Susan C. Harris, Ph.D. & Carol Brown, M.A. University of Southern California

1. Achieving Diversity through Service-Learning: Practical Suggestions for Developing Curricula & Evaluating Diversity Outcomes Susan C. Harris, Ph.D. & Carol Brown, M.A. University of Southern California Association of American Colleges & Universities Diversity, Learning, and Inclusive Excellence:Accelerating and Assessing Progress Long Beach, CA October 17, 2008

2. Overview of Presentation • Goal: to identify effective ways to incorporate diversity related objectives into service learning courses and programs • Importance of diversity • Ways in which diversity is conceptualized, incorporated, and assessed in the service-learning field • Common problems • Practical Applications for designing rigorous service-learning programs that achieve positive diversity related outcomes

3. Diversity • Diversity as a university mission • Diversity requirements on campus can play a role in reducing racial prejudice • AAC&U’s Making Excellence Inclusive

4. Diversity • Diversity as a primary goal/outcome for service- learning • Service-learning participation is often found to reduce negative stereotypes & increase tolerance of diversity • Overlap in goals of higher education & service-learning (References: Eyler & Giles Jr., 1999; Milem, Chang, & Antonio, 2005)

5. Educators’ Views:The Essential Learning Outcomes • Knowledge of Human Cultures and the Physical and Natural World • Through study in the sciences and mathematics, social sciences, humanities, histories, languages, and the arts Focused by engagement with big questions, both contemporary and enduring • Intellectual and Practical Skills, including • Inquiry and analysis • Critical and creative thinking • Written and oral communication • Quantitative literacy • Information literacy • Teamwork and problem solving Practiced extensively, across the curriculum, in the context of progressively more challenging problems, projects, and standards for performance

6. Educators’ Views:The Essential Learning Outcomes • Personal and Social Responsibility, Including • Civic knowledge and engagement—local and global • Intercultural knowledge and competence • Ethical reasoning and action • Foundations and skills for lifelong learning Anchored through active involvement with diverse communities and real world challenges • Integrative Learning, including • Synthesis and advanced accomplishment across general and specialized Demonstrated through the application of knowledge, skills, and responsibilities to new settings and complex problems Source: Schneider, 2008, AAC&U

7. Service-learning and Diversity • Conceptualizations of diversity in the service-learning literature: • Diversity as an attitude • Diversity as a practice, policy or skill • Diversity as a learning outcome

8. Assessment • Quantitative assessment • In service-learning • Looking to other fields as a starting point • Qualitative assessment • Useful way to assess not only student attitudes but also how students are connecting class content to their experiences in the community

9. Teaching Diversity • Review of select service-learning course syllabi (from www.campuscompact.org) • Sociology: 41 syllabi, 26 that deal with diversity in some way • Explicit goal of the course • Topic of assignments • Topic of readings (most common) • Goal of service-learning

10. USC Joint Educational Project • Established in 1972 • Places approximately 1000 students in service-learning assignments every semester • Peer educator model “(Program Assistants”)

11. Source: USC Civic and Community Relations

12. USC student body (Fall 2007) • Population: 33,408 students, approximately half of which are undergraduates at the “University Park” campus • Race & Ethnicity: • 6% African American • 22% Asian American • 13% Latino • 1% Native American • 47% White • 5800 international students: • 27% from India • 42% from east Asian countries • 4.4% from Canada

13. University Park Community (2000 Census) • Population: 66,832 (excludes on-campus student population) • Race & Ethnicity: • 21% African American • 8% Asian American • 57% Latino • 1% Other • 11% White (non-Hispanic) • Large immigrant population: • 44% of population foreign born • 38% from Mexico • 24% from El Salvador • 10% from Guatemala • 61% speak a language other than English at home

14. Learning Diversity through Service-Learning

15. Learning Diversity through Service-Learning

16. Learning Diversity through Service-Learning

17. Learning Diversity through Service-Learning

18. Exposure ≠ Understanding • Analysis of Students’ Early Essays • Stereotyping: Tendency to make unwarranted, stereotyped, and sometimes racist conclusions based on selective perceptions. • “The Mexican kids in the class are at a disadvantage, compared to the black kids, because none of them speak English as their native language.” • “These children have tended to be somewhat noisy, which is disrespectful, as I am rather certain that most of the time they (eventually) notice that I am reading with a student in the hallway. They also act rather inappropriately; for example, I discovered that one or two boys were spitting over the railing onto the steps below …. Furthermore, their topics of conversation are not appropriate for their age levels. … Perhaps these children have grown up without their parents around as much, and therefore they do not always understand that discipline is usually not optional.”

19. Analysis of Students’ Early Essays • Analysis of Students’ Early Essays • “N of 1”: The problem of making sweeping generalizations about an entire group based on only one or two examples or instances. • “Aldo told me that his mother babysits during the day and works at the factory at night. All the parents are working 2-3 jobs to support their families, leaving them with no time or energy to help their kids with their homework.”

20. Analysis of Students’ Early Essays • Analysis of Students’ Early Essays • “Blaming the Victim”: Assuming that individual qualities and characteristics explain entirely why a person lives in poverty, is unemployed, etc. Ignoring the social factors that affect the conditions of the community and its residents. • “Maria seems bright enough but lazy. She is big for a ten year old and seems to have a good vocabulary, but clearly does not like school. When I asked her to do the times tables with me she told me that ‘math is boring.’ It’s hard to stay motivated and give of myself when I encounter such a negative attitude toward education. Don’t these people realize that education is the way out of the miserable life in this neighborhood?”

21. Analysis of Students’ Early Essays • Common problems • “Mind-Reading”: Assuming that one knows the underlying causes or reasons for a person’s behavior. Drawing conclusions based on very limited evidence or on one’s own projections. • “Some of the parents stressed education and would walk their kid all the way into class and even stay a few minutes into class. While other parents we never saw.” • “When riding my bike through Vermont Ave. I see the poverty displayed in many ways. For the most part, very little people own cars. Most people ride the bus. Mothers walk with their babies in strollers and little children beside them run down past shops of thrift stores and pawnshops. The elderly are often also walking long distances to the supermarket. These people are always poorly dressed often with unhappy looks on their faces. I don’t blame them. It’s almost a tease to see SC students like me riding their bikes in their Adidas pants and brand name shirt.”

22. Analysis of Students’ Early Essays • Common problems • “White Knight Syndrome”: A term that describes students (regardless of race) who believe their purpose as service-learning students is to single-handedly uplift community residents. Students see themselves primarily as charity providers whose very presence in the community offers children a better shot at success in life. • “I look at these kids and watch as they proudly show their affiliated gang walks and throw their hand signs. How can this end? Who will be the one to make those empowered to create change feel that they have to? I don’t know, but I do know that I, for one, will try.” • I initially joined JEP for the extra credit that IR 210 offered, but now … I am glad that I am participating in JEP. I can help kids learn and become more contributing citizens. In addition, I am glad that I am going to make an influence in the lives of my students. I am going to hopefully tell them that they can make it in life and that they will be able to better themselves through education.

23. Analysis of Students’ Early Essays • Common problems • Unwillingness to consider the salience of race, class, gender • “When will we stop asking questions about race and gender? People will not start to be treated based on their whole person unless we start treating them like their whole person. Why then are we asking these questions about men and women? … Maybe if people didn’t try so hard to pick on things like height, weight, gender and skin color then these discrepancies would correct themselves.” • (Sources: JEP students’ journals and on-line discussions; Hondagneu-Sotelo & Raskoff, 1994)

24. Learning Diversity through Service-Learning

25. Student backgrounds • Awareness of student diversity • (Pre-)assessment of students

26. Learning Diversity through Service-Learning

27. Preparation • Designing course with outcomes in mind • Preparing students for their service-learning assignments

28. Learning Diversity through Service-Learning

29. Service-Learning Assignments • Meaningful, mutually beneficial experiences • Partnership model • Engage students with difference

30. Learning Diversity through Service-Learning

31. Reflection • Developmentally-minded • Recurrent throughout the semester • Employs multiple modalities • Designed to link course concepts with community experiences • Aligned with other course goals re: diversity • Process-oriented • Frames students’ experiences

32. Reflection: Framing Students’ Experiences “THIS HOUSE MAY BE SMALL BUT THERE IS ROOM FOR ALL FRIENDS GOD LOVE”

33. Reflection Stage One: Shock • Journal responses are characterized by varying levels of shock, surprise, disbelief, and discomfort. •  Comments focus on vast, perceived differences between themselves and those with whom they are working. Alternatively (or in addition), they may focus on the newness of their role and how they are attempting to adjust to it. •  Responses likely to be emotion-laden in this phase. • “One thing’s for sure, my life story and the life stories of the students in Vermont Avenue Elementary School’s 5th grade classroom are drastically different, if not completely opposite. Being the spoiled suburban child from Silicon Valley that I am, I didn’t expect such a brash difference between my elementary school and Vermont Ave. … I was astonished at the reading and mathematical level of the students; furthermore, within the hour that composed my first day with JEP I lost all confidence in whatever educational system California claims to have.”

34. Reflection Stage Two: Normalization • After two or three weeks, students begin to adapt to new their environment and role and the initial shock begins to wear off. • Students begin to see more similarities between themselves and those with whom they are working -- they develop greater empathy for others. •  Students may begin to question stereotypes about the demographic groups at the site, writing in detail about individuals’ characters, personalities, etc., and how they don’t fit the stereotypic mold. • “In an intangible, vague way, I feel deeply connected with the students. … the first day was full of awkward conversations, I think I was trying to win their trust in my ability to help them learn and feel comfortable in learning. Initially, I was nervous but as the students began smiling and enjoying our reading sessions, I also began to get more comfortable.”

35. Reflection Stage Three: Engagement • In this stage, students begin raising causal questions and seeking answers to the problems raised in earlier stages. • Students become better at using their “sociological imaginations,” developing theories that attempt to understand individuals’ lives within the particular structural and historical contexts in which they are lived. It is in this stage when students are best able to relate their course material to the lives of the individuals with whom they are working. •  Students’ responses become less focused on their own feelings about their experiences and more analytical. Journals may be no less “emotional,” however, as students may become quite passionate about issues of social justice, social change, etc.

36. Reflection Stage Three: Engagement • “The inability to find high-wage jobs confines many Americans to a low standard of living. The existence of occupational inequality has significant negative influences on families in poor neighborhoods, not only because it causes many more obvious and immediate social problems such as child poverty and lack of medical benefits, but also because it aggravates economic inequality in society. Occupational inequality is evident in the neighborhood near my JEP site. According to the 2000 census, 45% of the community residents are employed in the manufacturing and servicing sector of the economy, whereas only 28% of the workers in Los Angeles County are employed in such industries. In addition, merely 14% of the community residents are actually employed in managerial and professional occupations. Although there are numerous other social problems that are affecting the community residents with whom I have worked, these problems are symptoms of a more serious social problem – occupational inequality. As a structural problem it plays a part in social reproduction and the perpetuation of poverty. Only by addressing and solving the problem of occupational inequality, can we begin to understand and solve other social problems. Model Source: Rockquemore & Schaffer (2000). Toward a Theory of Engagement: A Cognitive Mapping of Service-Learning Experiences. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, (Vol. 7), 14-25. (Quotes from JEP students)

37. Reflection • Begin with relatively unstructured, open-ended assignments • Note first impressions, early experiences • Describe site (physical and social characteristics) • Adjust to new role • Set goals and expectations

38. Reflection • WEEK ONE - First Impressions at Your JEP Site Describe your initial experience at your JEP assignment. Include a detailed description of the responsibilities and activities involved in your particular assignment. What are your most vivid impressions of the site? What were some of your expectations prior to beginning your assignment? How do your experiences during Week One compare to your expectations? • WEEK TWO - The Social and Physical Context Describe the social and physical context of your JEP site. Try to be as specific as possible about the number of people that are there, as well as the age, sex, race, ethnicity, and any other significant characteristics of all those involved in your JEP assignment. Walk or look around your site and take in the environment; specifically, provide details about the size, space, decor, noise level, etc. of the classroom (or meeting room), the building(s) making up the site, and its grounds. How does the site compare to the schools you attended as a child? What are some of the main difference and similarities? Do you think that these differences or similarities have any impact on the learning experiences of students at the site?

39. Reflection • After allowing time for students to adjust to their new roles, help them set the context for their experiences • Look up information about the demographic characteristics of the community • Research laws and policies that impact individuals • Connect macro and micro processes • Assessment of context at site

40. Reflection WEEK THREE - Families and Households in the Neighborhood (SOCI 1609: Changing Family Forms) Go to the U.S. Census Bureau to gather information about the families living in the neighborhood surrounding your site: 1. Go to www.factfinder.census.gov/ 2. Enter the address for your JEP site in the “address search” box on the lower left side of the screen and click “Go.” (select for “a year and program” census 2000) 3. Highlight the “Census Tract” number in the box that appears and click OK. (NOTE: record the Census tract number someplace where you can find it. You’ll need it again for Week 6.) 4. Select tables DP-1, QT-H3 and QT-P11, along with any others that are of interest to you. 5. Print your results and attach them to your journal. Take a look at the tables and describe the families who live in the neighborhood in which you are working. (You need not answer every one of the Table-related questions below in your journal, but please take a look at the data in the tables. Focus your response on the findings that interest you most and describe why they are of interest). - Looking at Table DP-1, what is the percentage of children in the population? What is the racial/ethnic makeup of the community? What percentage of households is occupied by “nuclear” families (married-couple families with own children)? What about single mothers? Individuals? What is the average family size? - Looking at Table QT-H3, are married families more likely to rent or own their places of residence? What about single householders? The elderly? - Looking at Table QT-P11, what percentage of households has grandparents living with grandchildren? How common are non-related households? Are elderly householders living alone more likely to be male or female? How do the data compare with the population actually served by your site (i.e., compare the census data with your observations of the site from Week Two)? How do they compare with what you’ve learned in class and from the readings about the changing structure and composition of contemporary families?

41. Reflection ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES • Week Three  Go to the Environmental Protection Agency’s homepage and look up data about the community in which you are working: http://www.epa.gov/epahome/commsearch.htm. Enter the zip code for your site’s address and explore the information in the various databases (“Envirofacts,” “EnviroMapper,” etc. Hint: when using the EnviroMapper database, select the “schools” feature and redraw the map.) What kinds of potential environmental hazards are located near your JEP site? How many and what kinds of EPA-regulated industries are nearby? Are they located primarily on major thoroughfares or in residential areas? Are there any other sources of pollution you can identify that are not measured by the EPA? Now, look up the same information for Beverly Hills (zip code: 90210). (You might want to compare your own neighborhood where you grew up, too, just for fun.) Howdo the two communities compare to one another? What are the major differences in the number and distribution of environmental hazards in the two communities? How do you think residents might be affected by the sources of pollution in their communities? • Week Four  For last week’s journal, you learned about the sources and types of pollution in the local community and in the much wealthier community of Beverly Hills. Consider these findings in relation to the demographic characteristics of each community. Go to the Census Bureau’s website: http://factfinder.census.gov/ and enter the zip code for your JEP site in the “Fact Sheet” box. Take a look at the statistics in the chart that appears. Click on the map link next to “Total population” and zoom to the “7 miles across” level (the 4th red bar from the right). Print all of your results. Now, do the same for Beverly Hills (90210). As you might guess, there are many differences between the two communities. What are some of the starkest contrasts? How are the two populations similar? Looking at the maps you printed, compare and contrast the relative size and density of the two areas, as well as their relative proximity to major thoroughfares. Now, keeping your findings from this week and last in mind, consider the relationship between environmental issues, race and social class. Do you think the differences between the two communities are evidence of “environmental racism”? Why or why not?

42. Reflection • Mid-late semester assignments • Apply course concepts • Connect to historical and political contexts contexts • Designed to encourage more sophisticated understanding and critical thinking • Conclude with summative assignments that help students integrate their in- and out-of-class experiences from the entire semester

43. Reflection Week Four: Peace Games within the Context of Peace and Conflict Studies • In the introduction to Rethinking Peace, scholars Elias and Turpin describe the development of peace studies over time. They note that during the 1970s peace studies “broadened . . . from the examination of war to the examination of other kinds of violence and injustice,” such as racism, sexism, and poverty (p. 7). In the 1980s, the field further expanded to include the activist work of pro-peace organizations and the study of conflict resolution and mediation. According to Elias and Turpin, the future of peace studies should include more attention to social change, diversity and developing interdisciplinary approaches. Where and how does Peace Games fit within this historical framework? What are the goals of the program? How does it address issues such as injustice, activism, social change, and diversity?

44. Reflection WEEK SIX – Institutional Inequality • For the last few weeks, your course has focused on institutional forms of segregation and inequality. Drawing from the readings in Part VIII, explain how institutional inequality can affect the life chances of the student(s) you are working with at your JEP site. What institutional obstacles could they face in life? Is the presence of JEP at your school indicative of the institutional obstacles many students face in disadvantaged neighborhoods? What role can JEP play in breaking the cycle of institutional inequality? Be sure to briefly summarize how institutional segregation or inequality works.

45. Reflection Week Six: Learning Language • Pay attention to the grammatical and syntax errors made by the community student with whom you are working. Are there any patterns to these errors? For example, does the student leave out particular grammatical morphemes such as the plural or past tense? Are there any errors in sentence structure, such as failure to use correct “helping verbs” (e.g., is, have, etc.) or incorrect use of prepositions (e.g., saying “to” where the word should be “from”)? Can you identify other types of language errors? How are these errors consistent with the process of language acquisition? Might the errors be characteristic of someone whose native language is not English?

46. Reflection WEEK EIGHT – Final Reflections • Think back over the last eight weeks. How have your experiences at your JEP site and in the community in general helped you learn about the Californian Dream and Los Angeles? What have you learned about yourself? What kinds of stereotypes were challenged in the process for you, if any? How have your perceptions of Los Angeles, race and ethnic relations, gender, social inequality, human conflicts and power changed, if at all? (If you do not think your community experiences have shifted your thinking about any of these issues, please explain why.) How do you think that your presence at the JEP site benefits student-learning?

47. Reflection: Employs Multiple Modalities • Graded, ungraded • Oral, written • Discussion (on-line, in-person) • Team-based, individual service-learning projects and/or course assignments • Independent assignments, cumulative projects • Structured, unstructured • Graded by peers vs. instructors • Recurrent

48. Learning Diversity through Service-Learning

49. Process oriented: • Feedback • Scaffolding • “Socratic Questions” • Evaluation • Formative • Summative

50. Learning Diversity through Service-Learning Positive student outcomes regarding diversity Reflection Service- learning assignments that engage difference and diversity Constructive criticism, encouragement, feedback and evaluation Students’ backgrounds and perspectives Preparing students for service- learning