Reflections on Service Learning Approach Towards
Project Transformers
Sebastian Zulueta
March 12, 2007
The definition of Service Learning we have developed from our program notes that "it is a pedagogical approach based on the experience of supportive service , in which students, teachers and community members learn, train and work together to meet community needs, mutually reinforcing goals of a course curriculum with service objectives. " Whether it is a pedagogical approach, refers to Service Learning is a methodology in which teachers, students and partners community must master a body of knowledge, procedures and skills to successfully achieve the objectives. In addition to the above, Learning Service considers new roles and relationships for the three actors directly involved in the course: the student as an actor, teacher and social transformer, and the partner as "community partner." Paulo Freire
broken with the traditional way of education, claiming the reciprocal dimension in the learning process played by people, through his famous statement:
By passing this conception [of education] through the release is achieved:
· no more a teacher of the pupil;
· no more a learner's educator
· but a teacher and student with a learner-educator. [1]
This means that no one educates anyone, that no one is education alone that people educate each other, mediated in and around the world.
This approach places as a center of education to the individual, and emphasizes that these people are part of a larger dimension: a political and cultural context. Zai Zati
Baba, who has made great contributions to education in India [2] , argues that education without transforming people is not a true education. This again puts the individual at the center of the educational process but, unlike Freire, who refers to a structural dimension, and an "awareness" of the condition of "oppression" in which people live (perpetuated by the lack of education) as a condition for release, Baba Zai poses to consider internal dimensions of the person to talk about transformation. To achieve this transformation, education should not settle for an education in the cognitive dimension, but also must consider the physical, emotional, intuitional and spiritual.
How to operationalize this transformational challenge the methodological dimension?
is difficult to achieve didactic transposition [3] transformation of this challenge, first because it has been very little research this dimension and, secondly, because the traditional forms of planning are rigid, not allowing to incorporate different actors, or operationalize dimensions "very" subjective (such as the impact on the spiritual or emotional).
The dual intent
Service Learning While this company is much bigger than I can cover in this discussion, I begin by analyzing some essential components of service learning projects. As its name indicates, these projects have a dual intent. First, is the pedagogical intention (Learning), through which seeks to enable better learning, both in the cognitive, procedural and values \u200b\u200b(or attitudinal). This intention has generally focused on one of three players in A + S, the student, what is wrong. Not only is the student needs to develop (better) learning in these dimensions, but also the teachers (who are co-responsible to catalyze learning processes in the other actors) and community partners.
Three relational processes is necessary to highlight the result of the above statement (that students, community partners and teachers need to develop learning processes), which will be essential to enable this learning intersubjective, "mediated in and around the world." First, the knowledge transfer process linked to the cognitive dimension, through which the various actors share their knowledge, whether academic, experiential or life. In this sense, each of the actors is "teacher-student", having a know (and do not know) precious to others while a "learner-educator" and can learn from each other. A second process is the empowerment (empowerment), linked to the procedural dimension, through which the various actors involved, actively and critically, the decisions and actions to understand the project. Only through such participation, different actors may be understanding and grasping the tools and resources needed to implement learning. The third process is the Social Integration, linked to the value-attitude dimension, through which different actors are formed in the values \u200b\u200bof solidarity. This means that each of the actors become aware of each other's needs and develops learning how to work around both the specific needs of the community and the needs of others (partner, partner).
Second, is the joint intention (Service), through which we will work around a need that is felt by a community. This intention has also had a biased approach because it is a simple conceptualization of social need, not relieving the multidimensionality of causes, the need to develop systemic approaches for meeting them, the demands to respect the territorial characteristics of actors (culture, values, situational, spatial ...). This results in a read the needs located exclusively in the community, or specific individuals within them, leading to dimensional measures of limited scope, they do not consider other dimensions of simultaneous intervention (personal, social, structural, environmental). A service learning project should cover these different dimensions, and understand that to meet the need, it should be a cooperative effort not only to the people of the community (common and mistakenly understood as beneficiaries only), but also with people who are related to this community, including the educational community to work with this course. The latter shows that teachers and students are also "beneficiaries" or focus of the joint intention, which should be explained in diagnosis and in planning and operationalized in the implementation and evaluation.
The importance planning 'transformational' to the pedagogic and supportive. Dual intent
poses a greater complexity to the service learning projects, because they must ensure that it meets each of these, without neglecting the other. In other words, that the progress towards achieving the pedagogical intention not neglect or compromise the ability intention to achieve solidarity, and vice versa.
If we think of college courses, we are facing some difficulties to be overcome at the planning level. The main planning tool is teaching a course Course program, which lets you set the general characteristics of the course (name, professor, academic unit, requirements, etc.) Diagnosis of educational need to which it responds ( introduction, theoretical justification and reasoning of its importance relative to other courses or disciplines, practical applicability, etc.) planning (objectives, activities, contents, schedule, etc.). and evaluation system (strategies, dates, requirements, etc.).
common in a college course, you only have this type of planning. But by incorporating the service learning component, we note that greater efforts should be planning, resulting in the consideration of new factors must be considered in the design of the course program (explain importance of cognitive learning objectives, procedures and value-related / attitudinal consider community partners such as referees, etc.) as well as the development of a new planning tool to better ensure the achievement of service objectives. This new instrument call it "Project Outreach."
The subject of planning in Service Learning, "the" we "
The project planning should include four stages componene planning cycle: diagnosis, planning, implementation and evaluation. And are presented as a cycle, to the extent that there is a recursive process, which allows to incorporate the experience into future planning. This cycle is responsible both to the planning of educational and social projects: in the case of A + S, both the Syllabus to the Solidarity Project.
Without going into each of the four stages, I would refer an aspect that should be present in each, and the problem is the subject of service learning projects.
Analyzing Programs planning courses of A + S, both nationally and internationally, we find objectives such as those listed below [4] :
• Students will explore two community development initiatives as examples of civil renewal (Course of History, USA).
· Expand awareness of ethical issues pertaining to specific situations of nursing (nursing program)
Develop an understanding of the fundamental principles animal behavior (Biology, USA)
And a review of service objectives, we find the following:
• Contribute to solving a real problem of a small businessman, using the knowledge gained during the bouquet Optimization (Engineering Course).
To know and understand the human resource management from a strategic perspective to promote integrated management and administration of people in organizations (Psychology course).
Improve opportunities for people with disabilities to access spaces and organs that have to cope, opening access barriers in both the private and community environment and public (course design)
is not the intention to make a comprehensive review of programs, or make a schematic on the types or categories of targets. But when you read these, and other programs of service learning courses can be seen that the subject is always the student: the student who must explore, expand, develop, deliver, build, etc.
But ... where you place the invitation of Paulo Freire that the educational process is a relationship of "teacher-student with a learner-educator? The only course planning considered a student, the student, as subject of the program objectives of the course. What happens to the teacher in their educational? And what about the third actor to introduce A + S to the course, the Community Partner, in its role of educating and in his role as educator?
And secondly, what about the claim that A & S courses are the product of a partnership between students, teachers and community? In this structure, planning, full responsibility is explicit in the students.
All this not only replicates the asymmetrical structure of education, between teachers and learners, from planning the training, but establishing a welfare structure in joint project planning.
If we want to be consistent with the Personal and Social Transformation, there is the need to think of a planning model that can be incorporated as "subjects" of planning, both in their capacity as learners and educators, the three actors . Implications
In planning the course: In practical terms, the course program should establish learning objectives for students in the first place. But, if you dare to be transformational, it should also explain, secondarily, the learning objectives for teachers and community partners. We know this can lead to complications within educational establishments, because the orthodoxy breaks and streamlined planning fees "right" or "acceptable" ... But will the barriers to be overcome to operationalize, in practice, projects transformational. And the targets appear to all players, also states that all stakeholders must participate both the implementation and evaluation. "Is met the cognitive learning objectives, procedural or value of teaching this course?". It would be nice to read something like this sentence in the evaluation of students to teachers in a course ...
In Solidarity Project Planning: In this type of project, objectives are usually established as a subject with the service provider ("That the student develop a Strategic Planning .... ") or" what is expected to deliver "in terms of purpose (" Building a Web Page ... "" To provide the necessary information and practical instances ... "). If the charity project focuses mainly on the needs of a community, no community would need to be the main subject of the objectives? And secondly, if the charity project occurs in the context of a university teaching project, where the main contribution can be made about community needs is from knowledge, would it not be appropriate for these objectives will be given in terms of learning (cognitive, procedural and values) to be achieved by community partners? As in the case of Course Program, Project Outreach should refer to the objectives of students and teachers.
The Educational Planning and Program Agreement between A & S: this instrument has not been implemented in a systematic or structured, however, given the discussion in which we have been, may emerge as relevant. In the Syllabus, the student is the protagonist, in the Solidarity Project, the Community Partner is the protagonist, in Teaching and Commitment Program A + S, the teacher is the protagonist. Here you should explain the cognitive learning, procedural, and values \u200b\u200bthat teachers are expected to perform in each implementation. The goals for students and community partners are set as secondary. Final thoughts
The subject of planning should be all the stakeholders: students, community partners and teachers. With this, you must set goals for each of them.
The predicate planning is transformation. And for this, consider cognitive objectives, procedural, and value for all stakeholders. Should explore the possibility of adding new dimensions such as emotional, spiritual or Could it be?
All projects A + S is an educational project of solidarity. This involves all stakeholders.
Objectives should be transformational: they should not be raised in terms of products, or goals, but in educational terms, which explicitly to what extent it is expected that each of the actors are transformed.
It should be a plan for the educational component and a component for solidarity.
Emerging Issues
types according to their transformational projects (based on activities, products, people, processing)
[1] delve into this in a future
reflection [2] delve into this in a future reflection
[3] delve into this in a future
reflection [4] Extracted Series "Service Learning at the Disciplines"
