Skip to content
Printer-friendly version

Executive Summary

Executive summary on the evaluation of K-12 service-learning in California.

Phase II Final Report

July 1998

This report was prepared by Daniel Weiler, Amy LaGoy, Eric Crane, and Abby Rovner of RPP International under contract with the California Department of Education.

Service-learning engages students in community service linked to school curriculum as a strategy to improve learning, help students become good citizens, and advance their personal and social development. Service-learning goals also include the promotion of school reform and the provision of needed services to communities.

Service-learning typically relies on partnerships between schools and public or non-profit agencies that provide service opportunities for students in the community. In California, grants to K-12 service-learning partnerships are made through the CalServe Initiative of the California Department of Education (CDE). The Initiative is funded by the federal Learn and Serve America Program, which was created by the National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993. Under this Act, federal funds are allocated to state education agencies for awards to local service-learning partnerships and for state-level capacity-building. Since the CalServe Initiative began in 1992, CDE has funded some forty service-learning partnerships throughout the state.

In June 1995, CDE contracted with RPP International to conduct an evaluation of the CalServe partnerships. The evaluation goals were to:

In order to determine what range of impacts could be expected from high quality service-learning programs, the evaluation concentrated on a study of well-designed and well-implemented partnerships with potentially high impacts that were representative of a range of key partnership characteristics. In the first phase of the evaluation, RPP conducted a preliminary fieldwork investigation and documentary analysis of 27 service-learning partnerships that were being funded through CalServe in spring 1995. This investigation identified 12 partnerships where service-learning was well-implemented and might be expected to have a reasonably high impact, and that also represented a wide range of variation in program scope, location, and design. The results of that work were published in December 1995 (An Evaluation of K-12 Service-Learning in California: Phase I Evaluability Report).

The Phase I work determined that service-learning was most often practiced by one or a few committed teachers in a school, that teachers were having difficulty implementing service-learning effectively, and that few schools were embracing service-learning as a way to realize school-wide goals. In the first year of Phase II, therefore, the evaluation focused on how schools and teachers used service-learning, in order to identify schools and classrooms where student and other impact measures might subsequently be employed. This work was also aimed at providing policy makers with a more thorough understanding of how service-learning was operating at the classroom level and making a preliminary assessment of the possible impact of service-learning on teachers and students. A report on the findings of that investigation was published in February 1997 (An Evaluation of K-12 Service-Learning in California: Phase II Status Report).

Utilizing information gathered during the first year of Phase II, evaluation staff identified 15 classes in 14 schools (in 11 CalServe partnerships) where service-learning appeared to be well designed and well implemented. Eight comparison classes in eight schools were also selected to be part of the evaluation. These classes and schools became the focus of evaluation efforts during the 1996-97 school year the final year of the evaluation when the evaluation collected data on the impact of service-learning on students, schools, teachers, and community partners. Thus, the findings summarized below are based on data from selected classes where evidence suggested that teachers were implementing service-learning effectively; they do not represent a portrait of the average impacts of service-learning at all CalServe-funded partnerships.

Of the 15 classroom sites participating in the evaluation, seven were urban, three rural and five suburban or suburban/rural. There were five elementary school classes, three at middle schools, three at the high school level, and four in continuation high schools. The smallest site had 12 students; the largest included two classes totaling 60 students, taught by the same teacher. School enrollments ranged from as few as 140 to as many as 3,000 students. Data were collected on approximately 775 students participating in service-learning in grades 6 through 12. The eight comparison classes had a total of some 310 students. Three of the comparison classes were in the same schools as their "matched" classes that used service-learning; five were in different schools. The data collected by the evaluation included student achievement tests, student attitude surveys, school record data, interviews with teachers, principals, students, program coordinators, and community partners, and observations of student service and classes where service-learning was being used.

Impacts on Students

Data gathered during the 1996-97 school year and in the fall of 1997 indicate that service-learning benefits student learning, attitudes toward school and citizenship, volunteer service behavior, and student personal and social growth. Quantitative findings were available from 12 of the 15 evaluation sites; field work data were collected from all 15 sites. The overall results were quite positive, though the specific measures for which impacts were found, as well as the magnitude of those impacts, varied from site to site.

Quantitative Findings

Field Work Findings

Impacts on Schools and Teachers

At schools where service-learning was well-designed and well-implemented, it had substantial benefits for both schools and teachers. The most substantial impacts occurred at schools where service-learning was most widespread, i.e., where more than 20 percent of the school's teachers were using service-learning. Service-learning:

Impacts on Community Partners

Data from field work interviews and observations indicate that service conducted by students from the evaluation sites addressed real community needs and enhanced relationships between schools and communities.

Service-Learning Implementation and Service-Learning Impacts

The evaluation assessed the relationship of service-learning implementation to the spread of service-learning within schools and to service-learning's impacts on students.

Implementation and the Spread of Service-Learning Within Schools

The findings point to a number of factors that were associated with school-wide adoption of service-learning:

Implementation and Student Impacts

The evaluation did not identify any particular pattern of service-learning implementation that could "guarantee" positive student impacts. However, there were a number of factors which, taken together, increased the likelihood that service-learning would promote improved student educational performance and civic responsibility:

Conclusions

The findings of this evaluation suggest cautious optimism. These findings indicate that service-learning led to a variety of positive results for students, schools, teachers, and communities. It would appear that well-designed, well-implemented service-learning programs can make an important contribution to student learning, civic responsibility, and personal growth; improve school climate; strengthen teacher professionalism and collegiality; and provide valuable services to communities.

What are the "right circumstances?" The evidence shows that effective service-learning implementation at the classroom level is a necessary (if not sufficient) condition for obtaining positive student impacts. Effective service-learning implementation in the hands of talented teachers has the greatest likelihood of achieving positive results for students, but good results were possible even with teachers of more modest talents, where service-learning was well-implemented. And yet, one of the most important lessons of this evaluation is that effective implementation is not easy. It requires teachers to understand how to link service to the curriculum, arrange pre-service and reflection activities that support learning, and involve community partners in service activities designed to empower and help teach students in a variety of ways.

The evaluation also shows that while service-learning can have beneficial impacts on teachers and schools, these impacts are likely to be much greater at schools where service-learning has been widely adopted. These schools typically welcomed innovation and supported and empowered teachers. Service-learning is most likely to be adopted and institutionalized in schools when teachers, principals, and community groups can see that it does have positive impacts on students.

The evaluation studied service-learning sites that were among the most well-implemented of the classes receiving CalServe support, together with a number of comparison classrooms. At these "high quality" service-learning sites, the evaluation nevertheless revealed considerable variation in the magnitude and breadth of service-learning impacts, as well as great variation in the quality of service-learning implementation. These results suggest that the majority of CalServe-funded programs probably still have much work to do in order to improve the effectiveness of service-learning implementation at the classroom level or achieve school-wide adoption of service-learning in a manner that will garner widespread teacher support.

At the same time, the evaluation has shown that the promise of service-learning can be fulfilled, provided that its classroom implementation challenges are understood and dealt with effectively.

Copies of the full evaluation report can be obtained from the California Department of Education, Educational Options, Student Support, and American Indian Education Office, 1430 N Street, Suite 6408, Sacramento, CA 95814, 916-323-2183.

Questions:   Educational Options, Student Support, and American Indian Education Office | 916-323-2183
Download Free Readers