programs
 Intertwining of research with program development
 How practice facilitated research
 How research findings have been used in programming
• Current research
•
•
University students participation in required service learning
Civic attitude development during college
Early Program Development: 1997-2005
 Four faculty in Psychology, working with schools in a public
housing community through a HUD grant to the University,
began offering SL courses
 Other interested faculty soon joined on.
 Formalization of service-learning program shown by
 Faculty approval of a service-learning course credit
 “Office of Service Learning” formed
 Staff positions established, space provided
•
Program growth illustrated in numbers of courses and
students:
 Courses: Increased from 7 in 1997-98 to 67 in 2004-2005
 Students increased from 186 in 1997-98 to 870 in 2004-2005
Sp
ri
ng
Fa 199
Sp l l 1 7
ri 99
ng 7
Fa 199
Sp l l 1 8
ri 99
ng 8
Fa 199
Sp l l 1 9
ri 99
ng 9
Fa 200
Sp l l 2 0
ri 00
ng 0
Fa 200
Sp l l 2 1
ri 00
ng 1
Fa 200
Sp l l 2 2
ri 00
ng 2
Fa 200
Sp l l 2 3
ri 00
ng 3
Fa 200
Sp l l 2 4
ri 00
ng 4
20
05
1997-2005: Number of
Service-learning Courses Offered
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
28
14
2
5
5
7
27 25
24
23
Number of Courses
30 31
35
24
17
10
32
1997-2005: Numbers of
Service-learning Students at Tulane
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
420
304
275
190 209
150 132
Number of Students
20
05
Sp
ri
ng
20
04
Sp
ri
ng
20
03
Sp
ri
ng
20
02
Sp
ri
ng
20
01
Sp
ri
ng
20
00
Sp
ri
ng
19
99
Sp
ri
ng
Sp
ri
ng
19
98
36
19
97
Sp
ri
ng
371 381 346
447 453 431 449
421
397
Program Enhancement through Funded Projects
 1996 – 2001: Tulane-Xavier Campus Affiliates Program, funded by
the U.S. Office of Housing and Urban Development, for
programmatic activities with agencies serving families and children
from New Orleans public housing
 1997-98: Foundation for Independent Higher Education and the
Annenberg Foundation, small grant for college student tutoring of
middle-school students
 2000-2003: Tulane was a subgrantee on a FIPSE grant to Eastern
Michigan University, for faculty development for SL
 2003-2006/8: Tulane led an LSA Consortium Grant for program
institutionalization, involved 7 other institutions, using Furco’s Rubric
as the basis for program development
Initial Research (1999-2000): What are students
gaining from their service-learning experiences?
 Development and use of the Civic Attitudes and
Skills Questionnaire (CASQ)
 Moely, Mercer, Ilustre, et al. (2002)
 Moely, McFarland, et al. (2002)
Tulane students engaged in service learning showed prepost course increases in ratings of their own civic
attitudes and skills, greater than those shown by
students in comparison courses that did not involve
service learning.
Changes in Civic Attitudes and Skills Following
Participation in Service Learning Courses
Pretest
M (SD)
Posttest
M (SD)
Service-learning course (N = 217)
3.95 (.52)
4.12 (.53)
Non-service-learning course (N= 324)
3.92 (.52)
3.94 (.56)
Service-learning course
3.87 (.68)
3.96 (.65)
No service-learning
3.90 (.66)
3.78 (.68)
Service-learning course
3.97 (.65)
4.17 (.62)
Non-service-learning
3.97 (.68)
3.84 (.77)
CASQ Scale
SOCIAL JUSTICE ATTITUDE *
LEADERSHIP SKILL*
CIVIC ACTION **
* p < .05, ** p < .01, for differential pre-post change in group means
Students’ Ratings of Course Value for
Service-learning and Comparison Courses
COURSE VALUE
Measure
Pretest
M (SD)
Posttest
M (SD)
Service-learning course (N = 211)
4.10 (.62)
4.14 (.60)
Non-service-learning course (N= 322)
4.13 (.60)
3.96 (.83)
(differential pre-post change, at p < .05)
COURSE VALUE SCALE: Eight items asked students to evaluate how
important or useful they expected (pretest) or had experienced
(posttest) the academic course to be for them.
Implications of the Research
 Programmatic feedback
 Assessment of program effectiveness: “On the right track,
though we can do better”)
 Building justification for program on campus
 Student gains were promising, encouraged faculty
involvement
 Enabling us to expand program through participation in
funded projects
 The CASQ measure we developed could be used in other projects
 Beginning of a record of research activity
2001-2 Research: Does service-learning
contribute to University goals?
Study of service-learning and students’ plans for continued
study to university graduation (retention):
 Sarah Gallini: Surveyed 333 Tulane students in SL and
other comparable courses
• Students in service-learning courses evaluated their
courses more positively than did students in nonservice-learning courses:
• Higher academic, community, and interpersonal
•
engagement, more challenged by their courses
SL course increased their plans to continue study.
Service-learning, Engagement, Plans for
Continued Study (Retention)
Measure
ServiceLearning
Course
(N = 142)
Nonservice
-learning
Course
(N = 171)
Community ***
3.85 (.60)
3.06 (.65)
Academic ***
3.86 (.56)
3.53 (.71)
Interpersonal ***
3.81 (.70)
3.15 (.89)
ACADEMIC CHALLENGE ***
3.68 (.52)
3.33 (.63)
HOURS STUDIED per week ***
3.73 (3.16)
3.05 (2.68)
RETENTION PLANS ***
3.55 (.58)
3.24 (.47)
ENGAGEMENT
*** p < .001, for differences between mean scores
Why Does Service Learning Increase
Retention in College?
Academic
Engagement
SERVICE
LEARNING
Academic
Challenge
Plans for
RETENTION
Academic factors (engagement, challenging course work) mediated the
relationship between SL and retention. -- Gallini & Moely (2003)
Implications of the Research
 Emphasized the academic component of service-
learning as integral aspect of its impact on students
 Faculty could justify including service-learning as
innovative teaching rather than service, in P&T and
other evaluations
 Built administrative support for the program
 Increased awareness of the potential for service-learning
to aid in pursuit of campus goals (increased retention
through rigorous academic offerings)
Paradigms of Service
(adapted from Morton, 1995)
Charity Approach
• Emphasis on direct service to the individual, for a
limited period of time. The “helper” plans activities
and makes decisions about service activities.
Social Change Approach
• Emphasis on producing societal change that will last.
Aim is to empower those served so that they can
accomplish self-determined goals.
Student Preferences and
Service-learning Outcomes
 Moely and Miron (2005) study, based on Morton’s paradigms of
service
 Compared two ways of assessing paradigm preferences , developed
•
reliable scales for Charity and Social Change, not for Project
paradigm
 Tulane students expressed preferences for more individual, helping
kinds of service (charity) than for experiences emphasizing social
change
Moely, Furco, and Reed (2008) Larger, more diverse sample


Included one of the Moely & Miron measures as part of an
asssessment of service-learning impacts
Looked at how preferences and service placements are related to
service-learning outcomes
Moely, Furco, and Reed:
Service-Learning Courses
 Data gathered from 7 campuses participating in a LSA
grant
 Involved 73 courses, representing a range of
disciplines, most often in
•
33% in the Humanities
•
27% in the Social Sciences
•
17% in Psychology/Human Development
• Courses taught by faculty who had taken part in a faculty
development seminar for service-learning
Community-Service Preferences Scale
(Sample Items)
“The following statements describe different kinds of service-learning
activities. Please rate each statement as to how much you would like to
engage in this kind of service.”
Charity Items:
• A service placement where you can really become involved in
helping individuals.
• Helping those in need.
(Internal Consistency: alpha (4 items, N = 2,016) = .83)
Social Change Items:
• Changing public policy for the benefit of people.
• Working to address a major social ill confronting our society.
(Internal Consistency: alpha (4 items, N = 2,017) = .85)
Characterizing Service Sites as Involving
Charity or Social Change (Sample Items)
“Using the scale below, indicate the extent to which your service-learning
activity involved each of the following:”
Charity
• A service placement where you can really become involved in helping
individuals
• Helping those in need.
(Internal Consistency: alpha (4 items, N = 1,650 ) = .85)
Social Change
• Changing public policy for the benefit of people.
• Working to address a major social ill confronting our society.
(Internal Consistency: alpha (4 items, N = 1,646 ) = .84)
Identifying “Match” and
“Mismatch” Groups
Charity
Pref.
Social
Change
Pref.
Both
Neither
Total
Match
Total
Mismatch
Charity Site
69
46
75
107
144
153
Social
Change Site
26
66
62
74
128
100
Both
83
105
195
131
195
131
Neither
62
88
76
170
170
226
Totals
240
305
408
482
637
610
Importance of the “Match”
For three Preference groups, a MATCH predicted:

Increased Learning about the Community

Increased Satisfaction with College

Increased Interpersonal Effectiveness

Positive pre-post change in CASQ Civic Action and
Furco’s HES-LS Civic Responsibility scales.
Matched/Not Matched Students’
Reports of Learning about the Community
Group:
Initial Service
Preference:
Charity
Social Change
High Value
Undifferent.
Low Value
Undifferent.
Match
NO Match
3.80
3.80
3.39
3.20
4.17
3.37
2.97
3.44
Implications of the Research
 Students preferences should be considered in planning service
learning experiences, by offering choices of varied service
opportunities
 Ideally, service should encompass aspects of BOTH service to
individuals and contributions to social change.
 Community partners’ roles in the education of students
 building connections between individuals served and larger social
issues the agency is addressing;
 offering students opportunities to contribute to social change
activities at the agency.
A New Phase in Program and Research:
Renewal after 2005 Hurricane Katrina
 Major changes at the University included an increased
emphasis on campus-community engagement :
 Board approval of a new Public Service emphasis
 Student graduation requirement established
 Center for Public Service established
Undergraduate Focus
Academic Realignment
An enhanced collegiate
experience that is campusand student-centric
Focus resources, achieve
greater integration and
synergy among related
disciplines
Tulane
Renewal
Plan
A focus on building healthy,
sustainable communities
locally, regionally, and
throughout the world
New Partnerships
More focused, world-class
graduate programs and
enhanced professional
experiences
Graduate Programs
Center for Public Service
Public Service Graduation Requirement
Part 1:
Service Learning
Part 2:
Service Learning
Internship
Honors Thesis
Research Project
Capstone
International
Center for Public Service
Public Service Graduation Requirement
Part 1:
Service Learning
Part 2:
Service Learning
Internship
Honors Thesis
• Completed by the end of the
Research Project
sophomore year
• Course level: 100 – 300
Capstone
International
Center for Public Service
Public Service Graduation Requirement
Part 1:
Service Learning
Part 2:
Service Learning
Internship
Honors Thesis
• Completed after sophomore
year before graduation
• Course level: 300 – 600
Research Project
Capstone
International
Center for Public Service: Building University
Capacity for Student Engagement
Academic Year:
2004-05
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
Number of CPS Program
Staff Members
Number of Community
Partners
Number of Service
Learning Courses
9
11
25
32
28
56
140
110
192
150
382
118
406
122
67
108
145
220
266
Number of Students in
PS Internships
69
112
170
193
211
New Research Questions
1) Did students entering Tulane after Katrina have different reasons for
attending this University and different expectations for their study than
those entering prior to the storm?
2) How did the incoming students view the public service graduation
requirement?
3) Were incoming students’ personal characteristics, past experiences with
service, and their civic attitudes, knowledge, and skills related to their
views of the public service requirement?
4) How do these students evaluate the requirement after they have spent
two/four years at the University ? (Work partially completed.)
5) How do students’ civic attitudes change over their years in
college? How are these changes related to aspects of their public
service experiences? (Work still underway.)
Research Design
Time of Test (Year)
Year of
Tulane
Entry:
2006
2003- 05
257*
2006
290
2007
2008
2007
2008
2009
47
185
2010
2012
55
55
195
2011
X
148
X
* Numbers indicate number of students completing surveys;
color codes indicate Year in College (e.g. first, second, fourth)
“X” represents a future test date
Arrows indicate repeated tests of same participants
Gold box indicates students considered in the present report.
Research Question 1a:
Were post-Katrina students’
reasons for attending Tulane different
from those of
pre-Katrina students?
Reasons for College Choice Differentiating
Incoming and Continuing Students
ALL First-Year
Students
2006-08
Advanced
Students
2006
N = 648
N = 257
M (SD)
M (SD)
Tulane will make it possible for me to help
rebuild New Orleans **
2.82 (.95)
2.07 (1.07)
Opportunities for me to engage in service in
New Orleans communities **
2.81 (.96)
2.16 (.91)
The major area of study I want is available at
Tulane. *
3.25 (.91)
2.97 ( 1.01)
Reasons Differentiating Student
Groups:
“Why did you choose to attend Tulane
University?”
* Groups differ at p < .01
** Groups differ at p < .001
Research Question 1b:
Were post-Katrina students’
expectations for their college
experience different from those of
pre-Katrina students?
Anticipated Gains from College that Differentiate
Incoming and Continuing Students
Reasons Differentiating Student Groups:
“What do you hope to gain from your college
experience?”
ALL Firstyear
Students
Advanced
Students
M (SD)
M (SD)
Helping with the revitalization of the New Orleans
community **
2.98 (.89)
Making a difference **
3.35 (.82)
2.87 (.98)
Becoming active in politics **
2.21(1.01)
1.73 (.94)
Gaining leadership experiences and developing leadership
skills **
3.22 (.86)
2.79 (.96)
Exploring career possibilities and preparation for a chosen
career **
3.74 (.55)
3.52 (.75)
Conducting research **
2.47 (.96)
2.04 (.99)
** Groups differ at p < .001
2.25 (.98)
Research Question 2:
How did incoming students view the
public service graduation requirement?
Incoming Students’ Views of the Public Service Requirement
Items Assessing Students’ Evaluation and
Plans
2006
2007
2008
N = 290
N = 185
N = 195
• A good idea
56%
54%
62%
• OK
31%
31%
30%
• I don’t have any opinion about this
9%
5%
4%
• A bad idea
4%
10%
4%
Evaluation: “Do you think that learning about academic
subject matter through public-service experiences is …”
Plans: “How much public service do you plan to do while here at Tulane?”
• I plan to become very active in the
community
25%
25%
32%
• More than the amount required if it seems
beneficial to me
56%
59%
56%
• Just the amount that is required, no more
19%
15%
12%
Research Question 3:
Were incoming students’ personal
characteristics, prior experiences with
service, and their civic attitudes,
knowledge, and skills related to their
views of the public service requirement?
Predicting Entering College Students’ Evaluations of
and Plans Regarding the Public Service Requirement
Predictors Correlated with Students’
correlations)
(bivariate
Evaluat.
Plans
Personal Characteristics
Gender (1 = male, 2 = female)
.21**
.18**
Area of Origin (1= Louisiana, 2 = All Other)
.12**
.17**
.30**
.35**
.23**
.20
Service was a volunteer activity (1 = no, 2 = yes)
.18*
.32*
Service was for a service-learning course (1 =no, 2 =yes)
.07*
.11*
High School Experiences
Enjoyment of Prior Community Service
Impact of Prior Community Service
* p < .01
*** p < .001
Predicting Entering College Students’ Evaluations of
and Plans regarding the Public Service Requirement
Predictors Correlated with Students’

(partial correlations, controlling for
Social Desirability responding)
Evaluation
Plans
s
Civic Attitudes
HES-LS Civic Responsibility
.51**
.59**
Valuing Community Engagement
.46**
.59**
CASQ Social Justice
.25
.36*
.29**
.37**
.27**
.28**
Leadership Skills
.18
.25*
Cultural Skills
.12
.25*
Civic Knowledge
Seeks Information about Political/Social Issues
Civic Actions
Interpersonal Skills
Research Question 4:
How do students evaluate the
graduation requirement after
they have spent two/four years
at the University?
(Data collection not yet completed.)
Continuing/Graduating Students’ Views of the Requirement
Assessing Students’ Evaluations and Plans
Evaluation: “Do you think that learning about
academic subject matter through public-service
experiences is …”
First Year to
Soph./Jr. Year
Seniors
(All Three Groups)
(2006
Group)
N = 252 (37% of total)
N = 55
Time1
Time2
Time 3
• A good idea
60%
65%
66%
• OK
31%
29%
29%
• I don’t have any opinion about this
3%
1%
0
• A bad idea
6%
5%
5%
Plans: “How much public service do you plan to do /are you doing/
while here at Tulane?”
• I plan to/have/ become very active in the
community
34%
14%
14.5%
• More than the amount required/ if it seems
beneficial to me
59%
61%
71%
• Just the amount that is required, no more
7%
25%
14.5%
Understanding Students’ Views
of the Requirement
 In contrast to these findings of a consistent and lasting positive
view of the requirement, studies of K-12 service learning have
shown that students show negative reactions to a required
service-learning experience. What might explain the difference?
 Stukas, Snyder, & Clary (1999) found that negative reactions to
required service are less likely among college students who


1) have a strong history of service activities, and

2) do not perceive the requirement as a strong form of control.
Our study: 1) Past experience did predict positive reactions;
2) “Control” was less apparent because students came to
the university with interest in service, and they had choices of
ways in which to complete the requirement.
Research Question 5:
How do students’ civic attitudes change
over two/four years of college?
(Data collection and analysis not yet
completed.)
Changes from Time 1 to Time 2 for
Groups Entering in 2006 and 2007 (N = 102)
Measure
Time 1
Time 2
M
M
SD
SD
HES-LS Civic Responsibility **
3.22
.43
3.88
.70
Community Engagement **
3.83
.57
4.02
.58
Seeks Information about Political/Social
Issues **
3.48
.50
4.35
.61
Knowledge of New Orleans Culture and
Issues **
2.83
.76
3.39
.72
Knowledge of Current Events **
3.53
.82
3.86
.71
HES-LS Academic Attitude **
3.17
.36
3.70
.66
* * Pre-post difference significant at p < .001
Summary of Current Research
Incoming students’ positive views of requirement are
influenced by
•
•
•
Gender, Area of Origin
Positive prior community service experience
Civic attitudes and Interpersonal Skills
Students’ views of the public service requirement
continue to be positive after two years of academic
study.
•
•
They see public service as a “good” or “OK” idea
They report doing more than the amount required
Students show increases in positive civic attitudes
after two years.
Implications of Current Research
 Concerns about students’ possible negative reactions
to the requirement are not confirmed by the findings.
 Student choice in completing the requirement may
contribute to the positive outcomes, so that offering an
array of service-learning courses and other kinds of
public service experiences is important.
 Question for the field:
Can these findings be generalized to other institutions
and contexts, or is this something specific to a
particular campus and city at a unique time?
Overall Summary: Looking Back
The research has been useful for program development.
 Formative value: Program has been responsive to implications for
practice gained through research
 Evaluation: Building the program’s reputation


Can show that a program contributes to campus goals, offers faculty
opportunities for new instructional and research initiatives
Research record is helpful in making the case to outside agencies for
support
Program development supports the research effort.
• Interesting research questions often derive from practice
• A strong program offers opportunities to conduct worthwhile research.
Looking Forward
 Research:
 Aim to complete this work, with two more groups of
seniors to be surveyed
 Ongoing research on campus-community partnership
development and partner strategies for working
effectively with large groups of students
 Program:
• Encourage more faculty to engage in research on
questions related to CPS
• Many other programmatic activities underway!
References for Tulane work

Moely, B. E., Mercer, S. H., Ilustre, V., Miron, D., and McFarland, M. (2002). Psychometric properties and
correlates of the Civic Attitudes and Skills Questionnaire (CASQ): A measure of students’ attitudes related
to service learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 8, 15-26.

Moely, B. E., McFarland, M., Miron, D., Mercer, S. H., & Ilustre, V. (2002). Changes in college students’
attitudes and intentions for civic involvement as a function of service-learning experiences. Michigan
Journal of Community Service Learning, 9, 18-26.

Gallini, S., & Moely, B. E. (2003). Service learning and engagement, academic challenge, and retention.
Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 10, 5-14.

Moely, B. E., & Miron, D. (2005). College students’ preferred approaches to community service: Charity
and social change paradigms. In S. Root, J. Callahan, and S. H. Billig (Eds.) Improving service-learning
practice: Research on models to enhance impacts. Greenwich, CT: Information Age

Moely, B. E., Furco, A., & Reed, J. (2008). Charity and social change: The impact of individual preferences
on service-learning outcomes. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 15(1), 37-48.

Miron, D., & Moely, B. E. (2006). Community agency voice and benefit in service-learning. Michigan
Journal of Community Service Learning, 12(2), 27-37.

Moely, B. E., & Ilustre, V. University students’ views of a public service graduation requirement. Submitted
for publication.
For More Information
Barbara Moely
[email protected]
Vincent Ilustre
[email protected]
Research Website
http://tulane.edu/cps/about/engaged-scholarship.cfm