Campus Compact

Description

This seminal volume takes service-learning to a new level by demonstrating how it can meet its academic and community goals while developing student leaders. Models from campuses across the country offer successful practices for recruiting and training student leaders in service-learning, using students to staff key administrative positions, and establishing student-faculty partnerships to design and run community-based courses.

According to Campus Compact's member survey, nearly three-quarters of colleges and universities cite both student leadership development and student civic engagement as key outcomes in their strategic plans. Students as Colleagues is a must for anyone on campus seeking to achieve these institutional goals.

Edited by Edward Zlotkowski, Nicholas V. Longo, and James R. Williams.

What leaders in the field are saying about Students As Colleagues: Expanding the Circle of Service-Learning Leadership:

Students as Colleagues provides colleges and universities with a strong rationale and specific models for expanding the role of students in all aspects of campus engagement. Its publication fills a large gap in the higher education resource library. Richard M. Battistoni
Director, Feinstein Institute for Public Service
Providence College

Students as Colleagues is a stunning testament to the rich educational value that student expertise and leadership can bring to the civically engaged classroom. It is not a step-by-step guide to replicating the programs it describes, but a source of ideas and inspiration for students, faculty, and service-learning professionals alike. Stephanie Raill, student,
Macalester College

Engaged students are vital to a flourishing democracy. This collection gives powerful examples of institutional support for student leadership in the academic curriculum that can help catalyze engagement on campuses around the country. We should all take notice, especially those of us who see service-learning as a vehicle for civic renewal. Eduardo J. Padrón
President
Miami Dade College

Table of Contents

• Foreword

  v

• About the Authors

  vii

• Acknowledgments

  xix

• Introduction

  1

• Identifying Student Leaders

  13

  • Community Service Scholarships at DePaul: Meeting Students Where They Are, Laurie Worrall, Devin Novgorodoff, and Joseph Stehlin

    15

  • Bentley's Service-Learning Scholarship Program: Finding and Nurturing Student Scholars, Franklyn P. Salimbene and Stephen R. Kennedy

    25

  • Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis: Supporting Student Involvement through Service-based Scholarships, Julie A. Hatcher, Robert G. Bringle, Lorrie A. Brown, and David A. Fleischhacker

    35

  • Community Service-Learning at the University of San Diego: Recruiting and Building a Team, Elaine Elliott and Lisa Garcia 49 More from Antioch College & Defiance College on Identifying Student Leaders

    61

• Training Students

  65

  • (sl)² at CSUMB: Training Students for Leadership in Service-Learning, Tania D. Mitchell, Karly Edwards, M. Crystal Macias-Diaz, and Olivia Weatherbee

    67

  • Advancing Engagement at NC State: Reflection Leader Training and Support, Patti Clayton and Julie McClure

    77

  • NCCU's Student Training Model: Preparing Student Leaders for Success, Rosa S. Anderson, Emmanuel O. Oritsejafor, and James. S. Guseh

    89

  • Service-Learning Advocates at Azusa Pacific: Students Training Students, Judy Hutchinson, Kristin Gurrola, Debra Fetterly, and Vanessa Fontes

    101

  • More from Mars Hill College, the University of Michigan, & Saint Anselm College on Training Students

    111

• Students as Staff

  119

  • Providence College: The Community Assistant Model, Angela E. Kelly and Hugh F. Lena

    121

  • Marquette University: The Student Coordinator Model, Bobbi Timberlake and Shelley Frank

    135

  • Miami Dade College: The Student Ambassador Model, Katia Archer, Yleinia Galeano, Ossie Hanauer, Nicolle Hickey, Michelle Lasanta, and Josh Young

    147

  • More from Boise State University on Students as Staff

    157

• Student-Faculty Partnerships

  159

  • The APPLES Program at UNC: Merging Students, Faculty, Community, and University, Dac Cannon, Emily Cupito, Janaka Lagoo, Kasey Q. Maggard, Leslie Parkins, and Beth Payne

    161

  • Allegheny's Service-Learning Challenge: Capitalizing on Student and Faculty Strengths, Andy Bennett, Michelle Ferry, Karen Hoerst, Rebecca Milbert, and David Roncolato

    171

  • Student Leadership Models at Portland State: Partnering with Faculty and Community, Dilafruz Williams, Kevin Kecskes, Christopher Carey, Adam Smith, Candyce Reynolds, and Ronnie Craddock

    181

  • Penn's West Philadelphia Partnerships: Developing Students as Catalysts and Colleagues, Jennifer Bunn, Mei Elansary, and Cory Bowman

    193

  • More from the University of Richmond & the Jane Addams School of Democracy on Student-Faculty Partnerships

    207

• Students as Academic Entrepreneurs

  211

  • Students as Engaged Partners at Duke: A Continuum of Engagement, Betsy Alden and Julie Norman

    213

  • Grassroots Community Development at UMass Amherst: The Professorless Classroom, Danyel Addes and Arthur Keene

    227

  • The University of Utah's SPACE Program: Service-Politics and Civic Engagement, William Chatwin, Shannon Gillespie, Anne Looser, and Marshall Welch

    241

  • Social Action at Miami University: Lessons from Building Service-Learning, Ross Meyer

    255

  • More from Bates College,Macalester College, Georgetown University, and Princeton University on Students as Academic Entrepreneurs

    265

  • Conclusion: Beyond Tactical Service-Learning

    273

Sample Chapter

Introduction

By almost any measure, the adoption of service-learning as a legitimate teaching and learning strategy in American higher education has been a remarkable success story. During the 1990s, we saw the founding and flourishing of the federal Corporation for National Service as well as the Community Outreach Partnerships Centers (COPC) program from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.We witnessed the phenomenal growth of Campus Compact from a few hundred members to more than 950 institutions and the founding of affiliated state Compact offices in more than 30 states.

The 20 volumes in the American Association for Higher Education's series on servicelearning in the academic disciplines (Zlotkowski, 1997-2004) have prepared the way for many other discipline-specific publications and initiatives. The disciplinary associations themselves have begun to take on the work of engagement, from major initiatives at the National Communication Association to more limited but significant developments in the sciences and the humanities. Associations organized by institutional type — such as the American Association of Community Colleges, the Council of Independent Colleges, the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges, and private historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) working through the United Negro College Fund — all have begun efforts to redefine higher education's role in promoting the public good.

We might conclude that the cyclical pattern of rising and falling interest in campusbased service that Levine (1994) refers to may finally have been transcended: "The historical reality is that student volunteer movements tend to be a passing phenomenon in higher education, rising and falling on campuses roughly every 30 years" (p. 4). The author specifies "student volunteer movements," and the fact that service-learning is not a volunteer activity but rather a required or optional academic assignment goes a long way toward accounting for its extended (and still growing) appeal. Levine himself explicitly recognizes the fundamental importance of making faculty a central feature of any campus service movement that hopes to sustain itself.

Yet, despite its obvious success in enlisting faculty in service initiatives and thus moving service closer to the core work of academic institutions, service-learning still has not begun to fulfill its promise. While the data suggest that currently perhaps 10-15% of all faculty members use service-learning in their courses (Campus Compact annual member surveys), that number must at least double before this approach will be able to transform academic programming. Furthermore, we still have not succeeded in regularly creating the kind of continuity and critical mass of service projects that will bring about measurable, substantive community results.

In organizing and editing this book, we contend that service-learning's full academic and social impact will not be achieved until the circle of service-learning leadership is further extended to include students themselves. This contention may seem paradoxical. Wasn't it the shift from student-led to faculty-led initiatives that made possible today's level of success? Doesn't genuine institution-wide acceptance of the practice demand that service be linked to the curriculum, and doesn't the curriculum imply faculty ownership? Why focus on students when we still need to achieve deeper, broader faculty commitment?

To address these questions, it is critically important to understand that what we here propose and document does not in any way imply a retreat from service-learning as a fully legitimate academic undertaking. To deepen its academic and social impact and to further the process of its institutionalization, we suggest that we revisit the roles students can and should play in making service-learning an essential feature of American higher education. To understand why, we turn briefly to the movement's history. The National Service Movement

In 1995, Goodwin Liu, a fellow in residence at Providence College's Feinstein Center for Public Service, reviewed the rise of the contemporary service movement on American campuses and identified its constituent phases and emphases. In Liu's analysis (1996), the movement owed its origin to the attempt to counter a pervasive stereotype: Our story begins with the generational stereotype of college students in the 1980s. The "me generation" label is especially familiar to those of us who came to social consciousness during this period?. It was against this backdrop that students of a different sort made their mark (pp. 25-26).

We contend that servicelearning's full academic and social impact will not be achieved until the circle of service-learning leadership is further extended to include students.

According to Liu, the Campus Opportunity Outreach League (COOL) in particular succeeded in focusing "national attention on students who belied the 'me generation' stereotype, and stories of a new wave of student volunteerism began to appear in the press" (p. 26). Thus, in a very literal sense, it was students who "catalyzed the contemporary service movement in higher education" (p. 26).

For Liu, this student-led period lasted from the early 1980s to the early 1990s and began to be complemented — and ultimately supplanted — by two other developments: first, the mobilization of institutional resources to support student interest in service, and second, the spread of academic service-learning. The first of these developments gave rise to Campus Compact and the Corporation for National Service (now known as the Corporation for National and Community Service, or CNCS). The latter development allowed for faculty participation and conferred academic legitimacy on the movement. Liu speculated that in the second half of the 1990s, additional steps such as increased attention to servicelearning on the part of disciplines and departments, revised promotion and tenure criteria, and evidence of the service-learning's "cognitive impact" might "put service squarely within the academic mainstream." Every one of these predictions has been realized.

Why the Need for Student Leadership?

Because both institutionalization and academic legitimization have proceeded so well during the past 10 years, we suggest that the time has come to expand the circle of service- learning leadership. While much remains to be done to advance both agendas through faculty, administrators, and professional staff, to focus exclusively on these campus constituencies now might be counterproductive. Just as the service movement once needed resources that students alone could not supply, so the movement has now reached a point where it needs resources that students alone can supply. In the following pages, we explore three different rationales for rethinking and expanding the role of student leadership in academic service-learning.

Students as Enablers

The first rationale can be dubbed instrumental. One by-product of the rapid growth of service-learning in higher education has been that the need for "enabling mechanisms" (Walshok, 1995) to support it has in many instances outstripped available resources. Because service-learning requires faculty members not only to reconceptualize the way in which they approach the teaching/learning process but also to factor new community- based considerations into their thinking and planning, it is often seen initially as very time consuming. Even when faculty members have become comfortable with service-learning's conceptual demands, they still must find ways to deal with a host of new logistics.

Students who can play a substantive role in linking academic learning with real-world problem solving represent in many ways an ideal.

For this reason, service-learning rarely achieves any broad currency at an institution unwilling to invest in supportive infrastructure, such as an office that facilitates campus- community connections; addresses transportation needs; assists with student orientation, reflection, and evaluation; and provides printed or Web-based forms, guidelines, and models. These resources can be generic, but only to a certain extent. Ultimately, every campus-community collaboration must be individual and distinct if it is to have the intended educational and social impact. Such personalization, of course, is difficult with a finite staff and a limited budget. Thus we arrive at a kind of Catch-22: the kinds of results that lead administrators to invest in service-learning are themselves dependent on the willingness of those same administrators to invest in service-learning up front.

Fortunately, professional staff people are not the only reliable source of practical faculty assistance. As many of the programs included in this book make clear, carefully selected, well-trained undergraduates can play decisive roles in making academic-community collaborations powerful, successful experiences. There is no single model for how to find and train students willing and able to play such key facilitating roles, but there is an entire spectrum of faculty-student relationships, from relatively simple help with logistics to full teaching assistantships. A willingness to step outside the box (or circle) of seeing the student role in service-learning as primarily reactive and dependent on faculty control is essential.

However, it is not just the academic side of service-learning initiatives that skilled students can support. Often, students who are familiar with community issues and local organizations far outnumber their faculty counterparts. Such students can bring their knowledge and experience to bear to ensure that service-learning projects help advance the interests of community partners. By serving as site supervisors, students can focus and coordinate the contributions of different courses and various disciplines to advance a single project or organization. In this way, students can function as the community's eyes and ears on campus while serving as the campus's representative at a particular community site.

Finally, the willingness and ability of undergraduates to assume substantive servicelearning responsibilities both in the classroom and in the community represent an excellent opportunity to align student affairs and faculty affairs. For some time, top administrators at many institutions have recognized that treating student academic work and general student development as largely discrete areas is neither economical nor effective. Many schools have already addressed this problem by administratively linking student and faculty affairs — placing the former under a provost or academic dean, decentralizing student development programs, and creating positions that effectively bridge the two divisions.

Service-learning is tailor-made to support such an organizational rationalization. Because service-learning projects promote the development of the "whole person" — requiring students to link academic, interpersonal, and affective skills to achieve multidimensional results — they relate as much to the concerns of student affairs professionals as they do to those of faculty. Students who can play a substantive role in linking academic learning with real-world problem solving represent in many ways an ideal. What they have learned in non-curricular programs like "Emerging Leaders" is as important as what they have learned in and through their academic assignments.

The Promise of Democratic Participation

Once we begin to explore the importance of holistic student development, we transcend an essentially instrumental rationale for student service-learning leadership. Our second rationale addresses student empowerment directly. Students have been demanding that higher education take seriously its public mission to support student civic engagement and not simply focus on professional skills and workforce preparation. In 2003, student leaders from colleges and universities across Oklahoma issued a public statement to the governor, state legislators, college and university presidents, and other civic leaders throughout the state:

We declare that it is our responsibility to become an engaged generation with the support of our political leaders, education institutions, and society.... The mission of our state higher education institutions should be to educate future citizens about their civic as well as professional duties. We urge our institutions to prioritize and implement civic education in the classroom, in research, and in service to the community (Oklahoma Students' Civic Resolution, 2003, p. 2).

The Oklahoma resolution was developed in the context of Campus Compact's efforts to understand better the civic experiences of college students by listening directly to their concerns and giving them the tools and resources to tackle public issues on their campus and in their communities. This generation of college students cares deeply about community issues and sees service-learning as an important avenue for civic participation. Civic engagement requires not only that students implement faculty and community partner agendas, but also that they have a substantive opportunity to shape those agendas. Students must be partners in service-learning in order for it to realize its full civic and academic potential.

Achieving such creative power supplied the rationale for two related civic initiatives instituted by Campus Compact: the drafting of The New Student Politics: The Wingspread Statement on Student Civic Engagement (Long, 2002) and the founding of the "Raise Your Voice" campaign. Both efforts began with a March 2001 conversation among 33 student leaders from around the country gathered at the Wingspread conference center in Racine,Wisconsin.

This meeting, which lasted several days, laid the foundation for The New Student Politics, an important, student-written publication in which students discuss their perspectives on democracy and the role of student voice in higher education, arguing that service-learning is an essential mechanism for democratic participation. Sarah Long, the lead student author, sums up what service-learning educators have long recognized — namely, that the nature of one's education changes "immeasurably through a community-based perspective" (p. 7). The Wingspread students conclude that students see service-learning "as a primary vehicle for connecting service and broader social and political dimensions" (p. 9).

The Wingspread document includes several recommendations for making servicelearning more substantive. Students do not want one-time programs; rather, they prefer the opportunity to build and maintain strong relationships with the community through ongoing service-learning experiences. Students want their professors to commit to working with the community and to "know the community and communitybased organizations well enough to facilitate deep reflection in the course material" (p. 7). They also propose that professors co-teach courses, when appropriate, with community partners.

Finally, a major theme of the Wingspread gathering was creating platforms for student voice. Students at Wingspread were critically aware that they are often treated like "fine china" brought out to impress trustees and honored guests. Yet they also assert that to be more effective, empowered citizens, they need to better understand power on campus, admitting that it takes time to learn how to navigate institutions of higher education:

Many of us who try to navigate the bureaucracy often lack access to the institutional system and find progress to be painstakingly slow and difficult.We often don't understand the inner workings of our institution until we are well into our college careers; by then it is often too late to put this knowledge to work in attempting to make changes on campus.

To address this problem, students suggest that colleges and universities build engaged campuses in which service-learning can play an important role. They also note that their institutions "can encourage engagement by providing space, resources, recognition, information, transportation, and other forms of support" (p. 9). Among their many recommendations is the development of community service scholarships, which are featured in the first section of this book.

In the fall of 2002, using the results of the Wingspread gathering as a starting point, Campus Compact launched "Raise Your Voice," a national campaign funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts to increase college student participation in public life. During the following three years, students from more than 400 college and university campuses made civic contributions by participating in statewide student leadership teams, mapping opportunities for civic engagement on their campuses, leading public dialogues, writing public issue statements, and meeting with elected officials.

All this activity has led to many insights into practices that promote student voice on campus and the structures necessary to connect service-learning with substantive civic engagement. Two central lessons have guided the development of this book:

• Creating safe, respectful, and democratic spaces allows students to develop, use, and own their voices on a host of public issues, including reforming higher education.
• Training, mentoring, and supporting students in their civic development using proven interventions (peer-to-peer persuasion, hubs for civic engagement on campus, collaboration among different civic engagement approaches, and connection with the curriculum) lead to deep levels of involvement that go beyond simplistic notions of volunteerism and allow young people to become engaged and responsible civic actors.

Clearly one of the most difficult hurdles for students in becoming both academically and civically empowered is the more or less exclusive control that faculty members have over the curriculum. Hence, much student activism on campus has been co-curricular, and in this space, students can develop their leadership capacities. But the curriculum remains decisive in determining what ultimately "counts" on campus: regardless of the quality of student co-curricular work, degrees are awarded on the basis of credit-bearing academic units. Thus, it is notable that, in the chapters that follow, we find numerous instances in which students exercising leadership as part of the curriculum is not only possible but is institutionally supported and encouraged. Contributing authors describe well-designed programs that allow students, faculty, staff, administrators, and community partners to work together as genuine colleagues. By doing so, they both inspire and encourage us to rethink the role of students in higher education.

A New Generation

Our third rationale addresses the potential of the current generation of students and identifies why now is the time to expand the circle of service-learning leadership. Each generation of students is unique, reflecting the paradigms and culture of its age and defined by intergenerational relationships with parents and grandparents. Each generation is also shaped by events. This generation has come to maturity at the same time as the national service-learning movement.

While the tone and nature of campus activism has changed since their parents' time, today's students roam freely with an awareness of their parents' era of student activism and empowerment.While rarely demanding a voice or a seat at the table, today's students still possess a desire, drive, and passion for meaningful participation in community concerns. According to researchers at UCLA's Higher Education Research Institute (HERI):

The 1990s witnessed a steady increase in the percentage of first-year students indicating they had frequently or occasionally performed volunteer work during their senior year of high school. In 1990, 63% reported participating in volunteer work, and the percentage increased each year, with a full 81% stating they had participated in 2000. (Vogelgesang et al., 2002, p.15)

Levine and Cureton (1998) paint a picture of students in the late 1990s that is, in many respects, similar to one they had drawn in the late 1980s, with one very significant difference:

Unlike their predecessors of the 1980s, current students have concluded that they do not have the luxury of turning away from [large-scale] problems.... Today's undergraduates don't expect government to come to the rescue; instead, they have chosen to become personally involved, but at the local level — in their community, in their neighborhood, and on their block

Many of today's college students have been exposed to service-learning and student engagement since they were quite young.Nationwide, service-learning efforts are cropping up in high schools and middle schools, being integrated into graduation requirements, senior projects, coursework, and internships, and becoming part of major school-reform efforts (Furco, 2002). In many places, students play a role in developing as well as participating in these programs. In the public schools in Portland, Oregon, for example, students have won passage of policies that mandate their participation in establishing a budget and curriculum, in hiring, and in other academic decisions. Thus, many students are arriving on college campuses expecting to play a leadership role in shaping their own learning. Their rich skills, experiences, perspectives, and energy are the kinds of strengths behind the successful examples described in this book. One of the volume's co-editors, James Williams, a student at Princeton University, had middle and high school experiences rich in service-learning as an integral part of the curriculum. In addition, he pushed for greater student voice and involvement in his school's decision-making processes. Hence, when he came to Princeton, he was immediately drawn to service and leadership opportunities on campus. As a freshman, he became part of the executive board of the Student Volunteers Council, a community service clearinghouse with 700 volunteers active in 47 weekly projects. Later that same year, he was elected to the university's Policy and Governance Council, joining the Priorities Committee, which sets Princeton's operating budget. He also joined the student government, various service committees, and the Community-Based Learning Initiative (CBLI), Princeton's service-learning office.

Through his position on the advisory board of CBLI and as board chairman of the Student Volunteers Council, Williams played a leadership role in helping students expand, integrate, and enrich academic service-learning opportunities. Largely because of student demand, particularly with regard to the immensely popular service-learning writing seminars, Princeton has seen growing interest in and sustained involvement with service-learning projects. The deliberation, participation, and involvement of students is pushing the institution to change.

Rather than posing a threat to faculty, students engaged in research can connect the community, the faculty, and the university in a powerful, productive alliance.

Although many colleges and universities have been slow to change and reluctant to grant students meaningful participation in shaping the curriculum, there is one area in which students have already been able to demonstrate academic leadership, responding to faculty guidance rather than formal prescriptions: original community-based student research. At Princeton and many other institutions, senior papers, term projects, and major reports allow students to engage in meaningful, original research that makes a public contribution and helps to create new community assets. The vast variety, creativity, and intellectual depth of these efforts testify to the power of involving students more deeply in the fabric of the academy: in its scholarship and research. Rather than posing a threat to faculty, students engaged in research can connect the community, the faculty, and the university in a powerful, productive alliance. The final section of our book includes some examples of this kind of work. As we have already noted, it is not just through their scholarship that students can contribute to a more creative linking of the academy and the community. In the chapters that follow, we find students serving as staff members and site coordinators, handling those logistical and practical responsibilities that facilitate the implementation of quality service-learning projects. We find students training students, empowering their peers to succeed both in the classroom and in the community. We also find students working closely with faculty to design, implement, and assess course-based community work — and even playing a primary role in defining course-based work. All these roles constitute ways students can be viewed and treated as colleagues, respected and valued for their unique and vital contributions to the service-learning movement.

In summary, the current generation of students — practicing their own service politics, engaging in important issues, embedded in their communities — represents an ideal group with which faculty, staff, and administrators can renew both service-learning and the structures of the academy. If, as John Dewey (1899) has said, "Democracy has to be born anew every generation, and education is its midwife," the time could not be more opportune. Our country needs to recommit to its democratic ideals, and the academy needs to redefine and clarify its special contribution to our democracy. We hope that this book, by bringing together some of the finest examples of how student leadership is helping to create new and renewed academy-community alliances, may itself contribute to the renewal of both the academy and our democracy. By serving as a springboard for further action, we hope it will add to and deepen what it means to educate students for citizenship.

About This Book

We have organized Students as Colleagues into five broad, clearly overlapping sections. Each section focuses on practices or programs that help expand the circle of leadership in service-learning. To find exemplary models, we surveyed more than 100 colleges and universities to review their approaches to service-learning student leadership. We uncovered more models than we could accommodate. For this reason, we chose to include in each section several short vignettes that suggest additional approaches to student empowerment. Some exemplary programs are not included here for reasons that have no bearing on their quality. To showcase a wide range of approaches, we selected programs that had little or no overlap. In addition, our desire to achieve some kind of institutional and geographical diversity meant that we sometimes had to pass over a school solely because we had already identified an interesting model from the same city or region.

One of this volume looks at student recruitment, focusing especially on scholarship programs that bring to campus students who have already distinguished themselves as leaders. Part Two presents models for training students to facilitate academy-community collaborations. Each of the remaining three sections centers on a particular type of student role. Part Three offers examples of students in key administrative or support positions. Part Four turns to students who partner with faculty to design and implement new community-based curricular units. Part Five surveys a range of entrepreneurial initiatives in which students create academy-community bridges: engaged research, student-led curricular initiatives, and political or policy action.We conclude by identifying some of the more important lessons we have learned from all of the examples presented.

References

Dewey, J. (1899). The school and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Furco, A. (2002). Is service-learning really better than community service? A study of high school service. In A. Furco & S. H. Billig (Eds.), Advances in service-learning research: Vol.1. Service-learning: The essence of the pedagogy (pp. 23-50). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers.

Levine, A. (1994, July/August). Service on campus. Change, 26, 4-5.

Levine, A., & Cureton, J.S. (1998).What we know about today's college students. About Campus, 3(1), 4-9

Liu, G. (1996). Origins, evolution, and progress: Reflections on a movement. Metropolitan Universities: An International Forum, 7(1), 25-38.

Long, S.E. (2002). The new student politics: Wingspread statement on student civic engagement. Providence, RI: Campus Compact.

Oklahoma Students' Civic Resolution (2003). Retrieved November 30, 2005.

Vogelgesang, L.J., Ikeda, E.K. Gilmartin, S.K., & Keup, J.R. (2002). Service-learning and the first-year experience: Outcomes related to learning and persistence. In E. Zlotkowski (Ed.), Service-learning and the first-year experience: Preparing students for personal success and civic responsibility. Columbia, SC: National Resource Center for the First-Year Experience and Students in Transition.

Walshok, M. (1995). Knowledge without boundaries: What America's research universities can do for the economy, the workplace, and the community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Zlotkowski, E. (Series ed.). (1997-2004). Service-learning in the disciplines (a series of 20 monographs). Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.

Introduction