SLCE Partnering with Social Justice Collectives to Dismantle the Status Quo.

Sarah Augustine, D. López, Harold McNaron, Elizabeth Starke, B. Gundy
{"title":"SLCE Partnering with Social Justice Collectives to Dismantle the Status Quo.","authors":"Sarah Augustine, D. López, Harold McNaron, Elizabeth Starke, B. Gundy","doi":"10.3998/MJCSLOA.3239521.0023.217","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\"Service-learning\" is a multilayered term with a complex historical evolution. The movement traces back to the work of Robert Sigmon and the Southern Regional Education Board in the early 1970s, when it focused on building democratic communities through a combination of meaningful service and deep collaboration. As noted in Zlotkowski's 1995 essay that asked whether service-learning had a future, there came a time in the history of the movement when some of its thought leaders urgently called attention to the necessity for a more academic and scholarly focus. In the last two decades, service-learning and community engagement (SLCE) have flourished in higher education as staff, faculty, and students have realized it can be a high-impact teaching and learning practice to promote student learning and development. While many SLCE courses and projects adopt this student focus in undertaking and reflecting upon useful service activities with community organizations, it can be difficult to implement them in ways that explicitly engage with the historical and contemporary systems of oppression--such as racism, classism, and sexism--that created the need for SLCE efforts in the first place. Tania Mitchell (2008), in fact, proposed a distinction between \"traditional\" and \"critical\" service-learning and suggested that the movement must focus on the latter and thereby challenge the foundational systems that uphold an inequitable status quo rather than risk perpetuating oppression through the former. Over the last decade, several other scholars and practitioners have called for a transformation of SLCE toward a practice aligned with social justice goals. Our own unit, the Office of Student Leadership and Service (SLS) at Lewis & Clark College, is moving in this direction with our co-curricular SLCE programs, using the framework of critical service-learning as a guide. Our vision for the future is a radical re-centering of SLCE within social justice collectives (SJCs), such as the organizers of the Movement for Black Lives, led by people from marginalized groups and addressing the systems of oppression most relevant to their own lives. SJCs may be registered nonprofits or non-governmental organizations but are more often, in our experience, unincorporated collaboratives comprised of individuals and groups united around a specific social justice cause. As it has been our experience that SLCE practitioners often rely heavily on nonprofit and school partners to determine the nature of SLCE projects, we are proposing a shift from individual partner organizations to SJCs so that each SLCE effort is firmly situated within a community-verified justice effort. Within this new structure for SLCE, colleges and universities, along with other stakeholders/partners, would follow the leadership of these off-campus collectives working on the frontlines of social justice movements. For this to happen, SLCE practitioners and scholars must first acknowledge the ways in which institutions of higher education can and do perpetuate injustice. Brown University's Steering Committee on Slavery and Justice serves as a powerful example of an institution grappling with the harm it has caused and directing resources to partnership efforts that restore community. After such an honest accounting, the calls of local, national, and international movements for justice can be better heard and heeded. Once SJCs and SLCE practitioners are communicating and collaborating, pilot projects can be pursued and partnership agreements drafted around the priorities of social justice movements and the marginalized communities leading them. SLCE for Social Justice Mitchell (2008) provides a useful framework for designing SLCE toward social justice ends, which we understand to relate to both (a) the end goal of resource distribution and access allowing for everyone to not only survive, but also thrive, and (b) the democratic, equitable processes in pursuit of that goal (Bell, 1997). …","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"12 1","pages":"170-174"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan journal of community service learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3998/MJCSLOA.3239521.0023.217","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

"Service-learning" is a multilayered term with a complex historical evolution. The movement traces back to the work of Robert Sigmon and the Southern Regional Education Board in the early 1970s, when it focused on building democratic communities through a combination of meaningful service and deep collaboration. As noted in Zlotkowski's 1995 essay that asked whether service-learning had a future, there came a time in the history of the movement when some of its thought leaders urgently called attention to the necessity for a more academic and scholarly focus. In the last two decades, service-learning and community engagement (SLCE) have flourished in higher education as staff, faculty, and students have realized it can be a high-impact teaching and learning practice to promote student learning and development. While many SLCE courses and projects adopt this student focus in undertaking and reflecting upon useful service activities with community organizations, it can be difficult to implement them in ways that explicitly engage with the historical and contemporary systems of oppression--such as racism, classism, and sexism--that created the need for SLCE efforts in the first place. Tania Mitchell (2008), in fact, proposed a distinction between "traditional" and "critical" service-learning and suggested that the movement must focus on the latter and thereby challenge the foundational systems that uphold an inequitable status quo rather than risk perpetuating oppression through the former. Over the last decade, several other scholars and practitioners have called for a transformation of SLCE toward a practice aligned with social justice goals. Our own unit, the Office of Student Leadership and Service (SLS) at Lewis & Clark College, is moving in this direction with our co-curricular SLCE programs, using the framework of critical service-learning as a guide. Our vision for the future is a radical re-centering of SLCE within social justice collectives (SJCs), such as the organizers of the Movement for Black Lives, led by people from marginalized groups and addressing the systems of oppression most relevant to their own lives. SJCs may be registered nonprofits or non-governmental organizations but are more often, in our experience, unincorporated collaboratives comprised of individuals and groups united around a specific social justice cause. As it has been our experience that SLCE practitioners often rely heavily on nonprofit and school partners to determine the nature of SLCE projects, we are proposing a shift from individual partner organizations to SJCs so that each SLCE effort is firmly situated within a community-verified justice effort. Within this new structure for SLCE, colleges and universities, along with other stakeholders/partners, would follow the leadership of these off-campus collectives working on the frontlines of social justice movements. For this to happen, SLCE practitioners and scholars must first acknowledge the ways in which institutions of higher education can and do perpetuate injustice. Brown University's Steering Committee on Slavery and Justice serves as a powerful example of an institution grappling with the harm it has caused and directing resources to partnership efforts that restore community. After such an honest accounting, the calls of local, national, and international movements for justice can be better heard and heeded. Once SJCs and SLCE practitioners are communicating and collaborating, pilot projects can be pursued and partnership agreements drafted around the priorities of social justice movements and the marginalized communities leading them. SLCE for Social Justice Mitchell (2008) provides a useful framework for designing SLCE toward social justice ends, which we understand to relate to both (a) the end goal of resource distribution and access allowing for everyone to not only survive, but also thrive, and (b) the democratic, equitable processes in pursuit of that goal (Bell, 1997). …
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
SLCE与社会正义团体合作,打破现状。
“服务学习”是一个具有复杂历史演变的多层次术语。这一运动可以追溯到罗伯特·西格蒙(Robert Sigmon)和南方地区教育委员会(Southern Regional Education Board)在20世纪70年代初的工作,当时该运动致力于通过有意义的服务和深度合作的结合来建立民主社区。正如Zlotkowski在1995年的一篇文章中所指出的那样,服务学习是否有未来,在这个运动的历史上,曾经有一段时间,它的一些思想领袖迫切地呼吁人们关注更多学术和学术关注的必要性。在过去的二十年里,服务学习和社区参与(SLCE)在高等教育中蓬勃发展,因为教职员工和学生都意识到它可以是一种促进学生学习和发展的高影响力教学实践。虽然许多SLCE课程和项目都采用了这种学生专注于与社区组织开展和反思有用的服务活动的方式,但很难以明确参与历史和当代压迫制度的方式实施这些课程和项目,例如种族主义、阶级歧视和性别歧视,这些制度首先创造了SLCE努力的必要性。事实上,Tania Mitchell(2008)提出了“传统”和“批判性”服务学习之间的区别,并建议该运动必须关注后者,从而挑战维持不公平现状的基础系统,而不是冒着通过前者延续压迫的风险。在过去的十年中,其他一些学者和实践者呼吁将SLCE转变为与社会正义目标一致的实践。我们自己的单位,Lewis & Clark学院的学生领导与服务办公室(SLS),正通过我们的课外SLCE项目朝着这个方向发展,使用批判性服务学习的框架作为指导。我们对未来的愿景是在社会正义集体(SJCs)中彻底重新定位SLCE,例如“黑人生命运动”的组织者,由边缘化群体的人领导,并解决与他们自己生活最相关的压迫制度。SJCs可能是注册的非营利组织或非政府组织,但根据我们的经验,更多的是由个人和团体为特定的社会正义事业而联合起来的非法人合作组织。根据我们的经验,SLCE从业者经常严重依赖非营利组织和学校合作伙伴来确定SLCE项目的性质,我们建议从个人合作组织转向SJCs,以便每个SLCE工作都牢固地定位在社区验证的正义工作中。在SLCE的新结构中,学院和大学,以及其他利益相关者/合作伙伴,将跟随这些在社会正义运动前线工作的校外集体的领导。为了实现这一点,SLCE的从业者和学者必须首先承认高等教育机构能够并且确实使不公正永久化的方式。布朗大学的奴隶制和司法指导委员会是一个强有力的例子,一个机构努力解决它所造成的伤害,并将资源用于恢复社区的合作努力。在如此诚实的核算之后,地方、国家和国际正义运动的呼声可以得到更好的倾听和重视。一旦SJCs和SLCE从业者进行沟通和合作,就可以开展试点项目,并围绕社会正义运动的优先事项和领导这些运动的边缘化社区起草伙伴关系协议。社会公正的SLCE Mitchell(2008)为实现社会公正目的设计SLCE提供了一个有用的框架,我们认为这与(a)资源分配和获取的最终目标有关,允许每个人不仅生存,而且茁壮成长,以及(b)追求这一目标的民主,公平的过程(Bell, 1997)。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Title Pending 5477 Daniels, R., Shreve, G., & Spector, P. (2021). What Universities Owe Democracy. John Hopkins University Press. List of Reviewers Reviewers - Volume 27.2 Validation of S-LOMS and Comparison Between Hong Kong and Singapore of Student Developmental Outcomes After Service-Learning Experience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1