Running head: CASE STUDY THREE

Case Study Three: Service-Learning

Katherine M. Knight
Loyola University Chicago

Service-Learning Program Analysis

CASE STUDY THREE

Service-learning in higher education today looks a lot different than it has in the past,
though higher educations main obligation to take care of societys needs remains the same
(Jacoby & Associates, 1996). According to Jacoby and associates (1996) the definition of
service-learning in higher education today requires that students engage in activities that
address human and community needs together in combination with reflection and reciprocity (p.
5). Through this case study, five service-learning programs at different universities are
described, compared, and integrated with literature on effective and significant service-learning
experiences. The service-learning programs discussed are DePaul Universitys Steans Center for
Community Based Service-Learning and Community Service Studies, Northwestern Universitys
Center for Civic Engagement, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA)s Center for
Community Learning, University of San Franciscos Center for Public Service and Common
Good, and University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC)s Student Leadership Development and
Volunteer Services.
Service-learning Program Descriptions
DePaul Universitys Steans Center for Community Based Service-Learning and
Community Service has a mission based on the entire institutions Catholic and urban mission
(Steans Center for Community-based Service-Learning, n.d). The Steans Center mission sets
out to develop mutually beneficial relationships with community organizations to engage
DePaul students in educational opportunities grounded in Vincentian values of respect for human
dignity and the quest for social justice. Programs offered in the Steans Center include: a
variety of paid and un-paid internships at DePaul, within the Chicago community, nationally and
globally; a Service Speaks day-long conference including presentations by students, faculty
and staff; the ENGAGE coalition of DePaul departments which program curricular and co-

CASE STUDY THREE

curricular opportunities for shared service experiences; and the student run service organization,
DePaul Community Service Association (DCSA). Finally, scholarships are available through the
Steans Center for students who have shown exceptional commitments to service and servicelearning programs.
Northwestern Universitys Center for Civic Engagement commits to service-learning
through an integration of academics with meaningful volunteer service, research, and
community partnerships and provides support and programming for current students, faculty,
staff, and alumni (Center for Civic Engagement, n.d.). With over 12 different service
programs offered, some of the unique opportunities to highlight include: a program dedicated to
accessible voter registration resources, NU Votes; the Engage Chicago summer field study
program; a Civic Engagement academic certificate program; a one-year Civic Engagement
Fellowship; and specific Graduate Engagement Opportunities to link graduate coursework and
active citizenship. The Center for Civic Engagement has its own advisory board, both in the city
of Chicago and the city of Evanston. Northwestern has dedicated advisors specifically for
service-learning opportunities, and has dedicated space for service-learning presentations and
meetings. Lastly, the Center for Civic Engagement has a commitment to conduct and publish
research on specifically on service-learning.
The Center for Community Learning at the University of California Los Angeles outlines
in its mission, the commitment to good citizenship through service-learning, internships and
other community-based learning experiences (Center for Community Learning, n.d.).
Undergraduate resources and programming are highlighted, as well as a separate development
program for faculty to enhance the knowledge of service-learning connections in academia as
well as course development training for faculty who want to develop new service-learning

CASE STUDY THREE

courses or revise existing ones. Undergraduate service-learning programming consists of:

internship courses; Civic Engagement and Disability Services minors; service-learning courses;
the Aston Scholars program consisting of a select group of senior students committed to paid
research on civic engagement; and several AmeriCorps affiliated programs.
The Leo T. McCarthy Center for Public Service and the Common Good at the University
of San Francisco (USF) defines service-learning as threefold, including service experience,
classroom experience, and intentional reflection (Service-Learning, n.d.). USF differentiates
service-learning from other types of learning and community service activities by focusing on
equally benefiting the provider and the recipient of the service. Distinctive programs within
the Center for Public Service and the Common Good include two masters degree tracks: one in
Public Affairs and one in Urban Affairs. In addition, USF provides resources to direct students
towards careers in public service. Lastly, USF offers additional programming including, but not
limited to, scholarships, fellowships, teacher training and faculty seminars, and global servicelearning programs.
The final service-learning program selected for this analysis is the Student Leadership
and Volunteer Services department at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) (Student
Leadership and Volunteer Services, n.d.). Located in the neighbor served by Jane Addams, UIC
service programs help students develop a sense of responsibility to the community through
intentional, educational, interactive, and reflective experiences. UIC sets to differentiate
service-learning from volunteering and community service through the following programs: a
service-learning speaker series; the UIC annual day of service; Student Service and Leadership
Awards; and Get Involved Service Experience, or GIVE.
Program Comparisons

CASE STUDY THREE

Though the five programs selected for this analysis are from two different areas of the
country and have very different institutional make-ups (public, private, religious, etc.), the five
service-learning programs have several similarities. For example, with the exception of Student
Leadership and Volunteer Services at UIC, all other programs are housed in their own servicelearning department. These stand-alone departments show that those four institutions (USF,
Northwestern, DePaul, and UCLA) highly value service-learning as part of the institution, that
they dedicate special time and services solely to this form of experiential learning. Second, all
five programs have developed their own missions apart from, but still linked to, the institution as
a whole. Lastly, all but one of the service-learning programs (UIC) offer services for
undergraduate students as well as faculty, staff, and the community.
Despite the several similarities between the five service-learning programs selected, there
are also several differences between the opportunities offered. While the majority of the
programs offer classroom-related service opportunities, the capacity that those courses are
offered are very different. UCLAs Center for Community Learning offers two minors worth of
service related coursework, whereas USFs Center for Public Service and the Common Good
only offers masters level coursework and tracks. Northwestern, UIC, and DePauls websites do
not state they offer any specific coursework on service-learning. Another difference between the
five programs is that some institutions practice research specifically related to service, and
service-learning activities. Northwestern and USF encourage students, faculty, and staff are
encouraged to complete and publish research on community-based activities, where UCLA,
DePaul, and UIC do not. Finally, and most obvious, is the difference in the variety and breadth
of program offerings between all five programs. UIC has a limited offering of large group

CASE STUDY THREE

services events, where DePaul and Northwestern have a variety of large group, individual, and
small group service-learning options.
Course Integration
Jacoby and associates (2006) and Honnet and Poulsen (1998) detail that the two most
important components of service learning are reflection and reciprocation, matching service
providers with those who need service. In order for students to have a true experiential servicelearning experience, they must reflect on the service they are doing and how it relates to the
course, position, or organization they are completing it for. Reciprocation happens when the
students and the parties served both benefit from the service-learning. Both sides are working
with each other, as opposed to for each other. Four out of the five programs selected for this
analysis state in a variety of different ways the importance of mutual benefit, a form of
reciprocity, in their service-learning opportunities. Surprisingly, only two of the five institutions
(UIC and USF) reference any form of reflection when discussing service-learning opportunities.
Though this reflection may be included in individual course descriptions and syllabi and the
remaining institutions, there is no emphasis on overall reflection to be found on the program
websites.
One of Howards (1993) principles of good practice for service-learning programs is to
rethink the faculty instruction role (pp. 6-7). This principle requires those leading servicelearning programs and activities to mix pedagogical methods for instruction. The two California
schools, USF and UCLA, have resources specifically for faculty to use when developing servicelearning coursework. USF offers help on constructing learning outcomes for service-learning
activities, and UCLA has books, downloadable resources, and one-on-one assistance in creating
a successful service-learning course.

CASE STUDY THREE

Finally, Furco (1996) details the differences between service-learning, volunteering,

community service, internships, and field education. The main difference between these five
different types of services is rooted in what the programs put more emphasis on. Where pure
service-learning places an equal emphasis on service and learning, community service and
volunteering place more emphasis on service and internships and field education put more
emphasis on learning. All five programs selected for this analysis claim they have servicelearning components. However, whether these programs contain true service-learning
experiences is up for debate. For example, UICs Student Leadership Development and
Volunteer Services department emphasizes reflective experiences through service-learning, all
programs listed appear to be heavily volunteer based, as indicated by the title of the department.
Conclusion
The five programs selected for this case study from Northwestern, UIC, USF, UCLA, and
DePaul all had excellent commitments to the reflective and reciprocal elements of service
learning, in addition to specific faculty resources for creating significant service-learning
experiences. However, there is some dissonance between the five programs as to what servicelearning looks like, and at times, these programs do not align with definitions set forth by Jacoby
and associates (2006), Honnet and Poulsen (1998), and Furco (1996). I believe, the biggest
challenge today is creating a true service-learning program that addresses many, if not all of the
principles laid out by Howard (1993) that make programs mutually beneficial for all involved
while integrating service with learning throughout the course of the class, program, or
organization.

CASE STUDY THREE

References
Center for Civic Engagement | About. (n.d.). Retrieved February 16, 2015, from
http://www.engage.northwestern.edu/about/index.html
Center for Community Learning. (n.d.). Retrieved February 16, 2015, from
http://www.uei.ucla.edu/communitylearning.htm
Jacoby, B. & Associates. (1996). Service-learning in higher education: Concepts and Practices.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Furco, Andrew (1996). "Service-Learning: A Balanced Approach to Experiential Education."
Expanding Boundaries: Service and Learning. Washington DC: Corporation for
National Service. 2-6.
Honnet, E.P. & Poulsen, S.J. (1998) Principles of Good Practice for Combining Service and
Learning, The Johnson Foundation

Howard, J. (1993).Community service-learning in the curriculum. In J. Howard (Ed.), Praxis I: A

faculty casebook on community service-learning. (pp. 3-12). Ann Arbor: OCSL Press.
Service-Learning. (n.d.). Retrieved February 16, 2015, from
http://www.usfca.edu/templates/centers_mccarthy_inside.aspx?id=2147494075
Steans Center for Community-based Service-learning. (n.d.). Retrieved February 16, 2015, from
http://steans.depaul.edu
Student Leadership and Volunteer Services - Service. (n.d.). Retrieved February 16, 2015, from
http://www.uic.edu/depts/sldvs/service.shtml

CASE STUDY THREE