Issuu on Google+

ASSESSMENT REPORT 2012-2013 Submitted by Kelly Brotzman August 31, 2013


TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 2 SERVICE LEARNING BY THE NUMBERS ................................................................................. 3 Community Impact ........................................................................................................................ 3 Prevalence ..................................................................................................................................... 5

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES ....................................................................................... 7 Goal 1: Connections to Course Content ....................................................................................... 8 Goal 2: Understanding of Social Justice........................................................................................ 9 Goal 3: Root Causes of Social Problems ..................................................................................... 11 Goal 4: Spectrum of Involvement................................................................................................ 13

OTHER STUDENT OUTCOMES .......................................................................................... 14 Academic Success ....................................................................................................................... 14

COMMUNITY PARTNER OUTCOMES .................................................................................. 15 Goal 1: Capacity Building............................................................................................................ 15 Goal 2: Leverage ......................................................................................................................... 16 Goal 3: Accessing Other University Resources ............................................................................ 17 Goal 4: Connection ..................................................................................................................... 19

1


SUMMARY 2012-2013 was a successful year for the Office of Service Learning. This year alone, 602 unique students, representing 19.2% of the entire undergraduate student body, participated in service learning activities in conjunction with 59 different service learning courses offered in 18 departments and programs at Loyola. These students documented 20,265 hours of service learning, for an average of 33.7 hours per student. This is approximately equal to 10.5 years of full-time labor. Service learning students worked on behalf of 56 unique partner agencies throughout the city, region, state and world. According to Independent Sector and the Corporation for National and Community service, the in-kind value of these service learning contributions is $391,718. Although some numbers from 2012-2013 represent a 12-15% quantitative decrease from 2011-2012, this is due to the program’s implementation of higher quality standards. This year the Service Learning Faculty Advisory Committee began to enforce much stricter standards for service learning courses. Faculty and community partners also began to enforce higher minimum performance standards for students to be considered as satisfactorily completing their service learning commitments and therefore be eligible for SL transcript notations. This means that some marginallyperforming courses and students which may have been counted in previous years or semesters are not counted here. This year’s numbers represent a more impactful group of courses, more beneficial and effective student work, and more responsive and better-established partnerships. Despite the slight dip in annual quantity of service learning, saturation continues to increase. In 2010, just 28% of graduating seniors had a formal academic service learning experience during their career at Loyola. In 2011, this percentage rose to 46%. In 2012, it rose further to 57%, meaning that it was more likely than not that a graduating senior would have taken a service learning course during his or her time at Loyola. In 2013, 65% of graduating seniors had taken at least one service learning course. 31% of seniors had taken two or more SL courses. A trend worth noting is the emergence of a “service learning intensive” cohort. In 2013, 13% of graduating seniors had three or more service learning courses during their time at Loyola. The saturation of service learning is therefore not only broad, but also deep. Since its re-launch in 2008 after a three-year post-Katrina hiatus, OSL has achieved its goal of making service learning a normal and expected part of a Loyola education without adopting a strict curricular requirement.

18 key findings about student learning and community partnership outcomes are noted throughout the body of this report.

2


SERVICE LEARNING BY THE NUMBERS COMMUNITY IMPACT 25,000 20,000

21,259

23,253 20,265

2009-2010

17,188

15,000

2010-2011

10,000

2011-2012

5,000

2012-2013

0

Total hours documented by Loyola service learning students

$500,000 $450,000 $400,000 $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $0

$443,202 $397,755

$391,718

$321,588

2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

In-kind value of Loyola service learning students’ contributions to partner agencies

Total in-kind value of service learning contributions since 2009: $1,554,264 $8,200 $8,000 $7,800 $7,600 $7,400 $7,200 $7,000 $6,800 $6,600 $6,400 $6,200 $6,000

$7,914.32

2009-2010 $6,857.84 $6,699.75

$6,994.96

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

In-kind value per partnership

3


Impact by Agency (selected) Name of Agency American Heart Association Anna's Arts for Kids ARC of Greater New Orleans Boys Hope Girls Hope Bridge House Cafe con Ingles Cathedral Academy Catholic Charities Archdiocese of New Orleans Head Start Crescent House Adult Ed/GED Program ESL Program Volunteer Services Office Center for Ethical Living and Social Justice Renewal Edible Schoolyard NOLA Elevate New Orleans French Quarter Festivals, Inc. Freret Neighborhood Center Girls on the Run New Orleans Good Shepherd School Good Work Network Hagar's House Harry Tompson Center Hope Lodge Kedila Family Learning Services Lafayette Academy Reading Room LASPCA Community Clinic Louisiana Organ Procurement Agency Luke's House Clinic Metropolitan Center for Women & Children National Council of La Raza New Orleans BioInnovation Center New Orleans City Park New Orleans Outreach New Orleans Maritime Heritage Foundation Oportunidades Nola Orleans Public Defenders Ozanam Inn Computer Lab Passages Hospice Playworks Project Lazarus Proyecto Luis de Lion Second Harvest Food Bank Son of a Saint Foundation STAIR (Start the Adventure in Reading) The NET Charter High School Uptown Shepherd's Center Wilson Charter School Yes! YMCA Educational Services

# students # hours In-kind value 5 250 $4,832.50 30 624 $12,061.92 4 63.75 $1,232.29 12 221.25 $4,276.76 17 363 $7,016.79 15 222 $4,291.26 13 252.75 $4,885.66 39 831 $16,063.23 9 171.75 $3,319.93 11 256.75 $4,962.98 3 58.25 $1,125.97 14 319.25 $6,171.10 2 25 $483.25 6 103.25 $1,995.82 16 288.25 $5,571.87 15 333.75 $6,451.39 6 104.5 $2,019.99 37 667.5 $12,902.78 27 5265 $101,772.45 18 276.25 $5,339.91 22 461.5 $8,920.80 12 236.75 $4,576.38 6 166.55 $3,219.41 16 346.75 $6,702.68 14 256.25 $4,953.31 24 511.75 $9,892.13 11 856 $16,546.48 23 1234 $23,853.22 5 95 $1,836.35 21 437.5 $8,456.88 14 133 $2,570.89 13 254 $4,909.82 9 294 $5,683.02 27 429.5 $8,302.24 12 200 $3,866.00 29 521.5 $10,080.60 18 694.75 $13,429.52 19 387.25 $7,485.54 3 65.25 $1,261.28 7 111.5 $2,155.30 14 252.75 $4,885.66 7 121 $2,338.93 4 84 $1,623.72 3 155 $2,996.15 11 211 $4,078.63 10 204.5 $3,952.99 18 355 $6,862.15 5 117 $2,261.61 10 162.75 $3,145.96 4


Lifespan of partnerships (average: 2.53 years)

young (0-3 yrs) 45%

established (3+ yrs) 55%

PREVALENCE Total number of service learning students 800

754

780

700

712

600

602

500 400 300

325

200

Number of service learning courses 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

72 61

70

59

26

5


SL among graduating seniors 70% 65%

60% 57%

50% 46%

40% 30%

28%

20%

26%

10%

31%

16% 7%

0%

At least 1 SL Experience

2 or more SL experiences

Service learning exposure among seniors

Some exposure (1-2 courses)

35%

51%

Intensive exposure (3 or more SL courses)

No exposure 14%

6


STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES OSL has laid out the following six learning goals for students: 1.

Students will make connections between course content and service learning experiences.

2.

Students will strengthen their understanding of social justice.

3.

Students will explore the root causes of social problems.

4.

Students will understand the different ways they can be involved in the world on a spectrum

from service/volunteerism to structural change. 5.

Students will critically examine personal values and beliefs.

6.

Students will learn to appreciate diversity.

Of these goals, #1-4 were the subject of intensive scrutiny in OSL assessment surveys in 2012-2013. These four learning goals will continue to be the focus of OSL assessments through 2015. Goals #56 will be assessed using university-wide assessments.

7


GOAL 1: CONNECTIONS TO COURSE CONTENT My professor asked students to write about connections between SL and course material

Key finding #1

Strongly agree

94% of students are being asked

to write about the connection between SL and course material. This is up from 33% in 2009, a nearly threefold increase.

Agree

31%

Disagree

63%

Strongly disagree

It was easy for me to make connections to SL in writing assignments and class discussions.

44%

42%

10%

I learned things in class that helped me understand my SL experience better.

45%

41%

12%

I gained skills through my SL experience that helped me do better in this particular class.

33%

SL made this class more interesting.

38%

SL helped me apply things I learned in class to specific cases.

38%

0%

Strongly agree

20%

Agree

Disagree

42%

38%

19%

17%

42%

40%

60%

16%

80%

100%

Strongly disagree

Key finding #2 Service learning is a form of two-way, integrative learning: SL experience clarifies course material, and classroom instruction illumines SL experience. 8


GOAL 2: UNDERSTANDING OF SOCIAL JUSTICE

Any career path can contribute to social justice.

35%

I promote social justice whenever I consider how my choices impact the well-being of people and the planet.

37%

If I want to promote social justice, I have to choose a career path where I can serve those in need.

24%

0%

Strongly agree

Agree

20%

Disagree

49%

13%

58%

32%

40%

4%

35%

60%

80%

9%

100%

Strongly disagree

Key finding #3 Students are ambivalent about social justice and career discernment. While 84% believe any career path can contribute to social justice, at the same time 56% appear to associate social justice with careers in the social/human service field. More work should be done to explore this ambivalence.

Students were asked: “In your opinion, what is the most important social justice issue in the world today?�

88% of students provided a response. Below are the top responses. The size of the word corresponds to its frequency.

9


Students were asked to examine five pairs of views about justice and injustice and indicate where they felt they were on the spectrum between each pair. The goal was to assess both the level of complexity in students’ thinking about justice and also the degree to which students’ views on justice align with Jesuit values. 1= lean strongly Less complex & less aligned with Jesuit values

It’s unjust when anyone suffers for any reason.

1

12%

2= lean somewhat 3= both equally

2

3

18%

2

29%

1

24%

More complex & more aligned with Jesuit values

13%

Suffering isn’t always unjust, only when it’s caused by harmful or neglectful actions of others.

25%

Injustice is caused by humans.

SLIGHT LEAN

Injustice isn’t caused by humans; it’s just part of the way the world is.

3%

11%

37%

22%

STRONG LEAN

There is nothing that human beings can do to bring about social justice.

1%

4%

15%

26%

53%

Human beings can do things to help bring about social justice.

VERY STRONG LEAN

Small daily decisions like what I buy can’t solve social justice issues.

6%

13%

29%

24%

21%

Small daily decisions like what I buy can help solve social justice issues.

18%

Inequalities are only unjust when they result from people being unfairly excluded from opportunities.

STRONG LEAN

All inequalities are unjust.

17%

15%

27%

17%

DRAW

Key finding #4

Key finding #5

In general, service learning students lean toward views about social justice which are both more complex and more aligned with Jesuit values.

Service learning students can think about social justice in personal, concrete terms, not just abstract, impersonal terms. This is generally considered a sign of moral development.

Key finding #6 32% of SL students equate inequality with injustice. Understanding the distinction between these two concepts represents a teaching opportunity. 10


GOAL 3: ROOT CAUSES OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS

SL caused me to wonder why a social problem exists.

57%

SL caused me to rethink a social problem I thought I already understood.

65%

SL made me aware of a social problem I hadn't known about before. Yes

No

43%

35%

48%

0%

52%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Key finding #7 Service learning is more likely to cause students to re-think familiar social problems than reveal totally new social problems that students were previously unaware of.

100% 80% 60%

17%

18%

40% 49%

47%

40% 20%

41% 31%

31% 14%

0%

SL increased my interest in I intend to remain active on finding and addressing the the social issues addressed by root causes of social problems. my SL agency. Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Working with my SL agency made the causes of social problems seem less overwhelming to me. Strongly disagree

Key finding #8 Service learning generates activism on social issues.

11


Students were asked to share their views about the causes of nine different social problems. The goal was to assess the extent to which students are able to analyze social problems in more than just individual terms (i.e., as the result of poor choices made by individuals).

High crime in inner cities Kids performing poorly in public schools Unemployment Childhood obesity Undocumented people coming into the US from other countries Environmental pollution Home foreclosures High levels of student debt Poverty

Mostly caused by poor choices people make

Mostly caused by factors beyond people’s control

A little bit of both

21% 12% 16% 38%

9% 25% 21% 9%

66% 60% 59% 49%

10%

34%

43%

42% 16% 13% 4%

7% 19% 34% 26%

46% 57% 47% 66%

Key finding #9 Most of the time, most students understand that social problems have multiple causes. This indicates a tendency to embrace rather than resist complexity in thinking about social problems, which is generally considered a sign of moral maturity.

Key finding #10 Service learning students tend to individualize some social problems more than others in the sense that they attribute them to poor choices made by individuals (eg, environmental pollution and childhood obesity). On the other hand, they also tend to “structuralize� some social problems more than others in the sense that they attribute them to larger factors which constrain, influence or condition individual choices (eg, student debt and undocumented immigration). Comparative causal analysis of social problems represents a teaching opportunity.

12


GOAL 4: SPECTRUM OF INVOLVEMENT Students were presented with the following vignette: Consider the common saying: “Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime.” Take this one step further: “Build a clean, well-stocked fish pond in the man’s village, solve the village’s hunger problem.” Giving a man a fish meets his immediate need. Teaching a man to fish gives him a skill which can help prevent him from being hungry in the future. It also empowers him to meet more of his own needs. Building clean, well-stocked fish ponds in villages with widespread hunger is an attempt to solve this problem on a larger scale. All three are meaningful, important, and necessary ways of responding to the same basic problem (hunger).

(ex: giving a man a fish)

Helping people by giving them skills to meet more of their own needs (ex: teaching a man to fish)

Working for large-scale solutions to community problems (ex: building a clean, wellstocked fish pond )

equally

None

Before your service learning experience this semester, which kind of involvement were you most strongly drawn to?

29%

31%

14%

22%

4%

Today, which kind of involvement are you most strongly drawn to?

10%

34%

22%

31%

3%

Which kind of involvement do you feel most strongly drawn to in your future?

8%

25%

33%

31%

3%

Helping people by providing for immediate needs

All 3

Key finding #11 Service learning substantially shifts students’ interests from immediate, short-term, charity-style social involvement to working for large-scale, long-term community solutions.

Did you have the opportunity to think about these different kinds of involvement this semester? Yes, in class discussions Yes, in assignments I had to do for this class Yes, in my time spent working on behalf of my agency Yes, in discussions I had with staff, clients or others at my agency Yes, on my own No, I haven’t thought about it until now

62% 64% 61% 40% 56% 13%

Key finding #12

Service learning students are just as likely to consider distinctions between different kinds of social involvement in the course of their off-campus work as they are in a Loyola classroom. 13


OTHER STUDENT OUTCOMES ACADEMIC SUCCESS

I gained skills through my service learning experience that helped me do better in this particular class. 6% 19%

33%

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree

42%

I gained skills or knowledge through my SL experience that helped me improve my overall academic performance

6% 20%

34%

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree

40%

Key finding #13 Three-quarters of service learning students believe SL improves their academic performance, both in general and in their specific SL course.

14


COMMUNITY PARTNER OUTCOMES OSL has laid out the following four goals for community partnerships: 1. Partnering with OSL will build community partners’ capacity to promote positive social change. 2. Community partners will be able to leverage their partnership with OSL. 3. Community partners will know how to access resources at Loyola beyond just student volunteers. 4. Partnering with OSL will strengthen community partners’ connections to one another. GOAL 1: CAPACITY BUILDING Helped us develop new programs Helped us permanently increase the number of services we were able to offer

7%

19%

11%

Strongly agree

19%

Agree

Helped us permanently increase the number of people we were able to serve

22%

22%

Helped us produce new materials

21%

25%

Helped us update or improve existing materials

19%

31%

Helped us update or improve existing programs

34%

41%

Helped us implement actual improvements within our agency

37%

41%

Increased awareness about our agency within the wider community

38%

41%

Helped us make meaningful progress toward achieving one or more goals in our strategic plan

64%

18%

Allowed our staff members to spend more time on priority projects

54%

32%

Eased the overall workload for our staff members

53%

33%

Helped us temporarily improve or expand our existing services

59% 0%

20%

28% 40%

60%

80%

100%

Key finding #14 The greatest contribution to community partner capacity consists in assisting and supplementing a partner agency’s existing priorities, resources and programs, rather than in creating, producing or developing new resources or programs or rearranging priorities. The former should be the focus of service learning partnerships. This also comports with the Jesuit spirit of solidarity. 15


GOAL 2: LEVERAGE Has your agency's partnership with Loyola facilitated connections to potential new donors?

26%

Yes 41%

No N/A 33%

Has your agency used its partnership with OSL to apply for grants or other funding? 30%

Yes 40%

Plan to do this in the future No

17%

N/A 13%

20% of partners report successfully receiving grants or other funding with leverage from OSL. 23% report that such grants are pending.

62% of partners say SL students continued to volunteer at their agencies after the formal conclusion of SL commitments. 63% of partners say SL students expressed interest in jobs/internships with their agencies. 21% of partners say SL students secured jobs/internships with their agencies. Key finding #15 Community partners are able to leverage their service learning partnership with Loyola to meet ongoing volunteer and staffing needs. More can be done to cultivate their ability to financially leverage the partnership.

16


GOAL 3: ACCESSING OTHER UNIVERSITY RESOURCES OSL community partners also engaged the following programs in 2012-2013:

LUCAP Wolves on the Prowl

Law Clinics

Social Justice Scholars

Boggs Center

Music Therapy Program

Athletics

OSL

College and department internship programs

Community Based Federal Work Study

LA Bread for the World

Donnelley Center Honors Program

JSRI

60% of OSL’s partners report engaging at least one other program at Loyola besides service learning. Key finding #16 Service learning partnerships are a gateway to broader partnering activities across the university. 17


Our partnership with OSL helped us learn more about how to access Loyola's resources 11%

Agree Disagree

89%

100% 90%

23%

80% 70% 60% 50% 40%

Agree 77%

Strongly agree

30% 20% 10% 0%

Loyola tries to share its resources with community partners

Key finding #17 100% of service learning community partners agreed or strongly agreed with this statement.

18


GOAL 4: CONNECTION

Our partnership with Loyola's service learning program facilitated connections to other potential partners.

11%

33%

19%

Strongly agree Agree Disagree N/A or don't know

37%

Key finding #18 Although OSL community partners generally feel connected to one another, more can be done to foster a spirit of solidarity among partners (as well as with partners).

19


2012-2013 Assessment Report