Lynn Sutankayo is a partnership coordinator at University of Alberta’s (North Campus) Community Service-Learning (CSL) unit, where she focuses on matching academic courses with community partners and providing opportunities for students to engage with community partners through volunteer experiences built into a course. She tells us about how a strong relationship built on trust and support can help a partnership grow.

How did you first start working with the Edmonton Mennonite Centre for Newcomers (EMCN)?

has collaborated with CSL as a Community Partner in the curricular CSL program since 2005. When I began working at CSL in 2012, EMCN hosted around 7 students from 1-2 courses per semester. The homework club volunteer position was a popular CSL placement then, and remains to this day. EMCN’s homework clubs are after school or weekend programs that offer children and youth from grades 1 to 12 the opportunity to work with an adult or older youth volunteers for help with homework, language skills and social skills.

How did that work evolve?

The reciprocity that comes with co-creating successful CSL projects each term created a trusting working relationship between Partnership Coordinator staff and EMCN volunteer Coordinator staff over the years. Since 2005, I estimate that EMCN has worked with at least 15 different courses and, with increased capacity on both our sides, they have worked with as many as 40 students in a semester. EMCN has incorporated new activities into programs facilitated by CSL students from courses that teach about play leadership, inquiry-based learning, comedy and other diverse fields. EMCN has also partnered with courses to explore new projects. For example, this past semester, while continuing to host CSL students in homework club roles, EMCN connected with CSL students to film an educational video. The semester before that, CSL students supported the development of training resources for volunteers. Those are just a few of the examples of projects that our partnership has inspired. To make projects happen term after term and to continue working with each other to build upon successes requires a particular type of relationship. For us, that relationship includes trust, mutuality, reciprocity, and one where we can provide each other positive and negative feedback. There is a common satisfaction there, and that relationship is part of the ‘infrastructure’ of supporting our ability to work with each other to make those tangible kinds of outcomes happen.

You’ve mentioned the positive changes that EMCN has implemented. What has CSL’s role been in developing that level of trust you mentioned?

Something CSL strives to do well is listen to organizational needs and ideas and respond to the interests and creativity that surface in friendly conversation. I think that is part of a community-first approach—starting where the community is at. Community organizations, like faculty, are at different points in their community engagement journeys. Some may want to start with a small number of students in 1 CSL course, while other organizations may be interested in a large-scale engagements involving several courses and students. We can offer ideas, and organizations like EMCN are willing to experiment and innovate. Ultimately, we decide together the type of engagement that has the greatest chance for everyone – students, instructors, and the organization – to be successful. It’s also important to recognize that ‘increased engagement’ doesn’t need to result in a increasingly larger number of participants. There is also a type of increased engagement that ‘deepens’ the relationship. For example, a deepened relationship is one where we can talk frankly about setbacks, yet agree to continue working together and to improve on the process for next time.

What have been some of the highlights of your work together?

CSL partnered with EMCN to co-design a course called CSL 350, an ‘Introduction to Community-based Research’. It was taught by our CSL director, David Peacock, a member of the CFICE team, in collaboration with EMCN’s researcher and volunteer coordinator, who participated as a community co-educator. Based on the research from that course, and EMCN’s expertise and experience, EMCN has developed a homework club best practices guide to be shared city-wide with practitioners who work with newcomers and youth. The homework club model is common in Edmonton, and so this guide is an important resource.

Most recently, we have co-written a federal government grant proposal. The grant was to build the social capital of 40-50 newcomer and diverse youth, ages 16 to 18, to participate in service learning activities based upon EMCN’s unique family-centered approach to youth settlement. The funding, if granted, will go towards EMCN and another community partner to implement the program. CSL supported the grant-writing process and we will participate in the proposed program to link youth with CSL student volunteers.

One of the most significant drivers in this work is the energy and innovation brought by EMCN’s volunteer management staff. These staff saw the potential that CSL students could bring as volunteers in their programming. A highlight for me is the relationship I have been able to form with EMCN’s volunteer management team. It’s trusting, it’s energizing, it’s motivating, and it’s responsive in the ways we support each other’s work. That kind of close working relationship has been valuable to my own learning about reciprocity.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Dr. Charles Levkoe is a CFICE co-investigator as part of the CCE Brokering Working Group.

CFICE Co-Investigator, Charles Levkoe, recently published an academic article with colleagues Abigail Friendly and Amrita Daniere titled Community Service-Learning in Graduate Planning Education. Published in the Journal of Planning Education and Research January 2018, the article looks at how planning programs involving graduate-level students can examine learning outcomes to better describe the implications of community service-learning for graduate planning education.

Read through the abstract below, and access the full article through the .*

Abstract

Community service-learning (CSL) has gained popularity over the past decades in universities across North America.ĚýAlthough planning programs tend to involve more graduate-level community-engaged learning than other professional disciplines, learning outcomes have not been sufficiently examined. Based on a review of existing literature and analysis from four years of a CSL course at the University of Toronto’s Department of Geography and Planning, this article describes the implications of CSL for graduate planning education. We argue that CSL in graduate planning programs has a series of unique characteristics and thus requires distinctive pedagogical approaches.

*Note: Readers may need a subscription to the Journal or through an academic institution in order to access the full article.

To cite this article, please use:

Levkoe, C. Z., Friendly, A., & Daniere, A. (2018). Community Service-Learning in Graduate Planning Education. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 11(2), 0739456X1875431–12.

I saw the as a great opportunity to travel and learn about sustainability, so in October 2014 I decided to participate. The Alternative Spring Break program at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University is a 6-month immersive community service learning (CSL) program that connects students’ academic learning to hands-on community experiences. The program’s main attraction is its February service learning trip, where students are sent to a specific community to work with one of the program’s many partner organizations.

As part of my trip, I traveled to Uaxacutun, Guatemala to assist the community with implementing creative recycling. As an environmental studies student, I initially found this CSL opportunity very exciting since I thought it would give me insight into how a community becomes more environmentally conscious in a grassroots fashion. Though we participated in useful tasks, from picking up and separating plastic, paper, and garbage to painting and labeling recycling bins, I noticed that the community seemed to expend greater energy on hosting us than what we were giving them in return. For example, the community put a lot of effort into welcoming us through a huge community-wide welcome party. They also provided us with accommodations, and multiple meals throughout the day. As the trip progressed, it became evident to me that we were using up a lot of the community’s already scarce and valuable resources.

Upon returning and reflecting on the trip, I had mixed feelings. I was under the impression that we would be mostly working with and for the community during our time in Uaxactun, however I felt that my group and I benefited the most from the trip.

Voluntourism is problematic because it reinforces the false stereotype of the need for northern aid. Children in the community saw us, the students from the global north, as people with knowledge and skills beyond those of their community leaders; on several occasions the children and community members watched as their community leaders and elders thanked us for lending them our assistance. We were also teaching children at the local school English words related to health and recycling. Being positioned as teachers does not demonstrate collaboration between the community and Westerners. Rather, it reinforces to the children the idea that Westerners are the ones with the answers and that communities like theirs must depend on the West for guidance.

Because of the very short duration of our trip, and our lack of skills in carpentry (among many other factors), I believe the people of Uaxactun were more than capable of implementing this recycling project themselves. It could have been a great community engagement project by the community and for the community. The community did, of course, benefit from having recycling bins, but what is the purpose of Canadian students travelling such great distances to help the community paint recycling bins, and do the benefits to the community reconcile in the end with the amount of resources that the community used to host us?

Overall, the experience has made it clear to me that international service learning needs to be radically restructured. For example, students couldĚýcommit to working with their home communities by having fundraisers to assist with the community’s needs with building infrastructure. This type of student contribution would be much more beneficial to the community as the community would be able to specifically outline the developmental barriers they are facing.

If you are planning to go on an international volunteer trip during spring break this year, I recommend you do your independent research of where your money is going. Look into whether your money is going to the community directly or whether it’s mostly covering administrative costs or big salaries. Finally, make it a goal to yourself and your group to work towards long-term structural change prior and subsequent to your trip.

Please visit:Ěý to access the newsletter.

Please follow the link for more information about abstract submission and share widely.

The site contains rich detail on how UBC’s CSL programs developed including written reflections fromĚý students, examples of CSL projects, and analysis of the factors that contributed to the institutionalization of CSL at UBC and the resilience of partnerships with community organizations.

To view this special issue of the Journal, please log on toĚý. ĚýTo assist your review, the manuscripts have been categorized as follows:

a. ĚýNational (Multi-University) Programs
b. ĚýEcosystems
c. ĚýPrograms and Curricular Efforts
d. ĚýTopic-Focused Programs
e. ĚýCourse-Focused Programs

Since 1994, The Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning (MJCSL) has been the premier national, peer-reviewed journal publishing articles written by faculty and service-learning educators on research, theory, pedagogy, and other issues related to academic (curriculum-based) service- learning and community-engaged scholarship in higher education. The Michigan Journal, published by the University of Michigan’s Edward Ginsberg Center for Community Service and Learning, contributes to the national dialogue on community engagement.

The Fall Issue (Volume 21 Number 1) of The Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning is about to be released. The yearly subscription rate for Volume 21 which includes both the Fall and Spring issues (released respectively in November, 2014 and April, 2015) is $29.00. Shipping is included in the price except for Canada ($5) and International addresses ($20).

Volume 21 Number 1 includes the following articles:

• The Impact of Service-learning Course CharacteristicsĚýon University Students’ Learning Outcomes (Barbara E. Moely and Vincent Ilustre)
• Developing Intercultural Competence by Participating In Intensive Intercultural Service-Learning (Nadia De Leon)
• “Rekindle and Recapture the Love”: Establishing System-wide Indicators of Progress in Community Engagement and Economic Development (Emily M. Janke)
• Democratic and Social Justice Goals in Service-Learning Evaluation: Contemporary Challenges and Conceptual Resources (David E. Meens)

SPECIAL SECTION: GLOBAL SERVICE-LEARNING

• Pushing Boundaries: Introduction to the Global Service-Learning Special Section (Eric Hartman and Richard Kiely)
• “Learning Service” in International Contexts: Partnership-based Service-Learning and Research in Cape Town, South Africa (Janice McMillan and Timothy K. Stanton)
• What Counts as Outcomes? Community Perspectives of an Engineering Partnership (Nora Pillard Reynolds)

BOOK REVIEW ESSAYS

• Driving Social Change: How to Solve the World’s Toughest Problems, Paul C. Light (Reviewed by Sandra L. Enos)
• Civic Work, Civic Lessons: Two Generations Reflect on Public Service, Thomas Ehrlich & Ernestine FuĚý(Reviewed by Nicholas V. Longo and Kerry Fleming)

To learn more and place an order:ĚýĚý

From:
Jeffrey Howard, Editor