Service Learning: A Promising Strategy for Connecting Students to Communities

Abstract

Service learning is enjoying the limelight these days. In 1993 President Clinton signed into law the National and Community Service Trust Act. A major title in that act, Learn and Serve America, designed to encourage school-based community in kindergarten through high school, has inspired pro grams in all 50 states. Many proponents of school reform are urging learning as an element in the restruc turing of public schools. Still others propose community as a prevention strategy in dealing with at-risk youth. High school honor societies often make a condition of membership; a handful of states and a some what greater number of school districts have added munity to the requirements for graduation. And nationally, in addition to the federal funds provided by the Corporation for National and Community Service, private foundations, notably the DeWitt Wallace-Readers Digest Fund and W.K. Kellogg, have made large grants in support of learning. Service learning has been greeted with particular enthusiasm by those concerned with schools that serve young adolescents. Recent reports and school reform proposals point out the benefits of involving young ado lescents in community service. They acknowledge the fit between the characteristics of the age group and the processes of active learning. They recognize that not only does learning address a number of the traditional goals of the middle school (e.g., education for citizen ship, career exploration, reinforcement of basic skills), but it is also uniquely responsive to the traits of young adolescents—to the need to test oneself, to try on adult roles, to experiment with new relationships, to be trust ed, to connect with a world beyond the school and fam ily. Finally, learning is seen as a way to counteract the climate of violence and alienation that colors the lives of so many young people. It also encourages the dawning altruism that is an often-suppressed character istic of today's youth. This surge of enthusiasm is reminiscent of the days when open education and alternative schools captured the imagination of educators and parents. The increased interest in learning, the recognition of youth's potential to contribute to the society, and the acknowl edgment of the need to create environments responsive to the developmental needs and characteristics of young people might be seen as occasion for celebration by those of us who have long argued for giving learning a central role in the middle grades and beyond. In fact, however, the spotlight and, even the increased flow of resources constitute at least a risk, if not a threat. Like those earlier innovations, in the rush of eager activity that follows the discovery (or, as in the case of youth community service, the re-discovery) of a promising practice or program, many well-meaning efforts are launched and many fail. Mandates for com munity involvement will appear on Board of Education agendas; checklists of activities and formulas for required hours of service will emerge on the desks of administrators and teachers. With minimum planning, little or no staff training, and scant opportunity to include parents or the broader community in the process, token programs will be hastily initiated and claim the title of learning. Then, when the pro gram fails to live up to optimistic expectations, the fault will be seen to lie, not in the execution, but in the idea itself. It goes without saying that the school or other agency that has had such an experience is not likely to try that particular approach soon again. But this is not the only possible scenario. There are