Perspectives of Community Partner Organizations in the Development of Ethical Service-Learning Guidelines

Meghan V. Doran
{"title":"Perspectives of Community Partner Organizations in the Development of Ethical Service-Learning Guidelines","authors":"Meghan V. Doran","doi":"10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research brings the voices of community partner organizations into the discussion of ethical obligations of university and student partners in community- based learning. We used a framework for service-learning ethics developed by Wendler (2012), which brings The Belmont Report (1979) on research ethics together with decolonizing, feminist, and participatory action research frameworks, to guide our interviews with staff members of community organizations about their experiences and beliefs about the ethical obliga tions of faculty and students partnering with service- learning courses. We found that the community organization perspective deepened our understanding of the categories elaborated in the Wendler framework (i.e., respect, reflexivity, beneficence, and justice) and situated them in relationship to one another as context, process, and outcome. Based on these findings, we introduce a relational approach to service- learning ethics that centers social justice, and we offer seven key principles to reflect the perspectives of community partners in our ethical practice. framework, which is grounded in decolonial, feminist, and participatory approaches, to understand how community partners interpreted issues related to respect for persons, beneficence, justice, and reflexivity in service- learning partnerships. We found that Wendler’s framework useful in uncovering issues of power and inequality in community- university partnerships as well as in help-ing us to understand what a more just vision for service- learning that’s rooted in the concerns and aspirations of our community partners looks like. Our findings showed that community partners expressed their desire to have more ownership over decision- making processes and that strong relationships grounded in open communication and consent were critical to the success of service- learning projects. We introduced the concept of a relational approach to service- learning ethics, which builds upon existing studies showing the importance of relationships","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"84 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan journal of community service learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0027.107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This research brings the voices of community partner organizations into the discussion of ethical obligations of university and student partners in community- based learning. We used a framework for service-learning ethics developed by Wendler (2012), which brings The Belmont Report (1979) on research ethics together with decolonizing, feminist, and participatory action research frameworks, to guide our interviews with staff members of community organizations about their experiences and beliefs about the ethical obliga tions of faculty and students partnering with service- learning courses. We found that the community organization perspective deepened our understanding of the categories elaborated in the Wendler framework (i.e., respect, reflexivity, beneficence, and justice) and situated them in relationship to one another as context, process, and outcome. Based on these findings, we introduce a relational approach to service- learning ethics that centers social justice, and we offer seven key principles to reflect the perspectives of community partners in our ethical practice. framework, which is grounded in decolonial, feminist, and participatory approaches, to understand how community partners interpreted issues related to respect for persons, beneficence, justice, and reflexivity in service- learning partnerships. We found that Wendler’s framework useful in uncovering issues of power and inequality in community- university partnerships as well as in help-ing us to understand what a more just vision for service- learning that’s rooted in the concerns and aspirations of our community partners looks like. Our findings showed that community partners expressed their desire to have more ownership over decision- making processes and that strong relationships grounded in open communication and consent were critical to the success of service- learning projects. We introduced the concept of a relational approach to service- learning ethics, which builds upon existing studies showing the importance of relationships
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
社区伙伴机构在制定诚信服务学习指引中的观点
本研究将社区伙伴组织的声音引入到社区学习中大学和学生伙伴的伦理义务讨论中。我们使用了温德勒(2012)开发的服务学习伦理框架,该框架将贝尔蒙特报告(1979)与非殖民化、女权主义和参与性行动研究框架结合在一起,指导我们对社区组织工作人员的采访,了解他们对与服务学习课程合作的教师和学生的道德义务的经验和信念。我们发现,社区组织视角加深了我们对温德勒框架中阐述的类别(即尊重、反身性、善行和正义)的理解,并将它们作为背景、过程和结果置于彼此之间的关系中。基于这些发现,我们引入了一种以社会正义为中心的服务学习伦理的关系方法,并提出了七条关键原则,以反映社区合作伙伴在我们的道德实践中的观点。框架,该框架以非殖民化、女权主义和参与性方法为基础,以了解社区合作伙伴如何解释与服务学习伙伴关系中尊重个人、慈善、正义和反身性相关的问题。我们发现,温德勒的框架在揭示社区大学伙伴关系中的权力和不平等问题,以及帮助我们理解根植于社区合作伙伴的关注和愿望的服务学习的更公正的愿景方面是有用的。我们的研究结果表明,社区合作伙伴表达了他们希望在决策过程中拥有更多自主权的愿望,建立在公开沟通和同意基础上的牢固关系对服务学习项目的成功至关重要。我们介绍了关系方法的概念,以服务学习伦理,这是建立在现有的研究显示关系的重要性
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