This article reports on the first stage of a mixed-methods community-based research project involving residents of a socioeconomically challenged neighborhood in Baltimore City, Richnor Springs, and service-learning students in technical and professional communication courses at Loyola University Maryland (Loyola). To measure outcomes, we analyzed student surveys from 80 respondents and critical reflections from two students. We also analyzed interviews from two students and two community members. Findings indicate that there were no statistical mean differences in the educational experiences between service-learning and nonservice-learning students; however, there were significant mean differences in transformational experiences. Findings also indicate that community members responded positively and that stakeholders valued the personal relationships that developed.
AsenR. (2004).
A discourse theory of citizenship. Quarterly Journal of Speech,
90(2), 189–211.
2.
AstinA. W.SaxL. J.AvalosJ. (1999).
Long-term effects of volunteerism during the undergraduate years. The Review of Higher Education,
22, 187–202.
3.
BlackburnL.CushmanE. (2013). Assessing sustainability: The class that went terribly wrong. In RestainoJ. R.CellaL. J. C. (Eds.), Unsustainable: Re-imagining community literacy, public writing, service-learning, and the university (pp. 161–177).
Lanham, MD:
Lexington.
4.
BowdenM.ScottJ. B. (2003). Service-learning in technical and professional communication.
New York, NY:
Longman.
5.
BoyerE. (1997). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate.
San Francisco, CA:
Jossey Bass.
6.
BringleR. G.ClaytonP. H.PriceM. F. (2009).
Partnerships in service learning and civic engagement. Partnerships: A Journal of Service Learning & Civic Engagement,
1(1), 1–20.
7.
BrizeeA. (2014).
Toward participatory civic engagement: Findings and implications of a three-year community-based research study. Computers and Composition: An International Journal,
32, 22–40.
8.
BrizeeA. (2015).
Using Isocrates to teach technical communication and civic engagement. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication,
45(2), 134–165.
9.
BrizeeA.SousaM.DriscollD. L. (2012).
Writing centers and students with disabilities: The user-centered approach, participatory design, and empirical research as collaborative methodologies. Computers and Composition: An International Journal,
4(29), 341–366.
10.
BrizeeA.WellsJ. M. (2016). Partners in literacy: A writing center model for civic engagement.
Lanham, MD:
Rowman and Littlefield.
11.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.).
Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum
12.
CroneT. S. (2013).
The effects of service-learning in the social psychology classroom. Journal of Service-Learning in Higher Education,
2, 62–74.
13.
CushmanE. (1996).
The rhetorician as an agent of social change. College Composition and Communication,
47(1), 7–28.
14.
CushmanE. (1999).
The public intellectual, activist research, and service-learning. College English,
61(3), 328–336.
DeansT. (2010). English studies and public service. In DeansT.RoswellB.WurrA. (Eds.), Writing and community engagement: A critical sourcebook (pp. 97–116).
Boston, MA:
Bedford/St. Martin’s.
17.
DeansT. (2013). Sustainability deferred: The conflicting logics of career advancement and community engagement. In RestainoJ. R.CellaL. J. C. (Eds.), Unsustainable: Re-imagining community literacy, public writing, service-learning, and the university(pp. 101–111).
Lanham, MD:
Lexington.
18.
DienhartC.MaruyamaG.SnyderM.FurcoA.McKayM. S.HirtL.HuesmanR., Jr. (2016).
The impacts of mandatory service on students in service-learning classes. Journal of Social Psychology,
156(3), 305–309.
19.
DriscollD. L. (2009). Pedagogy of transfer: Impacts of student and instructor attitudes (Doctoral dissertation). Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
20.
DubinskyJ. M. (2002).
Service-learning as a path to virtue: The ideal oratory in professional communication. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning,
8, 61–74.
21.
EhnP. (1992). Scandinavian design: On participation and skill. In AdlerP. S.WinogradT. A.(Eds.), Usability: Turning technologies into tools (pp. 96–132).
New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
22.
Enos, S. L., & Troppe, M. L. (1996). Service-learning in the curriculum. In B. Jacoby (Ed.), Service-learning in higher education (pp. 156–181). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
23.
EylerJ.GilesD. E.Jr.SchmiedeA. (1996). A practitioner’s guide to reflection in service learning: Student voices and reflections.
Nashville, TN:
Vanderbilt U.
24.
FurcoA. (1994).
A conceptual framework for the institutionalization of youth service programs in primary and secondary education. Journal of Adolescence,
17, 395–409.
25.
GettoG.CushmanE.GhoshS. (2011).
Community mediation: Writing in communities and enabling connections through new media. Computers and Composition,
28, 160–174.
26.
GoldblattE. (2013). Afterward. In RestainoJ. R.CellaL. J. C. (Eds.), Unsustainable: Re-imagining community literacy, public writing, service-learning, and the university (pp. 263–267).
Lanham, MD:
Lexington.
27.
GrabillJ. (2007). Writing community change: Designing technologies for citizen action.
Cresskill, NJ:
Hampton Press.
28.
HerzbergB. (1994).
Community service and critical teaching. College Composition and Communication,
3(45), 307–319.
29.
KatzS. (1992).
The ethic of expediency: Classic rhetoric, technology, and the Holocaust. College English,
3(54), 255–275.
30.
LeveneH. (1960). Robust tests for equality of variances. In I. S. G. Ghurye, W. Hoeffding, W. G. Madow, and H. B. Mann, Olkin et al. (Eds.), Contributions to probability and statistics: Essays in honor of Harold Hotelling (pp. 278–292). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
31.
MarulloS.CookeD.WillisJ.RollinsA.BurkeJ.BonillaP.WaldrefV. (2013).
Community-based research assessments: Some principles and practices. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning,
9, 57–68.
32.
MathieuP. (2013). After tactics, what comes next? In RestainoJ. R.CellaL. J. C. (Eds.), Unsustainable: Re-imagining community literacy, public writing, service-learning, and the university (pp. 17–31).
Lanham, MD:
Lexington.
33.
NielsenD. (2016).
Facilitating service learning in the online technical communication classroom. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication,
46(2), 236–256.
34.
RestainoJ.CellaL. J. C. (2013). Introduction. In RestainoJ. R.CellaL. J. C. (Eds.), Unsustainable: Re-imagining community literacy, public writing, service-learning, and the university (pp. 1–14).
Lanham, MD:
Lexington.
35.
SchutzA.GereA. R. (1998).
Service learning and English studies: Rethinking ‘public’ service. College English,
60(2), 129–149.
36.
ScottB. J. (2004).
Cultural studies and service learning. Technical Communication Quarterly,
13(3), 287–306.
37.
ShapiroD. (2012).
Collaborative faculty assessment of service-learning student work to improve student and faculty learning and course design. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning,
19, 44–57.
38.
SimmonsM. W.GrabillJ. T. (2007).
Toward a civic rhetoric for technologically and scientifically complex places: Invention, performance, and participation. College Composition and Communication,
58(3), 419–448.
39.
SoriaK. M.WeinerB. (2013).
A “virtual fieldtrip”: Service learning in distance education technical writing courses. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication,
43(2), 181–200.
40.
StraussA.CorbinJ. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
41.
SullivanP.PorterJ. (1997). Opening spaces: Writing technologies and critical research practices.
Greenwich, CT:
Ablex.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
