|
COPYRIGHT 2005 Caddo Gap Press
Integrating community service with learning in the public school curriculum is not a new idea in education. The concept of service-learning has deep historical roots and there are numerous examples reported in research of the implementation of this practice in K-12 classrooms (Burns, 1998; Parsons, 1996; Stanton, Giles, & Cruz, 1999; Wade, 1997). While institutions of higher learning have not been exempt from the development of service-learning programs , it has been only within the last decade that there has been an increase in the interest of providing service-learning coursework at this level (Erickson & Anderson 1997; Eyler & Giles, 1999; Sax & Astin, 1997). As service-learning gained the attention of teacher educators, teacher education programs have begun to incorporate service-learning into their courses in a variety of ways (Donahue, 1999). Because teacher education programs traditionally include classroom-based field experiences such as classroom observations and student teaching, questions arise as to how service-learning differs from those experiences and what difference do these difference make. Up to this point research on the benefits of such programs remain limited in scope. For example, Conrad and Hedin (1991) noted that little is known about the academic benefits of university students' participation in community service and that still fewer studies have examined the benefits for prospective teachers. In fact, Gallego (2001) reports that according to Zeichner, Melnick, and Gomez (1996), the application of such service-learning activities is mentioned only once in the entire 900 pages of the Handbook of Research on Teacher Education.
The study reported here uses a qualitative design to investigate the benefits of service-learning through the eyes of the preservice teachers who participated in it. The study focuses on how preservice teachers compare and contrast teaching and learning in the formal classroom during student teaching and teaching and learning in service-learning. It is part of a larger investigation focusing on preservice teacher outcomes related to service-learning activities.
Background
We framed our investigation within three areas of the literature: (a) service-learning as an experience that differs from student teaching, (b) service-learning as an integral part of coursework, and (c) reflective practice as a learning tool.
One rationale that has been offered for including service learning in teacher education is that it has benefits not found in student teaching placements. Erickson and Anderson (1997) have argued that traditional student teaching placements are most often not service-learning experiences, in that they do not address a real need for the students and their teachers (p. 7). The primary reason for placing student teachers in classrooms is to provide opportunities for them to connect theory and practice and to enhance their teaching skills (Krustchindky & Moore, 1981) rather than to provide a service to the community. Another difference between service-learning and student teaching lies in the types of activities that student teachers engage in and the opportunities for learning that are afforded as a result. In the traditional student teaching placement, student teachers are typically assigned to a single classroom with one teacher acting as a mentor. However, it has been suggested that the tasks students conduct often end up being mechanical and management oriented (Goodman, 1985). A possible reason could be that in these cases students are essentially visitors in someone else's "home" and as a result they often take subordinate roles, being neither fully a student, nor fully a teacher. Thus, their voice in deciding curriculum and the methods used for instruction remains limited, which restricts the opportunity for personal learning and professional development (Erickson & Anderson, 1999; Gallego, 2001).
Therefore, it may be that the role for preservice teachers in service-learning differs from their role in the formal classroom because they are more likely to have decision-making authority regarding the service they provide, including the ability to choose the curriculum they teach and the methods they use (Erickson & Anderson, 1997). In this way, service-learning placements offer preservice teachers stimulating, responsible positions (Eyler & Giles, 1999). As a result, the potential for personal learning and professional growth is expanded through the connection of academic study and a program of service that allows them to be directly responsible for providing a needed service.
Service-learning as it is applied in teacher education programs varies widely, but as noted it is most generally designed to complement and extend field-based experiences already present in such programs. The service-learning assignment described in this study is most closely aligned with what Sigmon (1996) describes in his typology as "SERVICE-LEARNING" (as cited in Eyler & Giles, 1999, p. 5). Both words are capitalized to symbolize the emphasis on both the service being provided and the learning that occurs as a result. From this perspective the purpose of engaging students in service-learning activities is similar to that of student teaching (i.e., to offer students the opportunity to connect theory with practice and practice teaching skills). However, service-learning assignments are ones in which students provide a community service outside the formal classroom (e.g., after school programs, community service organizations), and as such they address a real need for the students with whom they are working (Wade, 1997).
Studies related to service-learning state that in order to identify the outcomes of integrating service-learning into coursework there must be opportunity for student reflection (Burns; 1998; Erickson & Anderson, 1997; Eyler & Giles, 1999; Gallego, 2001; Gray, Ondaatje, & Fricker, et al., 1999; Rhodes, 1997), be it through writing or discussion, to facilitate the connection between service and learning. It is generally believed that opportunity for reflective thought allows students to step back and be thoughtful about their experiences and monitor their own thinking processes. However, this type of reflective process is not routinely built into most community service work; therefore, refection activities that tie theory and practice must be developed by faculty and embedded in the service-learning assignment (Eyler & Giles, 1999). The use of such activities can push students toward a more critical evaluation of their experiences. The systematic examination of students' critical reflections (as well as other program data) can yield greater insight into student learning, and help to develop guidelines for the successful use of service-learning in teacher education courses.
Schon's (1983) book, The Reflective Practitioner, provides a foundation through which teacher knowledge can be investigated. Schon suggests using reflection in varied professions to analyze, discuss, evaluate, and change practice. Elbaz (1988) and Connelly and Clandinin (1986) argue that rich information is gained from teacher reflections. These reflections help teachers clarify their thinking and anticipate decisions and future action. Teacher education programs based on reflective practice contribute toward (a) enabling teachers to analyze, discuss and evaluate their own practice; (b) fostering teachers' appreciation of social and political contexts; (c) enabling teachers to evaluate moral and ethical issues regarding classroom practice; (d) encouraging teachers to take responsibility for professional growth; (e) facilitating teachers' development of their own philosophy of education; and (f) empowering teachers so they may influence future directions of education...
Read the full article for free courtesy of your local library.
|
Bookmark this article
Print this article
Link to this article
Email this article
Digg It!
Add to del.icio.us
RSS
