Framing a Theory-Grounded Research Agenda Related to

COMMUNITIES

Bob Bringle, Roger Reeb, & Laura Littlepage

IUPUI Series on Service Learning Research

Research on Service Learning: Conceptual Frameworks and Assessment

Vol 2A: Students & Faculty Vol 2B: Communities, Institutions, &

Partnerships (Stylus 2013)

Theory

Design

Practice

Measurement

Focusing on theory“Bringle (2003) has advocated for theory from cognate areas to be clearly used as a basis of research. These could include theories from psychology about motivation, interpersonal relationships, and cognitive and moral development; from business about interorganizational relationships, leadership, and change management; from philosophy about value systems and decision-making; from political theory about individual and collective action; from history about social movements; from communication about conflict resolution.”

Focusing on theory

“The theory or conceptual framework might precede the data collection, or it might emerge from or be modified based on data analysis and interpretation. Procedures for measuring quantitative or qualitative aspects of attributes do not stand alone, and their meaningfulness is often a function of how solidly they are situated in theory.”

Research on Service Learning: Conceptual Frameworks and Assessment

• I. STUDENTS• II. FACULTY• III. COMMUNITIES• IV. INSTITUTIONS• V. PARTNERSHIPS

Section: COMMUNITY

• Community outcomes• Organizational capacity

Chapter template• Theoretical / conceptual frameworks• Critical review of past research• Measurement approaches and instruments• Implications for practice• Future research agenda• Recommended reading

Lets do some of this same thinking together ….

Critical review of research to date: COMMUNITIES

(+) ( )Δ

Participants?Authors?

Community Outcomes in Service Learning: Research and Practice From

a Systems Perspective

Roger N. Reeb and Susan F. Folger

University of Dayton

rreeb1@udayton.edu

Purpose of Presentation• To provide an overview of conclusions regarding

research on community outcomes of service-learning;

• To provide a brief critique of available research;

• To describe a new conceptual model to guide engaged scholarship and service-learning;

• To stimulate discussion and generate ideas for future development of the conceptual model.

11

Community Outcomes of Service-Learning

• Community respondents report that:

– Agencies are generally satisfied with students and their service;

– Benefits of service-learning outweigh the costs; and

– Service-learning projects facilitate campus-community partnerships.

• A few studies reveal challenges from the perspective of community respondents, such as:

– Difficulties concerning students’ schedules;

– Short-term commitments from students;

– Agency time/resources spent on training students; and

– Lack of communication with university partners.

Brief Critique of Research on Community Outcomes of Service-Learning

• Inferences were often based on general impressions of researchers, community respondents, or students.

• In general, this research has:

– Not been guided by theoretical frameworks;

– Not addressed complex questions;

– Not assessed key constructs; or

– Not utilized sophisticated research designs

Conclusion

• A question asked by Cruz and Giles (2000) 12 years ago is still relevant today:

–“Where is the community in service-learning research?”

• Cruz, N. L., & Giles, D. E. (2000). Where is the community in service-learning research? Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 7, 28-34.

Psycho-Ecological Systems Model of Community Action Research (PESM)

– Principle of Reciprocal Determinism • Bandura, A. (1978). The self system in

reciprocal determinism. American Psychologist, 33, 344-358.

– Biopsychosocial Model• Kiesler, D. J. (2000). Beyond the disease model of

mental disorders. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

– Ecological Systems Model• Bronfenbrenner, U. (1996). The ecology of human

development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

15

PESM integrates three theoretical developments:

Psycho-Ecological Systems Model of Community Action Research (PESM)

Purpose of PESM :

– PESM was developed to inform and guide community interventions, including those associated with engaged scholarship and service-learning.

16

• Publication:– Reeb, R. N., & Folger, S. F. (2013). Community outcomes in

service learning: Research and practice from a systems theory perspective. In P.H. Clayton, R. G. Bringle, & J.A. Hatcher (Eds.). Research on Service Learning: Conceptual Frameworks and Assessment (pp. 389-418). Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

• Local Presentation:– Stander Symposium, University of Dayton, 2011

• Regional Presentation:– Southwestern Ohio Council for Higher Education, 2011

• National Presentation:– American Psychological Association, 2011

• International Presentations:– IARSLCE, 2010, 2011– International Symposium on Service-Learning, Ningbo,

Zhejiang, China, 201117

Background PublicationsandPresentationsonPESM

Psycho-Ecological Systems Model(PESM) for CommunityAction Research

18

Principle of Reciprocal Determinism

P

B E

P = Person Factors

E = Environmental Factors

B = Behavior

19

Biopsychosocial Model

• Internal Factors:– Vulnerability Factors– Resiliency Factors– Developmental Factors

• External Factors:– Risk Factors– Resource Protective Factors

20

The Different EcologicalSystems of PESM

21

Microsystem:

“a pattern of activities, roles, and interpersonal relations experiencedby the developing personin a given setting…”

The Different EcologicalSystems of PESM

22

Mesosystem:

“a system ofmicrosystems…”

“it comprises theInterrelationshipsamong two or moresettings in which thedeveloping personactively participates…”

The Different EcologicalSystems of PESM

23

Exosystem:

“one or more settingsthat do not involve thedeveloping person asan active participant,but in which eventsOccur that affect, or areaffected by, what happensin the setting containingthe developing person”

The Different EcologicalSystems of PESM

24

Macrosystem:

“…overarching practices,beliefs, changes, andmovements at broaderlevels (community,society, culture,government) thatfunction as blueprintsfor action…”

The Different EcologicalSystems of PESM

25

Supra-Macrosystem:

“…international orglobal influences,such as internationally-endorsed values(e.g., MillenniumDevelopment Goals)…”

Major Implications of PESM• Participatory approach

• Multidisciplinary projects

• Multidimensional assessment of community outcomes

• Projects that enhance resiliency and resources in the community

• Projects that reduce vulnerability and risk factors in the community

• “Psychopolitical Validity” (Prilleltensky, 2008):– Enhance agency in community members and groups

– Beyond ameliorative efforts, perhaps contributing to structural change

– Prilleltensky, I. (2008). The role of power in wellness, oppression, and liberation: The promise of psychopolitical validity. Journal of Community Psychology, 36, 116-136.

26

EXAMINING SERVICE LEARNING FROM THEPERSPECTIVE OF COMMUNITY

ORGANIZATION CAPACITY

Laura LittlepageIndiana University Public Policy Institute

Beth GazleySchool of Public and Environmental Affairs

Indiana University

Reciprocity in Service Learning • Students: expected to acquire new skills and learn more effectively

through ability to apply and test classroom knowledge in real settings.

• Instructors: expected to teach more effectively by extending the opportunities for their students to learn.

• Host agencies: expected to operate more effectively with additional volunteer labor and expertise.

• Communities: gain from pro-social student behavior, greater community social capital, stronger town-gown relationships, more volunteerism.

IUPUI SERIES ON SERVICE LEARNING RESEARCH

Gaps in Research• Challenges (versus benefits) of service learning• Impact on host agencies• ASSUMPTION:

• REALITY:

“Win-win” situationMcIntyre, Webb & Hite, Marketing Education Review, 2005

“Working with service learners has the potential to be more painful and more beneficial than working with [other] volunteers” Barry Lessow, CEO, Monroe County United Way

StudentCommunity Cam

pus

Benefits·Professional experience·Stronger grasp of subject matter·Understanding of social needs·Civic engagement·Personal efficacy·Critical thinking skills

Challenges·Managing time commitment·New learning environment·Expectation of professionalism

Benefits·Improved client services·Volunteer labor·Town-gown links·Networking·New expertise, technologies & research·Resources·Agency visibility

Challenges·Management capacity·Operational capacity·Pedagogical demands

Benefits·Pedagogical excellence·Bridge building & town-gown links·Student preparation & placement· Living lab for research·Scholarly publications·Applied research support

Challenges·Scheduling·Resources·Time & oversight required to maintain relationships·Staff’s ability to develop meaningful projects·Mentoring and supervision

Benefits and Challenges of the Service Learning Experience

Theoretical Lens: Volunteer Management Capacity

(Hager and Brudney, Urban Institute, 2004)• Addresses the capacity of nonprofits to work with

volunteers• Identifies effective volunteer management

practices • Identifies unmet managerial needs• Helps to explain agency capacity to take on more

volunteers– “Capacity” = managerial practices that support

volunteer involvement

Suggested Interventions and Programs

• Agency actions• Campus and/or faculty actions

Recommendations for Future Research

• How do agencies view and how prepared are they for, and what are their attitudes toward, service-learners as volunteers, especially as they compare to attitudes toward other types of volunteers?

• How can funding, training and professional development, and other volunteer management capacity resources be leveraged to increase an agency’s likelihood of involving service-learners in its operations?

• Is service learner participation distributed equitably across the nonprofit sector, or rather concentrated among certain agencies according to certain organizational characteristics (e.g., mission, size, management capacity)?