University-community engagement: exploring service-learning options ...

Asia-Paci®c Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 32, No. 2, July 2004

University-community engagement: exploring service-learning options within the practicum Margaret Vickers, Catherine Harrisa* and Florence McCarthyb a

University of Western Sydney, Australia International Christian University, Tokyo

b

Since 1999, pre-service teachers undertaking the Bachelor of Teaching (Secondary) Program at the University of Western Sydney have participated in an alternate practicum called Professional Experience 3 (PE3). This practicum encourages students to engage in broader educational settings within local communities. Increasingly, a number of service-learning opportunities have been developed, most notably, senior student tutoring programs and the involvement of students in the Plan-It Youth project in conjunction with the Department of Education and Training (DET) and the South-western Sydney Institute of TAFE. A focus of these programs has been to address the issues related to students at risk of leaving school early within the local South-western Sydney community. In this paper we discuss the bene®ts of these programs to the university, pre-service-teachers, school students and school communities, and the broader local community. Speci®cally, we examine service learning as a conduit for the development and maintenance of meaningful symbiotic relationships between the university and the educational community, and pre-service teachers and the local community. Finally, we look towards the future and highlight the challenges and opportunities for service-learning programs within the practicum.

Introduction Currently, students undertaking the Bachelor of Teaching1 (Secondary) Program are provided with an opportunity to broaden their professional experience by undertaking a practicum in educational settings other than secondary schools. These settings include, for example, primary schools, special schools, rural schools, distance education centres, ®eld studies centres (environmental education), TAFE colleges, Saturday schools of community languages (LOTE students), Intensive English *Corresponding author. Faculty of Education, Deakin University, PO BOX 423, Warrnambool, Victoria 3280, Australia. Email: [email protected] ISSN 1359±866X(print); ISSN 1469±2945 (online)/020129-13 ã 2004 Australian Teacher Education Association DOI: 10.1080/1359866042000234223

130 M. Vickers et al. Centres (ESL students), museums, galleries and other educational centres and tutoring/mentoring programs within high schools. This experience, referred to as Professional Experience 3 (PE3), constitutes one of the three practical experiences students must successfully complete within the Bachelor of Teaching (Secondary) Degree. PE3 involves ten days of practice teaching (or equivalent) in an alternate education setting of student's choice. We have found that allowing student's choice in their placement is empowering. It helps students to identify a particular educational issue and/or site and develop a commitment to it. PE3 aims to broaden and deepen student teachers understanding of the issues confronting the wider education community (SEECS, 2003). A particular focus is that of social justice and the provision of quality learning outcomes for all students. This is crucial when one considers the region in which our students generally live and will work. The underlying premise is that `the more informed the Teacher is about these educational issues, the more effective that Teacher can be in their own classroom. To facilitate this understanding therefore, the teacher needs to explore how learning and teaching are conducted in a variety of settings' (SEECS, 2003, p. 4). Three interrelated aims underlie PE3. These are: d

d

d

To promote service learning as a powerful pedagogical tool for the development of effective teachers in diverse educational settings. To promote understanding of the signi®cant social-cultural, political and economic issues in¯uencing students' learning and to develop skills and strategies to address these issues. To develop and maintain university-community partnerships that have bene®ts for all involvedÐthe University, students, teachers, schools and the community.

In this paper we examine the value of using a service-learning approach within the professional experience component of this degree. Speci®cally, we argue that service learning is both a methodologically and philosophically appropriate strategy for addressing the needs of pre-service teachers and the needs of the local community. To clarify this argument we draw on a PE3 case studyÐthat of the Plan-It Youth Program (PIY). It is within the context of the PIY program that we evaluate the bene®ts and challenges of University-community partnerships.

Service learning Service learning has become increasingly popular among educational institutions in many countries, including Asia over the last two decades (McCarthy, 2003). Among its many advocates, it is variously perceived as a means of energizing classroom curricula (Battistoni, 1995; Hesser, 1995; Rama et al., 2000), re-engaging students in their own learning, and prompting forms of social and civic development (Markus et al., 1993; Parker-Gwin, 1996; Eyler & Giles, 1999; Frederickson, 2000; Roschelle et al., 2000) or establishing linkages among universities and schools with their local communities and community agencies (Gardner, 1997; Hollander & Saltmarsh,

University-community engagement 131

Figure 1.

2000; Benson et al., 2000; Gronski & Pigg, 2000; Evenbeck & Kahn, 2001). De®nitions of just what service learning is also abound, and McCarthy provides a concise de®nition, the elements of which are widely shared by many scholars (Couto, 1996; Berv, 1998; Yerkes, 1998; Gray et al., 2000). Simply stated, service learning links academic instruction with community service guided by re¯ection (McCarthy 2002). Re¯ection is considered the critical piece in service learning as without it student's involvement in service remains as some form of volunteering or a `feel-good' exercise without linking student's experiences with curriculum content, or with more considered analysis of the social conditions giving rise to service needs in the ®rst place (Artz, 2001). In PE3 (analyzed below) the involvement of secondary pre-service in mentoring at risk high school students encourages pre-service teachers to be aware of and understand the social factors in¯uencing the learning behaviour of their mentees. This awareness and understanding is considered to be an important contribution to the formation of pedagogical practices new teachers will use in their own classrooms. In conceptualizing how the basic components of service learning (experience, knowledge, re¯ection) interrelate, McCarthy (2002) advocates using the schematic representation of triangles to illustrate these interconnections. In Figure 1 (below) the triangle indicates the mutual interdependencies and connections that exist among experience, knowledge and re¯ection. Experience is usually linked to action. We participate in activities or do things that comprise our experience, and that can lead to knowledge. However, unless experience is actively considered and analyzed, it is not certain that learning occurs. Learning from experience is not guaranteed; it is only when thought is linked to action that knowledge/learning may occur. Moreover, there are many kinds of knowledge, and it is increasingly accepted that knowledge derived from the classroom is only one form. There is a long tradition in education beginning with John Dewey in the United States that has advocated the strength of learning from doing, and this is increasingly the basis for many arguments supporting service learning (Dewey, 1937; Leming, 2001; O'Hara, 2001; Walstein & Reiher, 2001).

132 M. Vickers et al.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Similarly, the interdependencies among the central partners in service learning activities require the development of reciprocity and trust among faculty, community agencies and students. Using the triangle to illustrate the interdependencies among the partners indicates that if one of the partners were removed, the triangle would collapse and what would ensue would be more traditional community service programs emphasizing volunteering, or the more usual relationship between students and teachers. Figure 2, below, diagrammatically illustrates this point. Strong service learning programs recognize and include the strengths of each partner in the activity. This requires consciously working to develop what hooks calls `authentic help' wherein those providing `help' don't assume their superiority over those being helped (1994). In addition, authentic help requires that learning occurs among all the partners, especially by students and faculty from community members

University-community engagement 133 and agency staff (Artz, 2001). Done correctly, strong, reciprocal ties among the partners justi®es agencies spending the time and energy required to supervise students; rewards teachers for their effort and altered classroom practices by having more engaged students; and enhances student's sense of purpose, self worth and interest in learning and in community and civic issues (Fredericksen, 2000; Roschelle et al., 2000) It is not surprising therefore, that when done correctly, service learning combines strong ties among the partners involved in the activities, and ¯uid and reciprocal forms of learning and re¯ection among all participants. This is schematically represented in overlapping triangles (see Figure 3, below). To present service learning in this schematic form is not meant to indicate any assumption that there is only one correct form of program. Rather the best service learning programs are derived from existing strengths and interests of the different institutions and people involved. Service learning has been shown to enhance pre-service teachers behaviour, socialization, citizenship, self-esteem, leadership, mentoring ability, attitudes towards diverse communities, professional renewal and job placement (MacNicole, 1993; Henderson & Brookhart, 1997; Shimmons-Torres et al., 2002). Service learning also provides a meaningful context for learning. In this sense learning is contextualized not only within varied educational setting but also within the varied socio-cultural contexts of the Bachelor of Teaching (Secondary) pre-service teachers. The participants BTeach pre-service teachers The BTeach Program is a post-graduate degree and a signi®cant percentage of our students are mature-age and bring with them diverse career backgrounds and family experiences. Additionally, we have a culturally diverse student body. Many of our preservice teachers come from Greater Western Sydney and most will teach in this area. It is well documented that signi®cant socio-economic barriers to effective learning and equal opportunity exist within Greater Western Sydney (Campus Futures Project, UWS, 2003). These barriers are evidenced in lower school completion rates, fewer higher education quali®cations and a lower representation of professionals in the region2 (Campus Futures Project, 2003). Students at risk In the Campbelltown-Macarthur region 31% of the population have completed year 12 compared with 48.6% of the population of the Sydney Metropolitan Area (Campus Futures Project, 2003). A greater percentage of early school leavers therefore exist in this region. McClelland et al. (1998) have found that many early school leavers are engaged in marginal activities. This group of young people are either unemployed, employed part time or outside the formal labour force and not in

134 M. Vickers et al. full-time education or training (Vickers et al., 2000). McClelland et al. (1998) estimated that around 15% of young people are in marginal activities and Vickers et al. (2003) have established that this has signi®cant implications for the futures of these young people. Students at risk are those `who are likely to fail, drop out or not successfully complete school or its equivalent, and consequently are unlikely to possess suf®cient skills or quali®cations to acquire well-paid secure employment or become integrated into an accepted pattern of social responsibility' (Vickers et al., 2000, p. 9). Batten and Russell have identi®ed a number of indicators that schools can use to identify students at risk. These include: truancy, absence from class, and lateness; lack of interest in school; alienation from school; poor academic performance; disruptive behaviour; and passivity, especially amongst girls (1995, p. 54). Using these indicators the ®ve secondary schools participating in the PIY program (all from the CampbelltownMacarthur region) are able to identify students at risk to participate in the PIY program. To provide readers with contextual information a case study is presented below. This case study is drawn from the Learning from Early School Leavers Report which was prepared for the Campbelltown Full Service Schools Project (Vickers et al., 2000, p. 22)

Student at risk case study: Julie d d

Gender: female. Age: 17-years-old.

This young woman left school at the end of the ®rst term of Year 11 because she was not going to go to university and so senior school wasn't relevant. She did not have many friends left at schoolÐmost had already left. Although she had no job when she left school, she has had three casual and part-time jobs. All were low skill and low paid positions in the retail and hospitality industries (shop assistant & kitchen hand). She has had problems holding down a position because one employer closed down and the other cut her hours back to almost nothing. She is currently working in a hotel as a `room attendant' (i.e., she makes beds and cleans the rooms). She has undertaken some short certi®cate courses at TAFE because she feels she needs more education or training to get a better, more secure job. She liked the subjects that were taught best, with `good' teachers. Teachers who made subjects interesting were `good' teachers. Although not very academic she did enjoy the early years of high school. She was the oldest sibling in a family of ®ve young children. Dad left years ago. Mum is bipolar and was OK sometimes but other times just didn't get out of bed. So keeping up with homework in Year 11 was tough. Julie felt under pressure and her enjoyment of school fell away. She felt that the school didn't care about students who tried hard but still failed to get high marks. She felt that she was pressured to leave: `If you don't get the grades, they ask you to leave'. She

University-community engagement 135 says teachers do not take account of what students want. `It's our lifeÐso why can't decisions about students be made by students? They don't even ask us what we want!' Whilst service learning is not a new concept3, its application to students at risk is relatively new. Research has proven that the students' beliefs about the connection between school and their futures can be in¯uenced through the following channels: d d

d

connecting students with adult mentors; arranging work experience placements that give students ®rst-hand experience in `knowledge-based' occupations; and inviting local employers or Human Resources directors to visit your class and discuss issues related to labour market entry. (Vickers et al., 2000, p. 6)

The Macarthur Youth Commitment project (MYCP) emanates from the Dusseldorp Skills Forum and it aims to `support students in the transition from school to work and to expand learning, training and work opportunities thorough shared community responsibility for the outcomes and destinations of all young people' (MYCP, 2002). The MYCP acts as an umbrella organization which draws together the skills and support of a wide network of organizations to provide a safety net for youth `at risk' of early school leaving. The PIY program is af®liated with the MYCP and its purpose and function are outlined below. Plan-It Youth Program The PIY Program is the result of a partnership between the Dusseldorp Skills Forum, the NSW Department of Education and Training (DET) and TAFE NSW. The PIY Program is a model for linking community members with young people who may need extra support in the transition from school, to work or from school to further education or training (PIY, 2002, p. 3). This program `provides a strategic approach to addressing the needs of potential early school leavers' (PIY, 2002, p. 3). The program encompasses the following elements: d d d d

Targeting of Year 9±10 people at risk of leaving school early. Building on strengths, skills, abilities and interests of young people. Volunteer community members trained in mentoring through TAFE NSW. Coordinated approach to mentoring support for young people in selected districts. (PIY, 2002, p. 4)

The PIY Program is currently running in six regions of NSW, one of which is Campbelltown-Macarthur region. In late 2002, Professor Margaret Vickers, Head of Secondary Program, UWS approached Campbelltown DET Plan-It Youth Coordinator Jan Chisolm about the possibility of involving UWS pre-service secondary teachers in the PIY Program. Margaret's interest in PIY stems from her work with the MYCP, her experience with students at risk of leaving school early, and her commitment towards addressing this issue. Dr Catherine Harris, a lecturer in the

136 M. Vickers et al. BTeach Program was invited to participate in this evolving partnership. In early 2003, Margaret, Catherine and Jan met to talk seriously about developing this partnership and as a result a UWS, DET/PIY, TAFE pilot partnership program was run in 2003. The pilot program is the result of a developing partnership between the DET, the South-western Sydney Institute of TAFE and UWS, Bankstown Campus. Involvement in the PIY Program as a PE3 placement involves pre-service teachers undertaking an adapted 28 hour TAFE Mentoring in the community course (the Southwestern Sydney Institute of TAFE is currently covering the cost of this) followed by ten weeks of weekly one-hour mentoring sessions at designated local high schools and weekly one-hour `re¯ective' sessions. When approached, our pre-service teachers responded enthusiastically to an invitation to apply for a position in the PIY program. In 2003 there were 96 students undertaking the BTeach Program at UWS Bankstown and of this number, 40 students applied to be a part of this program. Many students opt to complete the BTeach (Secondary) Program in accelerated mode thus completing an 18-month program in 12 months. Students' time availability is therefore constrained. In view of time constraints and the budgetary constraints of the PIY program, there were 30 places available for UWS pre-service teachers in the pilot 2003 UWS, DET/PIY, TAFE program. Students were awarded a place in the program according to two criteria. These were: 1. Commitment to the programÐtime commitment and a genuine desire to mentor students at risk. 2. Satisfactory completion of program to date. Following the selection of participants, Jan Chisolm and Catherine Harris liaised with the South-western Institute of TAFE to adapt their Mentoring in the community course to meet the requirements of the UWS participants. The adapted course took into account the experience UWS students brought with them to the Mentoring in the community courseÐnamely, Child Protection quali®cations and understandings about communication and interpersonal skills. The adapted Course comprised ®ve weeks of four-hour meetings and two four-hour re¯ective sessions to be scheduled towards the end of the mentoring program. Participants also selected a school in which they mentored a student at risk throughout Term 3, 2003. There are currently ®ve secondary schools in the Campbelltown area participating in the PIY project. These are: Robert Townsend High School, Elizabeth Macarthur High School, Leumeah High School, Picton High School and Sarah Redfern High School. Each of these schools already has PIY mentors (drawn from community volunteers) currently working with identi®ed at-risks students. In the ®rst week of Term 3, UWS participants will attend individual school `meet and greet' sessions with students that individual schools have identi®ed as at-risk of leaving school early. During these sessions Jan Chisholm pairs UWS participants, now referred to as `mentors' with students at risk who are now termed `mentees'. Once paired the mentors and mentees begin the weekly meetings.

University-community engagement 137 To examine the DET/PIY, TAFE, UWS partnership we will now return to McCarthy's service learning triangle (refer to Figure 1). Knowledge The BTeach mentors draw on formal and informal knowledge whilst they engage in mentoring students at risk. The UWS BTeach Program encourages students to understand and engage with issues of social justice and there is a speci®c focus on students at risk within our foundation unitÐthe Profession of Teaching. All BTeach mentors have completed Professional Experience 1 and are therefore familiar (from a teachers perspective) with some of the issues related to providing pathways for students at risk of leaving school early. Prior to engaging in `mentoring' all BTeach participants have to satisfactorily complete the TAFE Mentoring in the community course which focuses on developing skills as a mentor (in contrast to that of a teacher or parent). Students' formal knowledge base is therefore substantial. All mentors bring with them a rich and varied socio-cultural background and many have had long-term experience in the workforce both within Australia and overseas. This also constitutes a rich knowledge base upon which the mentoring experience can rest. Experience The mentoring experience is organized and managed by the DET/PIY program. BTeach participants' suitability for the program rests with the DET/PIYÐUWS has no control over the evaluation of participant's suitability for the program beyond the initial criteria for entry speci®ed earlier. The Southwestern Sydney Institute of TAFE (Outreach Program) provide the Mentoring in the community course and the `experience' is structured around a one-on-one mentee/mentor relationship arranged and supervised by the DET/PIY. The potential for all partiesÐmentees, mentors, DET/PIY, TAFE and UWSÐto learn from this experience is vast. Re¯ection Both Mentees and mentors are actively encouraged to re¯ect on their experiences and knowledge. Two four-hour re¯ection sessions are incorporated within the Mentoring in the community course and ten one-hour weekly debrie®ng sessions are scheduled throughout the mentoring term. In these sessions, the mentors are encouraged to re¯ect on both the experiences of their mentees and on the process of service learning. In doing so, the BTeach mentors will be asked to explore the differences in their roles as parents, teachers and mentors. Further, it is hoped, as McCarthy states, that `student's examination of their experiences and the analysis of problems they encounter encourages them to actively engage with what happens to them and to question their responses and options' (2003, p. 2). Further, McCarthy's research (2003) reveals critical re¯ection pushes students to consider unexamined assump-

138 M. Vickers et al. tions, to reassess their values and expand their understandings of issues of social justice.

Relationships and reciprocity The service-learning triangle is based on a number of interdependent relationships. These relationships are based on reciprocity. This becomes clear when we examine the mentee/mentor relationship. Whilst the mentor brings with them knowledge and experience, the mentee also brings the lived experience of at risk youth. BTeach mentors can learn much from their mentees and this learning has broad application to teaching practice. Similarly, the relationship between DET/PIY, TAFE and UWS is one of reciprocity. UWS provides participants for the PIY program who will take what they have learned into local Campbelltown-Macarthur schools when they commence teaching next year. The DET/PIY on the other hand allow UWS to incorporate a service learning approach within PE3; they provide our students with places in the program and liaise with TAFE who provide the Mentoring in the Community course. The DET/PIY then liaise with local schools and arrange placement for mentors. The partnership between DET, TAFE and UWS is an evolving one. Much time was initially spent, and continues to be spent on role de®nition and decision-making processes. The roles of each stakeholder are currently de®ned as: d

d

d

DET/Plan-It Youth Program: As Program Coordinator Jan Chisholm's role is to oversee the functioning of the program. She works closely with the South-western Sydney Institute of TAFE to develop and implement the TAFE Mentoring in Community Course. Southwestern Sydney Institute for TAFE (Outreach Program): currently provide the Mentoring in the community course at no cost to DET/PIY or UWS BTeach participants. UWS BTeach Secondary Program: Catherine Harris has been allowed a fractional workload appointment to act as the BTeach Secondary Program contact. She liaises closely with Jan, advertises the PIY program to BTeach pre-service teachers, assists in the selection of participants for entry into the program, works with TAFE to adapt the Mentoring in the community course to recognize the expertise of our students and attends the Mentoring in the community course in an observer capacity.

As a University partner we also aim to provide the PIY program with `in-kind' support. For example, in 2003 a group of UWS Media and Communications students were invited (with the assistance of their lecturer) to develop and design a PIY promotional video. These students compiled a series of vignettes which showcase the work of mentors and mentees in the ®ve Campbelltown-Macarthur schools with the aim of attracting local sponsorship. This was an exhaustive yet highly valuable process and the completion of this video formed part of their formal University assessment. This is one example of the ways in which Universities and communities can work together to address community needs.

University-community engagement 139 Re¯ecting on the pilot program Part of UWS's commitment to the PIY project is an evaluative one. Evaluation of the pilot program in 2003 was limited due to ®nancial and time constraints4. We therefore relied on anecdotal re¯ections to evaluate the success of the program. We also relied heavily on Jan Chisholm's (DET/PIY coordinator) observations of mentor/mentee interactions to assess the value of the program. Informal, anecdotal comments from mentors, mentees and Jan were generally positive. A few challenges were noted; for example, many mentees wanted their mentors to continue with PIY beyond the required Term 3 timeframe and whilst many mentors did continue, some felt the demands of the BTeach course limited their continued involvement with PIY beyond the PE3 requirements. Another issue was that of suitability as some mentors adapted to the role of `mentor' well, whilst others struggled and assumed a teaching or parenting role in their relationship with their mentee. In 2004, we have decided to have `suitability interviews' with UWS participants as academic performance alone is not an appropriate criterion. Whilst informal evaluation such as this is helpful, a systematic evaluation of the experiences of all partnersÐparticularly the experiences of menteesÐis needed. We are currently working towards this is 2004. A further focal point for 2004 is that of workload. In 2003, much of the on-site (in school) organization fell to Jan and whilst as PIY coordinator this is her responsibility, overseeing the involvement of UWS participants in addition to the other mentors in the PIY program, is time intensive and also emotionally costly as mentors are themselves mentored by Jan. We are currently looking at ways in which UWS can support this process. Towards the future The future of this partnership seems bright but a number of obstacles may lie ahead. Recent changes at the DET/TAFE as announced by the Education Minister Andrew Refshauge may result in the status of the Mentoring in the community course being altered. The Course is currently an outreach course and as such DET/TAFE cover the cost of the course. Whilst this funding has been made available for 2004, the future is uncertain. Without TAFE funding the costs of running the course may have to be met by DET/PIY and/or BTeach participants. This will prove to be problematic and will be an issue that we will have to negotiate. Conclusion The developing partnership between DET/PIY, TAFE and UWS is of bene®t to both pre-service teachers and the broader educational community. This partnership has strengthened the professional experience component of the BTeach Program and has allowed a multi-agency approach to a signi®cant social and educational issueÐthat of students at risk. We look forward to evaluating the experiences of mentors and mentees and working towards developing and sustaining the UWS, DET/PIY, TAFE partnership in the future.

140 M. Vickers et al. Notes 1 2 3 4

For reader ease the Bachelor of Teaching (Secondary) Program will subsequently be referred to as the BTeach Program. This is drawn from a comparison between the Campbelltown-Macarthur region (located close to UWS Bankstown and the Sydney Metropolitan Area statistics as sourced in UWS Greater Western Sydney Regional Pro®le, 2003). Service learning can be traced to at least three sources: John Dewey, Experiential learning and civic learning (PSLEN, 1996) A strong evaluative mechanism was built into the pilot programÐa questionnaire was developed and authorized through the UWS Ethics committee and series of interviews (of both mentors and mentees) was planned. Funding for this evaluation was however frozen in late 2003 due to larger budgetary concerns.

References Artz, L. (2001) Critical ethnography for communication studies: dialogue and social justice in service-learning, The Southern Communication Journal, 66, 239±250. Battistoni, R. M. (1995) Service learning, diversity and the liberal arts curriculum, Liberal Education, 81, 30±35. Benson, L., Harkavy, I. & Puckett, J. (2000) An implementation revolution as a strategy for ful®lling the democratic promise of university-community partnerships: Penn-West Philadelphia as an experiment in progress, Nonpro®t and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29, 24±45. Berv, J. (1998) Service learning as experiential education's bridge to mainstream education, The Journal of Experiential Education, 21, 119±123. Bittle, M., Dugglby, W. & Ellison, P. (2002) Implementation of the essential elements of service learning in three nursing courses, Journal of Nursing Education, 41(3), 129±142. Campus Futures Project (2003) Greater Western Sydney regional pro®le (University of Western Sydney, Australia). Couto, R. A. (1996) Service learning: integrating community issues and the curriculum, in: R A. Couto (Ed.) Teaching democracy by being democratic (Westport, CT, Praeger). Dewey, J. (1937) Educational freedom and democracy. V 2. The John Dewey Society (London, Appleton-Century Company). Evenbeck, S. & S. Kahn (2001) Enhancing learning assessment and accountability through communities of practice, Change, 33, 24±33. Eyler, J. & Giles, D. E. (1999) Where's the learning in-service learning? (San Francisco, Jossey Bass). Fredericksen, P. (2000) Does service learning make a difference in student performance? The Journal of Experiential Education, 23, 64±74. Gardner, B. (1997) The controversy over service learning, NEA Today, 16, 17±18. Gehring, J. (2002) Partnership and service, Education Week, 21(21), 14±15. Henderson, J. E. & Brookhart, S. M. (1997) Service learning for aspiring school leaders: an exploratory study, paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, 24±28 March. Hesser, G. (1995) Faculty assessment of student learning: outcomes attributed to service-learning and evidence of changes in faculty attitudes about experiential education, Michigan Journal of Community Service-Learning, 2, 33±42. Hollander, E. & Saltmarsh, J. (2000) The engaged university, Academe, 8, 29±32. Hooks, B. (1994) Learning to transgress: education as the practice of freedom (London, Routledge). Leming, J. (2001) Integrating a structured ethical re¯ection curriculum into high school Community service experiences: impact on students' sociomoral development, Adolescence, 36, 33±45.

University-community engagement 141 Markus, G. B., Howard, J. P. F. & King, D. C. (1993) Integrating community service and classroom instruction enhances learning: results from an experiment, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 410±419. Macarthur Youth Commitment Project (2002) Macarthur youth commitment McCarthy, F. E. (2001) Educating the heart: service learning in Asian institutions of higher education. Report prepared for the United Board for Christian Higher Education in Asian and the International Partnership for Service Learning (United Board for Christian Higher Education in Asian and the International Partnership for Service Learning, New York). McCarthy, F. E. (2002a) Education as the practice of freedom: service learning, social dilemmas and `developing' countries, paper presented at the International Partnership for Service Learning Conference, Prague, Czech Republic. McCarthy, F. E. (2002b) Service learning and the institutionalization of networks and curriculum, in: K. Yamamoto (Ed.) Service learning in Asia: creating networks and curricula in higher education (International Christian University, Tokyo), 23±27. McCarthy, F. E (2003) Service learning as community engagement among colleges and universities in Asia, proceedings of the National Forum on University-Community Engagement, Parramatta, 16 July. Available online at: www.uws.edu.au/about/adminorg/ devint/ord/forum_info/publications. McClelland, A, MacDonald, F & MacDonald, H. (1998) Young people and labour market disadvantage: the situation of young people not in education or full time work, in: Dusseldorp Skills Forum (Ed.) Australia's youth: reality and risk (Dusseldorp Skills Forum, Sydney). O'Hara, L. S. (2001) Service-learning: students' transformative journey from communication student to civic-minded professional, The Southern Communication Journal, 66, 251±266. Parker-Gwin, R. (1996) Connecting service to learning: how students and communities matter, Teaching Sociology, 24, 97±101. Pennsylvania Service Learning Evaluation Network (PSLEN) (1996) The essentials of service learning (University of Pittsburgh). Rama, D. V., Ravenscroft, S., Wolcott, S. & Zlotkowski, E. (2000) Guidelines for educators and researchers, Issues in Accounting Education, 15, 657±692. Roschelle, A., Turpin, R. & Elias, R. (2000) Who learns from service learning? The American Behavioral Scientist, 43, 839±847. SEECS (2003) Professional experience III unit outline. Shimmons-Torres, C., Drew-Cates, J., Johnson, J. & Overbeek, D. (2002) Community-driven partnership. A unique RN-to-BSN clinical experience, Journal of Nursing Education, 41(12), 544±561. Vickers, M. H. (1998) Working to learn, in: A. Steinberg (Ed.) Real learning, real work: school-towork as high school reform (New York, Routledge). Vickers, M. H., Sweet, R., Petersen, M. & Van Ravens, J. (1999) The transition from school to work and further study in Sweden (OECD, Paris). Vickers, M., Mukherjee, D., Dowson, M. & Livermore, R. (2000) Learning from early school leavers. A research report prepared for the Campbelltown Full Service Schools Project. Vickers, M. & Lamb, S. (2002) Why state policies matter: the in¯uence of curriculum policy on participation in post-compulsory education and training, Australian Journal of Education, 46(2), 172±188. Vickers, M., Lamb, S. & Hinkley, J. (2003) Student workers in high school and beyond: the effects of part-time employment on participation in education, training and work (LSAY Research Report, ACER). Waldstein, F. A. & Reiher, T. C. (2001) Service-learning and students' personal and civic development, The Journal of Experiential Education, 24(1), Yerkes, R. (1998) Service learning revisited, The Journal of Experiential Education, 21, 117±118.