Service-learning (SL) has become a popular teaching method everywhere from elementary schools to colleges. Despite the increased presence of SL in the education world, it is still unclear what student outcomes are associated with SL programs and what factors are related to more effective programs. A meta-analysis of 62 studies involving 11,837 students indicated that, compared to controls, students participating in SL programs demonstrated significant gains in five outcome areas: attitudes toward self, attitudes toward school and learning, civic engagement, social skills, and academic performance. Mean effects ranged from 0.27 to 0.43. Furthermore, as predicted, there was empirical support for the position that following certain recommended practices—such as linking to curriculum, voice, community involvement, and reflection—was associated with better outcomes. Current data should be gratifying for educators who incorporate SL into their courses, and should encourage more SL research to understand how students benefit and what conditions foster their growth and development.
AmmonM. S.FurcoA.ChiB.MiddaughE. (2002). A profile of California's CalServe service-learning partnerships, 1997–2000, Sacramento: California Department of Education.
2.
AndersonS. (1998, September). Service learning: A national strategy for youth development, Washington, DC: George Washington University. Retrieved from www.gwu.edu/~ccps/pop_svc.html.
BilligS. H.(2002). Adoption, implementation, and sustainability of K–12 service-learning. In FurcoA.BilligS. H.(Eds.), Service-learning: The essence of the pedagogy, Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
5.
BilligS. H.(2009). Does quality really matter: Testing the new K–12 service-learning standards for quality practice. In MoelyB. E.BilligS. H.HollandB. A.(Eds.), Advances in service-learning research: Vol. 9. Creating our identities in service-learning and community engagement, (pp. 131–158. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
6.
BilligS. H.RootS.JesseD.(2005). The relationship between quality indicators of service-learning and student outcomes: Testing the professional wisdom. In RootS.CallahanJ.BilligS. H.(Eds.), Advances in service-learning research: Vol. 5. Improving service-learning practice: Research on models that enhance impacts, (pp. 97–115. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
7.
BlythD. A.SaitoR.BerkasT.(1997). A quantitative study of the impact of service-learning programs. In WatermanA. S.(Ed.), Service learning: Applications from research, (pp. 39–56. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
8.
BossJ. A. (1994). The effect of community service work on the moral development of college ethics students. Journal of Moral Education, 23, 183–98. doi:10.1080/0305724940230206
9.
Campus Compact. (2009). 2008 service statistics: Highlights and trends of Campus Compact's annual membership survey, Boston, MA: Campus Compact.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12.
ConradD.HedinD. (1982). The impact of experiential education on adolescent development. Child and Youth Services, 4, 57–76. doi:10.1300/J024v04n03_08
13.
ConwayJ. M.AmelE. L.GerwienD. P. (2009). Teaching and learning in the social context: A meta-analysis of service learning's effects on academic, personal, social, and citizenship outcomes. Teaching of Psychology, 36, 233–245. doi:10.1080/00986280903172969
14.
CummingG.FinchS. (2005). Inference by eye: Confidence intervals and how to read pictures of data. American Psychologist, 60, 170–180. doi:10.1037/0003–066X.60.2.170
15.
DurlakJ. A.WeissbergR. P.DymnickiA. B.TaylorR. D.SchellingerK. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82, 405–432.
16.
EylerJ.GilesD. E.SchmiedeA. (1996). A practitioner's guide to reflection in service-learning: Student voices and reflections, Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University.
17.
EylerJ.GilesD. E.StensonC. M.GrayC. J. (2001). At-a-glance: What we know about the effects of service-learning on students, faculty, institutions, and communities, 1993–2001, Retrieved June 15, 2009, from the National Service-Learning Clearinghouse website: http://www.servicelearning.org/pubs/materials/L054.
18.
GilesD. E.EylerJ. (1994). The impact of a college community service laboratory on students’ personal, social, and cognitive outcomes. Journal of Adolescence, 17, 327–339. doi:10.1006/jado.1994.1030
19.
GrayM. J.OndaatjeE. H.FrickerR.GeschwindS.GoldmanC. A.KaganoffT.KleinS. P. (1998). Coupling service and learning in higher education: The final report of the evaluation of the Learn and Serve America, higher education program, Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
HarwoodA. M.RadoffS. A.(2009). Reciprocal benefits of mentoring: Results of a middle school-university collaboration. In MoelyB. E.BilligS. H.HollandB. A.(Eds.), Advances in service-learning research: Vol 9. Creating our identities in service-learning and community engagement, (pp. 131–158. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
HolbrookA. L.KrosnickJ. A. (2010). Social desirability bias in voter turnout reports: Tests using the item count technique. Public Opinion Quarterly, 4, 37–67, doi:10.1093/poq/nfp065.
24.
KramerM. (2000). Make it last forever: The institutionalization of service learning in America, Washington, DC: Corporation for National Service.
25.
LarkinR.MahoneyA. (2006). Empowering youth to change their world: Identifying key components of a community service program to promote positive development. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 513–531.
MarkusG. B.HowardJ. P.KingD. C. (1993). Integrating community service and classroom instruction enhances learning: Results from an experiment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 410–419. doi:10.3102/01623737015004410
30.
MelchiorA.BailisL. N.(2002). Impact of service-learning on civic attitudes and behaviors of middle and high school youth: Findings from three national evaluations. In FurcoA.BilligS. H.(Eds.), Advances in service-learning research: Vol. 1. Service-learning: The essence of the pedagogy, (pp. 201–222. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
31.
MeyerS. (2006). Texas center for service-learning: Evaluation of K–12 SCP and CHESP programs, Denver, CO: RMC Research.
32.
MoelyB. E.MercerS. H.IlustreV.MironD.McFarlandM. (2002). Psychometric properties and correlates of the Civic Attitudes and Skills Questionnaire (CASQ): A measure of students’ attitudes related to service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service-learning, 8(2), 15–26.
33.
MorganW.StrebM. (2001, March). Building citizenship: How student voice in service-learning develops civic values. Social Science Quarterly, 82, 155–169. doi:10.1111/0038–4941.00014
34.
National Research Council. (1999). How people learn, Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
35.
National Service-Learning Cooperative. (1998). Essential elements of service learning, St. Paul, MN: National Youth Leadership Council.
Parker-GwinR.MabryJ. B. (1998). Service learning as pedagogy and civic education: Comparing outcomes for three models. Teaching Sociology, 26(4), 276–291.
38.
PerryJ. L.KatulaM. C. (2001, July). Does service affect citizenship?Administration and Society, 33(3), 330–365.
39.
ReindersH.YournissJ. (2009). School-based required community service and civic development in adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 10, 2–12. doi:10.1207/s1532480xads1001_1
40.
ShadishW. R.MontgomeryL. M.WilsonP.WilsonM. R.BrightI.OkwumabuaT. (1993). Effects of family and marital psychotherapies: A meta-analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 992–1002. doi:10.1037/0022–006X.61.6.992
41.
ShadishW. R.NavarroA. M.MattG. E.PhillipsG. (2000). The effects of psychological therapies under clinically representative conditions: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 512–529. doi:10.1037/0033–2909.126.4.512
WhiteA. (2001). Meta-analysis of service-learning research in middle and high schools, (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of North Texas, Denton.
