---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 96 10:21:12 PDT
From: Maryann Gray <jacobi@rand.org>
As many of you know, RAND and UCLA have recently completed a report
presenting findings from the national evaluation of Learn and Serve
America, Higher Education (LSAHE), based on the first year of data
collection (fiscal 1995). Several of you have suggested that we
provide a summary of the findings on the listserv, so here it is!
Please be forewarned that this summary is lengthy for email --
equivalent to about 6 single spaced pages.
I would enjoy hearing your comments and reactions to these findings. You
can send email to my personal address (Maryann_gray@rand.org). Please do
not send your comments to the listserv unless you intend to communicate
with the entire list.
Finally, as you know, our 1996 Annual Accomplishments Survey is out to you
now. A heartfelt thank-you to all who have responded. If you have not yet
completed and returned the survey, please do so as soon as possible. We
need your responses to compile a complete and accurate description of the
achievements of Learn and Serve America, Higher Education grantees. If you
need another copy of the survey, if you'd like help filling it out, or if
you have questions, please e-mail or call me (310 393-0411, ext. 6156).
***********************************************************************
SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS:
LEARN AND SERVE AMERICA, HIGHER EDUCATION
This report provides an overview of results from the first
year evaluation of Learn and Serve America, Higher Education
(LSAHE). The evaluation assessed the impacts of LSAHE on
communities, students, and institutions in fiscal year 1995.
BACKGROUND
LSAHE emphasizes the links between service and academic
learning by encouraging undergraduate and graduate students
to participate in community service. The Corporation for
National Service (CNS) has identified three goals for LSAHE:
(1) to engage students in meeting the unmet
educational, public safety, human, and
environmental needs of communities;
(2) to enhance students' academic learning, their
sense of social responsibility, and their
civic skills; and
(3) to increase the number, quality, and
sustainability of opportunities for students
to serve in the nation's institutions of
higher education.
CNS works toward these goals by awarding funds through a
national competition to higher education institutions and
community-based organizations. In fiscal year 1995, CNS
distributed approximately $9.5 million.
EVALUATION OF LSAHE
The National and Community Service Trust Act (1993) requires
CNS to conduct a national evaluation of LSAHE. CNS
contracted with RAND to conduct this study. RAND then
established a subcontract with the UCLA Higher Education
Research Institute (HERI) to help evaluate LSAHE impacts on
student volunteers.
The full evaluation will assess the first three years of
LSAHE (the 1995 through 1997 fiscal years), using both
quantitative and qualitative methods. During the first
year, RAND and UCLA implemented four data collection
strategies:
(1) Administration of an Annual Accomplishments
Survey to LSAHE program directors to obtain
descriptive information about grantee
activities. 341 program directors returned
the survey, for a 78 percent response rate;
(2) Administration of a Community Impact Survey to
a random sample of community organizations
involved in LSAHE to obtain community
perceptions of LSAHE effectiveness. 443
organizations returned the survey, for a 69
percent response rate;
(3) Administration of a UCLA Follow-up Survey of
undergraduate students enrolled in schools
with LSAHE grants to compare participants and
nonparticipants in service-learning. Over
3,400 students from 42 institutions returned
the survey;
(4) A series of 10 site visits to grantees to
explore LSAHE impacts on institutions and
assess implementation of LSAHE.
WHAT WORK WAS PERFORMED BY LSAHE PROGRAMS?
LSAHE grantees successfully implemented an array of
capacity building and direct service activities. Capacity
building activities provide training and assistance designed
to improve program quality and sustainability and to
increase the number of students engaged in service. Direct
service activities involve students as volunteers in
community settings.
(1) Subgranting greatly extended the reach of
LSAHE. Twenty-six (26) of 116 LSAHE direct grantees
used their awards to administer subgrants to
other institutions, some of whom then awarded
subsubgrants. In this way, over 500 colleges
and universities, or almost one in every seven
colleges and universities nationwide,
participated in LSAHE.
(2) A typical LSAHE program included both capacity
building and direct service activities. All of
those responding to the Annual Accomplishments
Survey devoted at least some time to building
the higher education sector's capacity for
service. Three quarters integrated service-
learning into the curriculum, creating over
1,000 new courses. Two-thirds provided
technical assistance on topics such as how to
develop service-learning courses or how to link
higher education institutions and community
organizations. Slightly over three-quarters
(78 percent) of Annual Accomplishments Survey
respondents also included direct service in
their LSAHE program.
(3) On average, programs responding to the Annual
Accomplishments Survey worked in three different
different areas of service. Three-quarters
(75 percent) involved students in service
to promote school success among K-12 youth,
and slightly over half (53 percent) involved
students in helping homeless, improverished,
elderly, or disabled people. Respondents were
least likely to work in the area of crime
control (18 percent).
(4) Sample accomplishments in various service areas
include: (1) student volunteers provided
assistance to over 1,800 K-12 teachers; (2)
student volunteers served 487 soup kitchens or
shelters and organized almost 200 food and
clothing drives; (3) volunteers taught 180
conflict mediation courses and mediated over
250 disputes; and (4) volunteers tested over
200 buildings for environmental hazards.
WHAT WERE LSAHE IMPACTS ON SERVICE RECIPIENTS?
During the spring of 1995, staff from 443 community agencies
and schools completed the Community Impact Survey, which
assessed the contributions of student volunteers to their
communities. Ten site visits extended and confirmed the
survey data. Major findings include:
(1) Respondents perceived the student volunteers
from LSAHE institutions as highly effective in
promoting the goals of the community
organizations they served. Almost three
quarters (71 percent) of the community
organizations responding to the survey reported
that the student volunteers enabled them to
increase the quality of their services.
Additionally, 61 percent increased the
intensity of services provided (i.e., the
amount of services per recipient), 59 percent
increased the variety of services offered, and
52 percent were able to serve more people.
(2) Respondents to the Community Impact Survey
assigned students high ratings for their
contributions in the areas of education,
health, public safety, and environment.
For example, student volunteers received
mean ratings above 4.0 on a five-point
scale (indicating a "very high" level of
effectiveness) for their efforts in
"improving students' school achievement,"
"promoting children's readiness for school,"
"improving conditions for low-income or
homeless people," and "conserving or
restoring natural habitats."
(3) Staff from community organizations assessed the
student volunteers as especially skilled in
working with youth. Respondents reported the
greatest strength of student volunteers to be
their enthusiasm and interpersonal skills.
They perceived the students' greatest weakness
to be lack of time for volunteer work due to
competing demands of school, employment, and
extracurricular activities.
(4) Respondents rated student volunteers from LSAHE
institutions as substantially more effective
than other volunteers, including volunteers
from non-LSAHE colleges and universities. They
rated the student volunteers as equal in
effectiveness to paid staff.
(5) Almost all community organization respondents
(97 percent) indicated that they would like to
work with student volunteers again if given the
opportunity. Similarly, 92 percent responded
that the benefits of working with student
volunteers outweighed the problems and costs.
WHAT WERE LSAHE IMPACTS ON INSTITUTIONS?
The Annual Accomplishments and Community Impact surveys
reveal increasing support and capacity for service
activities within higher education institutions.
(1) LSAHE colleges and universities support
service-learning in a variety of ways. Almost
all the institutions responding to the Annual
Accomplishments Survey (92 percent) had
integrated service into curriculum. Three-
quarters (75 percent) housed a volunteer or
service center. Two-thirds (68 percent) offered
rewards or recognition for student and faculty
involvement in service. On the other hand,
less than one-third (31 percent) included
service in the core curriculum.
(2) The implementation of LSAHE was associated with
growing support for service-learning. One-
third (33 percent) of the institutions
responding to the Annual Accomplishments Survey
developed service-learning courses for the
first time in 1994-95. Close to one third of
responding institutions (30 percent)
established faculty committees on service-
learning, and an equal number began offering
service-learning course development funds.
(3) The implementation of LSAHE was associated with
improving relations between higher education
institutions and community organizations.
Community organizations responding to the
Community Impact Survey reported increasing
cooperation and collaboration with LSAHE
institutions through such activities as joint
service projects and participation on
committees.
WHAT WERE LSAHE IMPACTS ON SERVICE PROVIDERS?
The UCLA Follow-up Survey indicates that students who
participated in community service showed greater gains in
civic responsibility, academic achievement, and life
skills compared to those who did not. Even stronger
evidence of the impact of service participation emerges
from multivariate, longitudinal analyses conducted before
and after students' service experiences. Such analyses
enable investigators to control for many factors that might
predispose students to participate in service.
(1) Simple comparisons of Follow-up Survey responses
between service participants and nonparticipants
indicate that service participants exhibited a
greater sense of civic responsibility (e.g.,
commitment to serving the community), higher
levels of academic achievement (e.g., academic
self-concept, grades, degree aspirations), and
more growth in life skills (e.g., leadership self-
confidence, interpersonal skills).
(2) Comparisons of change over time between the pre-
test (Freshman Survey) and Follow-up Survey
responses of service participants and
nonparticipants indicate that, in most categories
of student development, service participants
experienced larger relative gains than did
nonparticipants. For example, service
participants showed larger net gains than
nonparticipants in their commitment to helping
others and level of social self-confidence.
Further, whereas service participants displayed
increases in their commitment to influencing
social values and influencing the political
structure, nonparticipants reported declines in
these areas.
(3) Multivariate results indicate that every one of 35
outcome measures was favorably influenced by
engagement in some form of service work, even
after controlling for a wide variety of input and
environmental factors. Service participation
positively affected students' commitment to
serving their communities, helping others in
difficulty, and promoting racial understanding. A
similar pattern was observed for the development
of such life skills as leadership ability, social
self-confidence, critical thinking, and conflict
resolution. Service participation also had
positive effects on academic development,
including grades, time devoted to academic
endeavors, degree aspirations, and self-reported
gains in knowledge. Thus, participating in
service activities substantially enhanced
students' development in the areas of civic
responsibility, life skills, and academics.
CONCLUSION
At the end of its first year, LSAHE grantees were actively
engaged in a wide variety of capacity building and direct
service activities. Moreover, results indicate that these
activities were achieving the three major goals of LSAHE.
First, community organizations strongly valued the
contributions of student volunteers and perceived the
students as highly effective in meeting both organizational
and client needs. Second, institutions were increasing
their capacity and support for service-learning,
particularly by developing new service-learning courses.
Relations between higher education institutions and
community organizations also improved during the year.
Third, participation in service was associated with gains in
student learning and development. Students participating in
service showed greater increases in civic responsibility,
academic achievement, and life skills than did
nonparticipating students.