Increasing interest on college campuses in volunteerism and service to the community can be the foundation for the development of enriched curricular and co-curricular service-learning programs by faculty and student affairs professionals. Alexander Astin’s theory of student involvement provides a strong justification for linking service-learning experiences to student success in college. This paper examines the elements of experiential education, reflective thinking, and student and community reciprocity within the service-learning process, all factors that enhance student learning. Student affairs professionals can be effective advocates to their faculty colleagues in raising awareness about the benefits of the service-learning model for students, faculty, and the university.

As higher education responds to the national focus on service and volunteerism, many educators believe it is important to take the next developmental step to service-learning. Increasing attention by colleges and universities, particularly within the ranks of student affairs professionals, is being given to the concept of service-learning how to promote its implementation through both curricular and co-curricular programs. Barbara Jacoby (1996), noted academic in the field of service-learning, has defined service-learning as:

a form of experiential education in which students engage in activities that address human and community needs together with structured opportunities intentionally designed to promote student-learning and development. Reflection and reciprocity are key concepts of service learning. (p. 5)

Service-learning is important for reasons that affect students, faculty, the university, and the surrounding community. As colleges and universities strive to engage their students in their education, one of the most compelling arguments for implementing service-learning programs on campus is creating the opportunity to involve college students more significantly in their education. According to Alexander Astin’s well-documented and well-accepted research on student involvement theory (1977, 1993b), the extent of student involvement is a key indicator of the level of success for a student in college. Thus, the current interest in service-learning provides an excellent opportunity to put Astin’s student involvement theory into practice through implementing service-learning programs at colleges and universities.

In his book Four Critical Years (1977), Astin stated that his original purpose of looking at student involvement was to measure the overall impact of college on students. Due to changes in both higher education and college students since the late 1970’s, Astin revised his study (1993b) to obtain more recent and relevant data. His principal purpose, however, was still to enhance our understanding of how undergraduate students are affected by their college experiences. Both studies focused on traditional-age college undergraduates who entered college soon after completing high school and enrolled on a full time basis (Astin 1977, 1993b).

Astin’s information about student involvement came from a longitudinal study that included a follow-up questionnaire completed by students in 1989-1990, in which 57 different measures of involvement were identified under five general headings (1993b). The five areas and the corresponding number of measures were: academic involvement (22), involvement with faculty (6), involvement with student peers (14), involvement in work (4), and other forms of involvement (11). Academic involvement includes the quantity of involvement in academic work as well as in various undergraduate courses. Involvement with faculty examines the number of hours per week spent talking with faculty outside class, assisting faculty in teaching or research, having a paper critiqued by a faculty member, and being a guest in a professor’s home. Involvement with student peers embodies such examples as socializing with friends, involvement in a student organization, working on group projects, discussing racial or ethnic issues, socializing with someone from another racial or ethnic group, tutoring another student, and participating in a campus protest. Hours per week working for pay and whether a student had a job on-campus or off-campus are examples of involvement in work. Other forms of involvement can encompass reading for pleasure, volunteer work, attending religious services, and exercising (1993b). The greater the involvement of students in college, the greater the amount of student learning and personal development (Astin, 1984).

As a result of his research, Alexander Astin (1996) has noted the three most important forms of college student involvement:

The results strongly support the importance of involvement as a powerful means of enhancing almost all aspects of the undergraduate student’s cognitive and affective development. The three most potent forms of involvement turn out to be academic involvement, involvement with faculty, and involvement with student peer groups. (p. 126)

Service-learning clearly incorporates all three of these involvement strategies.

Academic Involvement
As previously noted, service-learning is an effective academic experience using the devices of reflection and critical thinking. Service-learning does not need to be administered as part of a classroom experience, although incorporating service-learning into the curriculum would be an effective move. San Francisco State University has a successful service-learning program that includes more than 50 classes which require students to first partake in service work in the community and to then reflect on the work (Gose, 1997).

Faculty Involvement
Faculty and staff interact with students on a greater level by including service-learning in a class curriculum, creating co-curricular service-learning programs, and promoting service-learning experiences to students. University administrators need to take the lead in not only developing the projects, but also facilitating and allowing for the reflection processes. The service-learning model can serve as an intellectual challenge while providing the means for faculty-student interaction.

Peer Involvement
When service-learning initiatives are implemented, students will be part of a larger group working collaboratively for the betterment of something or someone. Within this greater group, students will have more opportunity for peer interaction. Throughout the entire process, from the hands-on service as part of a group to the facilitated group discussions and reflections, students will be constantly interacting with peers.

Universities historically have had a commitment to the common good. In 1984, college students with a mission to strengthen the nation through service founded Campus Outreach Opportunity League (COOL). The following year, in 1985, Campus Compact was founded by college and university presidents to extend opportunities for public and community service in higher education while promoting the importance of civic responsibility in student learning. More recently, President Clinton’s Learn and Serve America: Higher Education Program, came into existence on college campuses.

Despite some of these efforts, as the late Ernest Boyer stated in his 1995 speech, The Scholarship of Engagement, a dramatic decline has taken place, however, in the commitment of engaging the university with the community. Service is hardly ever mentioned during discussions of tenure and promotion. Institutions are beginning to resemble a private benefit and not a common good, further estranging the institution from the community. Academia needs to become more engaged in the civil duties of the nation, the schools, the cities, and the social problems. Boyer offered his term scholarship of engagement as a means of connecting the assets of colleges and universities to the most pressing social, civic, and ethical problems, as well as to the people whom the problems affect. Universities need to further their connection with civic cultures by creating climates in which the academic and the civic spheres come together.

Astin’s Findings on Service
Astin found that there is a strong correlation between student participation in volunteer work and social activism, leadership, participation in campus demonstrations, and interest in tutoring other students. Astin also noted a strong correlation between volunteer work and students’ self-reported growth in leadership abilities. A positive effect was also seen on commitment to developing a meaningful philosophy of life, promoting racial understanding, and participating in programs to clean up the environment (1993b). More recent research by Astin found that community service participation had positive effects on college grade point average, college retention, aspirations for educational degrees, as well as discipline-specific knowledge, academic self-concept, and time devoted to studying and homework (Astin & Sax, 1998). Service work enhanced the students’ awareness and understanding of different races and cultures, community problems, and national social issues. Participants in service were more likely than non-participants to reflect stronger interpersonal skills, an ability to work cooperatively, conflict resolution skills, and greater increases in social self-confidence and leadership ability.

While Astin’s research shows the importance of participation in volunteer work, service-learning is different from volunteerism and community service. Although community service is spreading throughout college campuses, administrators should not be satisfied with the hands-on work alone. As previously noted in this paper, Barbara Jacoby (1996) mentions that service-learning programs go beyond community service. Service-learning facilitates students applying what they are learning to real world problems as well as becoming more involved in the community surrounding the campus (Gose, 1997).

Experiential Education
In his Pedagogic Creed of 1897, John Dewey said that education needs to be part of community life. At the same time, Dewey placed importance on social purpose through his concept of “experience” (1959). He was one of the first educators to talk about how education happens in many places outside of the classroom and because of Dewey, educators have placed greater importance on experiential education. Both in-class and out-of-class experiences have significant positive effects on changes in critical thinking (Pascarella, White, Nora, Edison, Hagedorn, & Terenzini, 1996). Pascarella et al. found that out-of-class experiences were even more important than in-class experiences to the development of critical thinking skills.

The results from the research of Pascarella et al. (1996) support Astin’s theory of the importance of out-of-class experiences on student learning during college. Astin (1993b) used both in-class and out-of-class experiences to measure student involvement. Service-learning is a particularly good strategy to involve students because it is a co-curricular process that bridges academic learning and out-of-class service work. Thus, service-learning can also be seen as an effective example of student involvement theory because it encourages the development of critical thinking skills within students (Astin & Sax, 1998; Galligan, 1995). By sharing, discussing, and reflecting, students will begin to think more deeply about the world around them.

Reflection
Another major component of service-learning is reflecting on that action or experience. Although many critics of service-learning think that students do not actually “learn,” students learn through both the experience and the reflection afterwards. Freirian philosophy (1970, 1997) tells us that educated people can only transform the world by the process of praxis. By praxis, Freire refers to the practice of action and reflection. Action, or service, is not enough alone; reflection has to occur for there to be a learning outcome. Hatcher and Bringle (1997) define reflection as “an intentional consideration of an experience in light of particular learning objectives” (p. 154). They believe that reflection is essential because it links the concrete action to the abstract. Including reflection opportunities can be a challenge because many service-learning programs happen outside of the classroom, making it harder for students to participate in the reflection process. Inside of the classroom, service-learning courses have an intentional reflection piece directed by the professor or instructor; outside of the classroom, reflection needs to be made more intentional. It is hard to get a student to spend time reflecting or even talking about the service experience outside of the classroom (Scheuermann, 1996). Students often see reflection as taking time away from other activities such as school work, employment, or further volunteer work. Unfortunately, this causes students to not want to take the time and reflect on the experience. Students need to know the importance of reflection and that it needs to be incorporated as part of the experience for them to really reap benefits; it is not “just an afterthought” (Scheuermann, p. 141). To be most successful, student participants need to talk about and share their feelings about the experience, while also talking about the issues that precipitated the particular need for service.

Student affairs practitioners and faculty can challenge students to reflect on their service experience. Reflection can happen as both a group process and an individual process. Some of the more common practices include having large group discussions, having students write in journals, and having students answer specific questions prepared by the reflection facilitator. However, the group’s facilitators should not feel limited to these techniques. Scheuermann (1996) proposed examples of ways to implement reflection: viewing a video and drawing on the connection to service; reflecting on one question; performing role plays; having the students use one word to describe the experience and then discuss why they chose that specific word; or giving the facilitator feedback. Hatcher and Bringle (1997) propose options of electronic mail discussion groups, personal narratives, or writing short stories. No matter how reflection occurs, it is important that reflection is guided and that it occurs regularly to link experience to learning.

Reciprocity
Reciprocity is another key element in successful service-learning programs. Students learn from the people they are helping, while the people they are helping simultaneously learn from the students. Ann Galligan (1995) defines service-learning as “one aspect of experiential education which adds the component of service, community development, as well as aspects of reciprocal learning between student and community” (p. 190). In this case, both the “served” and the “server” learn from each other. A purpose of higher education is to prepare students to be citizens of society. Institutions of higher learning have a responsibility to both students and society which can be fulfilled by service-learning. Service-learning emphasizes reciprocity between campus and community and between those who serve and those who learn. Reciprocal learning results in both student and client empowerment (Delve, Mintz, & Stewart, 1990).

While the key elements for service-learning have been noted, there are many ways that service-learning programs can be implemented at the collegiate level. Service-learning can be effective in both the curricular and the co-curricular setting. Scheuermann (1996) looked primarily at the co-curricular setting and proposed six steps for developing a service-learning program. Her plan, however, can be implemented in the classroom as well. The six steps for developing a successful service-learning project are: (1) developing the community sites; (2) assisting the student/organization in choosing a site; (3) getting the student/organization to make a commitment to the site; (4) preparing the student/organization for service; (5) engaging the student/organization in reflection; and (6) evaluating the program outcomes.

Another popular service-learning model developed by Delve, Mintz, and Stewart (1990) considers students’ development while participating in service-learning activities. This five-phased model includes starting at the initial stage of exploration and moving through clarification, realization, and activation towards the final stage of internalization. In the exploration phase, a student is excited to explore new opportunities and to get involved, but has no psychological connection to the project. In the clarification stage, students begin to understand what is important to them and make a commitment to an organization that participates in service activities. The realization stage is when the student has an “a-ha” moment (p. 15) in understanding what the service-learning experience is truly about. At this stage, the student begins to understand the concept of reciprocal learning. In the activation stage, the student feels a strong sense of devotion to the particular group with which they were working and gains more from the service than they are giving. Most students may never reach the internalization phase which occurs when students decide to fully integrate community service into the rest of their lives.

Service-learning benefits all those involved: the student, the community, the faculty, and the university. Programs and curriculum incorporating service-learning provide dual benefits of educating both the student and the community through reciprocal learning. By sharing, discussing, and reflecting, students will begin to think in broader strategies and more deeply, as well as develop critical thinking skills. Researchers at Brandeis University found that students who participated in service-learning programs in school earned better grades, were more committed to their communities, and were more open to cultural diversity (Leatherman, 1997). Jacoby (1996) reported similar outcomes stating that students who participated in service-learning gain knowledge, are prepared for citizenship, are prepared for democratic participation, and develop appreciation of human differences and similarities while valuing “persons of different races, genders, physical and mental abilities, religions, classes, and sexual orientations” (p. 32).

Other advantages become evident as universities incorporate more service-learning programs. During times of budget reductions and cut-backs, service-learning is a low-cost, low-budget way to teach students. The service-learning model can also serve as an intellectual challenge for faculty as it helps them connect academic learning with much needed social change. More importantly, service-learning opportunities also provide the means for developing more faculty-student interaction (Palmer, 1993). Faculty often see students as apathetic, but “service-learning is an empowering tool that can help bring young people from the margins into the center, giving students both a social purpose and a sense of personal worth in the process of learning itself” (Palmer, p. 18). It is part of the mission of higher education institutions to build positive teacher-student relationships. This outcome contributes to the reasons most professors entered academia in the first place (Weigert, 1998). Service-learning also provides an avenue for faculty members to engage in research. Faculty can develop new research projects that focus on the interaction of their students with the discipline in the larger community.

Service-learning programs will continue to grow because of the positive effects they have on everyone involved. Implementing a service-learning model at the university level results in learning opportunities for students, faculty, and the community. It is a low-cost way to successfully involve and educate students, to develop student-faculty interactions, and to develop relationships between the school and the community.

Whether in the curricular or co-curricular arena, colleges and universities need to develop or continue to develop service-learning programs on campus. The most successful programs can be accomplished when interest is displayed from both student affairs practitioners and from faculty (Zlotkowski, 1996). University administrators must demonstrate their support of such initiatives by making resources available for new course development, addressing issues of tenure and promotion for faculty teaching such courses, providing support for community grants, and providing academic credit to students who participate in such programs.

As educators, it is our role to explain the value and necessity of service-learning to our academic counterparts. Beyond that, as practitioners we must prepare students for the service-learning experience. By looking at service-learning programs through the lens of Alexander Astin, it should be evident that implementing service-learning programs on a college campus is a great way to ensure student involvement. Given the current national interest in service-learning in higher education, we as university officials should be developing programs and encouraging students to participate in service-learning experiences.

We need to help students move through critical stages of development as they engage in service-learning. We must also provide students with new avenues for their participation in service. College and university officials should work to increase student and faculty participation in service-learning in order to help students become more successful and faculty become more engaged with the students. Student affairs administrators have an excellent opportunity to put Astin’s theory of student involvement into practice by directing the attention of their campus colleagues toward the promotion and implementation of service-learning programs.

Astin, A.W. (1977). Four Critical Years. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Astin, A.W. (1984, July). Student Involvement: A Developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25 (4), 297-308.

Astin, A.W. (1985, July-August). Involvement: The cornerstone of excellence. Change, 17 (4), 35-39.

Astin, A.W. (1993, January). An empirical typology of college students. Journal of College Student Development, 34 (1), 36-46.

Astin, A.W. (1993). What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Astin, A.W. (1996, March-April). Involvement in learning revisited: Lessons we have learned. Journal of College Student Development, 37 (2), 123-133.

Astin, A.W., Sax, L.J. (1998, May-June). How undergraduates are affected by service participation. Journal of College Student Development, 39 (3), 251-263.

Boyer, E.L. (1997). The scholarship of engagement. In L.M. Green (Ed.), Ernest L. Boyer: Selected Speeches 1979-1995 (pp. 81-92). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Delve, C.I., Mintz, S.D., Stewart, G.M. (1990, Summer). Promoting values development through community service: A design. In New Directions for Student Services, 50. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Dewey, J. (1959). Dewey on education: selections. New York: Teachers College Press.

Freire, P. (1997). Pedagogy of the oppressed (Rev. ed.) (M.B. Ramos, Trans.). New York: Continuum. (Original work published 1970).

Galligan, A.M. (1995). Service learning and experiential education. In J. Fried & Associates, Shifting paradigms in student affairs (pp. 189-207). Lantham, Maryland: University Press of America.

Gose, B. (1997, September 14). Many colleges move to link courses with volunteerism. The Chronicle of Higher Education, pp. A45-A49.

Hatcher, J.A., & Bringle, R.G. (1997, Fall). Reflection: Bridging the gap between service and learning. College Teaching, 45 (4), 153-159.

Honnet, E., & Poulsen, S. (1989, October). Principles of good practice for combining service and learning. Wingspread Special Report, Racine, WI: The Johnson Foundation.

Jacoby, B. (1996). Service learning in today’s higher education. In B. Jacoby, & Associates, Service-learning in higher education: concepts and practices, (pp. 3-25) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.

Leatherman, C. (1997, April 25). Groups plan to promote civic education and volunteerism. The Chronicle of Higher Education, pp. A13-A14.

Palmer, P. (1993). Is service-learning for everyone? In T.Y. Kupiec (Ed.), Rethinking tradition: Integrating service with academic study on college campuses, (pp. 17-18). Providence, RI: Campus Compact, Brown University.

Pascarella, E.T., Whitt, E.J., Nora, A., Edison, M., Hagedorn, L.S., & Terenzini, P.T. (1996, March-April). What have we learned from the first year of the national study of student learning? Journal of College Student Development, 37 (2), 182-192.

Scheuermann, C.D. (1996). Ongoing cocurricular service-learning. In B. Jacoby, & Associates, Service-learning in higher education (pp. 135-155). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Terenzini, P.T., Pascarella, E.T., & Blimings, G.S. (1996, March-April). Students’ out-of-class experiences and their influence on learning and cognitive development: A literature review. Journal of College Student Development, 37 (2), 182-192.

Weigert, K.M. (1998). Academic service learning: its meaning and relevance. In R.A. Rhoads, & J. P. F. Howard (Eds.), Academic service learning: A pedagogy of action and reflection, (pp. 3-10). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Zlotkowski, E. (1996, January-February). Linking service-learning and the academy. Change, 28 (1) 20-28.

Kirsten E. Freeman graduated from The Ohio State University in 1998 with a Bachelor of Science Degree in Human Development and Family Studies and minors in Sociology and English. Kirsten is a second year HESA student and the Community Service Graduate Assistant for the Department of Student Life.