Running head: CASE STUDY #2

Case Study #2
Service-Learning Programs in Higher Education
ELPS 430
Adessa Kiryakos
Loyola University of Chicago

CASE STUDY #2

2
Part I: Describe

Canisius College, Buffalo, NY (http://www.canisius.edu/academics/academicaffairs/community-based-learning/)

Housed under Academic Affairs, Canisius Colleges Center for Service Learning (CSL)
ties community service and academics through a pedagogical method, specifically communitybased learning, of service-learning. How they do so is similar to what Robert Sigmons (1998)
approach to experiential learning in that the service and academic component are dependent on
one another. To learn, the student must experience and reflect, and to experience, the student
must learn (theoretical frameworks). Additionally, the purpose of service learning through CSL is
for students to work with mostly with disadvantaged and under-served individuals or groups. As
a Jesuit institution, the CSLs Vision Statement is aligned with Jesuit values such as magis, which
is to strive for excellence in all things. The CSL has a learning goal and 4 objectives. In short, the
objectives encompass the ability for students to work with a campus partner, take a service
learning course, use Ignatian pedagogical principle in the academic coursework, and the ability
for students to connect their service experience to Jesuit mission and values. When clicking on
the link to their brochure it appears that the name of the center is, Office for Community-Based
Learning but does not state so on the website link itself.
San Jose State University, San Jose, CA (http://www.sjsu.edu/ccll/)
The Center for Community Learning & Leadership (CCLL) leads efforts of servicelearning on San Jose State Universitys campus. The CCLLs motto: Engaging Community
through Service, Learning and Leadership places a focus on community, but approach
community in a multitude of way: service-learning, internships, civic engagement, academic
advancement in collaboration with staff & faculty, professional enhancement, and serving the

CASE STUDY #2

common good. The approach CCLL takes on their approach is through a framework of
Community Learning, which is high quality community learning blends academic learning,
practical experience, personal exploration and reflection on student roles and involvement in
their communities. Community Learning according to the website is different from volunteering
or community service. Service learning is not a requirement at San Jose State University, and
students may fulfill service-learning requirements through partnerships not affiliated with CCLL.
Ryerson University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
(http://www.ryerson.ca/experiential/index.html)
The Experiential Learning Office at Ryerson University has an extensive list of what
qualified as experimental learning. Of that list, the definition for service-learning is: Servicelearning is a type of experiential learning that engages students in volunteer service within the
community as an integrated aspect of a course. The service is linked to both community
identified needs and to course objectives. The learning outcomes through the Experiential
Learning Office are Intentionality, Engagement, Iteration, Integration, and Reflection. The office
also has a service learning network comprised of students, staff, and faculty but is currently
inactive. If students want to get connected to an experiential learning opportunity they are
advised to contact their program to learn more.
University of Toronto, Mississauga Campus, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
(http://www.utm.utoronto.ca/experience/)
The Experiential Education Offices purpose is to enrich students experiences by
connecting them with opportunities to learning within and outside the classroom. These
experiences can be paid or unpaid. Learning is accomplished by hands-on work and reflection.

CASE STUDY #2

The offices framework is Community-Engaged Service Learning which is a method of

teaching, learning and reflection that combines academic classroom curriculum with meaningful
service in the community. The information on the website is explicit about stating that the
service learning is a mutually beneficial partnership amongst the community and the students.
University of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
(https://www.usfca.edu/catalog/undergraduate/core/the-service-learning-designation-sl)
Service learning is a requirement for students at the University of San Francisco. Based
on the frameworks of social justice and being agents of change students are able to receive
academic coursework and community-based lessons. An emphasis is placed in the ability for
students to seek out rich experiences in San Francisco, as well as recent course offerings. The
learning outcomes are strong. It is unclear which office service learning is housed under, if it is
an office at all. There is no contact information provided for students to get connected with.
Part II: Compare and Contrast
Comparative Analysis of Programs
Although the five university comprise of private, public, national, international it is
important to note that the schools have a service-learning component, though approach service
learning in different ways. Other than for the two Jesuit universities, service-learning is not a
requirement, but rather an opportunity to enrich the student experience. Three of the five
universities incorporate reflection into the service-learning experiences. Except for the
University of Toronto, it could be implied, though not stated, that the service-learning experience
is to be unpaid. Ryerson University explicitly states that service-learning is done through
volunteering. Community-based and Community-engaged learning were two frameworks that
Canicius College and University of Toronto implemented; though two different meanings. Lastly,

CASE STUDY #2

through all websites but Ryerson University and University of San Francisco, information was
not clearly presented and did not have consistent wording (e.g. Canicius Colleges website versus
its pamphlet.)
Part III: Integrate
Course Readings and Analysis
In analyzing the methodology of each of the service-learning structures:
1. University 1: Incorporates community service within the academic experience at
Canisius, principally through the pedagogical method of service-learning. Through
service, students are given the opportunity to live out the cornerstones of the Jesuit
mission and values.
2. University 2: Community-based Learning: high quality community learning blends
academic learning, practical experience, personal exploration and reflection on student
roles and involvement in their communities.
3. University 3: A type of experiential learning that engages students in volunteer service
within the community as an integrated aspect of a course. The service is linked to both
community identified needs and to course objectives.
4. University 4:Community-Engaged Service Learning which is a method of teaching,
learning and reflection that combines academic classroom curriculum with meaningful
service in the community.
5. University 5: Service activities are mandatory, have a connection between service
activities and the academic discipline, are a benefit to the client/community in a
meaningful way, engage in reflection, and assessment to ensure outcomes are met.

all universities service-learning programs align with Kolbs (1984) four kinds of abilities:
concrete experience, reflective, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation. Students
in the service-learning structures must have an experience with a community partner, use
reflection to connect and deepen understand of experience, and implied that as course
requirements, abstract conceptualizations, and active experimentation would arise. Howards
(1993) break down of how instructors should think about approaching service-learning in the
curriculum is beneficial to instructors; however, with the content of information for each

CASE STUDY #2

university it is a challenge to pull out information that can relate to Howards principle.
University of San Francisco has thorough learning outcomes which speaks to Principle 2: Do Not
Compromise Academic Rigor. As a graduate requirement, the outcomes need to be more clear
and concise. It is with great hope that instructors for the service-learning courses approach
Howards principles to ensure a higher quality experience for students and the community. Furco
(1996) compiled an array of service-learning definitions and broke down Sigmons 4 types of
approaches. Even though University 2 states their approaches as community-based, all of the
universities fall under SERVICE LEARNING which place an equal importance to the service
and learning component. Furco (1996) also states that there are differences between
volunteerism, community service, internships, field education, and service learning. Although
Canisius College does service-learning work, their definition includes community service in it.
To this, Furco would state that some of the differentiations fall in the grey. What is important to
note is the intended focus and beneficiary. Though I understand Canisius to have a greater
emphasis on wanting to connect the work done to Jesuit mission and values, it still is, in essence
accomplishing service learning. However, I do question if working in disadvantaged
communities is the best way to experience service-learning, as states on their website. Ryerson
University states that students are engaged in volunteer service, but question if they mean
volunteer as in it is not a requirement for students or volunteer in the definition that Furco
provides. Of all the readings, Furcos holds more value because he is the only one to explicitly
differentiate service opportunities and admit that many experiences can be argued to fall under
service-learning so there are grey areas, but I understood it as the true intention behind the
approach to service, especially its academic attachment is what distinguishes a service-learning
opportunity from the rest.

CASE STUDY #2

References
Furco, Andrew. "Service-Learning: A Balanced Approach to Experiential Education." Expanding
Boundaries: Service and Learning. Washington DC: Corporation for National Service,
1996. 2-6.
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.
Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.