Re: Request for critical material on service-learning
In response to the suggestions that comments on this subject be put on the
list here is a copy of mine expanded a bit. It hit a hot button for me thus
the length.
This comment comes from a true believer in service-learning who has some
real concerns that the service part be done right.
I don't know of articles specifically against service-learning but there has
been an ongoing debate about short term service and volunteerism and "do
goodism." I vaguely remember critiques of the Appalachian volunteers of the
60's and 70's.
I work in a church related college and am aware of a number of articles
criticizing short term mission service- things like medical teams overseas,
building teams etc. If this would be helpful I can provide references or
copies. Some people in one of our church agencies are advocating a
moratorium on short term service because they say it does more harm than
good.
One article is titled McMissions and plays off the book The McDonaldization
of Society which critiques the tendency to look for quick fixes, fixes we
can control, fixes that don't cost much etc. One article gives evidence
that the primary medical situation actually is worse after short term high
tech medical teams visited a Caribbean country, the Dominican Republic I
think
I would think some of the debate about Peace Corps and VISTA would be
relevant, in principle. I know there has been criticism of the short term
nature of peace corps published and I have seen some of the negative as well
as the positive impact.
Ivan Illich and John McKnight have written stuff critiquing service in
general which is very relevant since short term sometimes exhibits the
characteristics they identify. Why Service is Bad, McKnight, The Other
Side, February 1989 also Professionalized Service and Disabling Help
In Ivan Illich Disabling Professions Marion Boyars London McKnight has
other stuff which could be found in a library search.
Specifically some of the criticisms that would apply to even good
service-learning would include issues as to whether or not service is
authentic and helpful it involves:
Mixed motives
"Forced" service
Professors and students working outside their expertise
Too many demands on local people
I have heard arguments in the following areas about service-learning and
short term service in general:
1. S-L is not academic learning. The arguments about experiential
learning are relevant. Also the college is not a social
service agency and does not have the expertise to do social service well.
Colleges should do what they know how to do and what
society expects them to do and let service to the service agencies.
2. Volunteerism is a false pretense for what really needs to be done
about social need
Problems need social policy responses, structural responses
not band aids
Volunteerism is ameliorative and does not get to the real
causes
This criticism was leveled against the Presidents summit.
Thinking volunteerism can make a dent in the real problems
is unrealistic. Promoting volunteerism gets people off the hook, makes
them feel good but doesn't really make a
difference in the root causes.
3. Relationships are short and destructive since by the time students
build relationships they leave, just another example of what
poor people experience all the time.
4. Volunteers are unreliable. They work at their convenience.
5. Volunteers with their lack of maturity and training do more harm
than good.
6. Staff at local agencies spend valuable time working with volunteers
that they should spend working with local people.
7. Outside volunteers do what local people should be doing and give
the impression that local people don't have what it
takes to solve their own problems, and in fact inhibit locals from doing
what they should be doing.
8. Volunteers start programs. The programs die when they leave. Again
what poor people experience all the time!
9. Some say volunteerism is like inoculation which is a mild dose of the
real thing which makes people immune to the real thing.
The "real thing" of course is structural change, long term programs, social
policies, fundamental life-style change etc.
10. Students learn the wrong things. IE. they tend to see personal and
individual inadequacies rather than structural ones and they have
prejudices reinforced and inappropriate generalizations supported.
11. Objectives of programs are skewed toward the students rather than
toward the problems.
I've administered programs in short term (several week to three year)
volunteer "service" in the US and overseas for the past 35 years and have
seen some really good work and some that should be banned.
I think short term service is valid 1. Primarily as an educational tool,
2. Primarily as a contribution to a local community or agency, 3. or a
combination of both. Certainly 3 is preferable and if 1 is the objective
"harm" must be avoided and the purposes made clear to all concerned.
The answer I think is to find agencies and situations that have work which
can be done within the limitations imposed by service-learning, train
volunteers, and supervise and monitor them carefully. Because of some past
problems we do have agencies who will not accept volunteers from our
college. I am sure there are some in your area. Find them and ask, "
Why?"
The wingspread principles are good.
Good luck!
John W. Eby
Director of Service-Learning
Messiah College
JEby@Messiah.edu