This document discusses pathways to democratic civic engagement through problem-based service learning (PBSL). It explores moving beyond a volunteer model to one where students solve real-world problems through service. The document notes that achieving democratic civic engagement requires moving multiple dimensions, including students, faculty, institutional support, and community partnerships. It also discusses how to design PBSL projects that appeal to faculty by directly relating to course outcomes and presenting students with complex problems to solve. Overall, the document provides a framework for designing PBSL projects and partnerships that can grow over time from initial projects into deep, democratic civic engagement between higher education and communities.

1. +
PBSL: Pathways to
Democratic Civic
Rick Gordon and Ruth Scipione
Siena College

2. +
Workshop Goals
 Explore 21st century model of service learning--Hi impact
service and social change
 Need to work smarter, not harder
 Change paradigm from student placement/volunteer
model to problem solving model, from “technocratic” civic
engagement to democratic civic engagement

3. +
Eyes on the prize: Ends vs means
 Challenge: Create a more socially just world
 Sub-challenge: Aspiring to Democratic Civic Engagement
and Deep Partnerships

4. +
Multidimensional Problem
 Student Engagement, Faculty Engagement, Institutional
Support, Community PartnershipsResults and Outcomes
 Can’t move on to highest level without moving others as
well

5. +
Yeah, but…
 How do you get faculty engagement at any level?
 And how do you move them from initial interest or trying
SL to deep engagement and commitment?

6. +
Activity 1
 Motivation: Get beyond altruism
 Economic Theory: Incentive and Disincentives: Increase
benefits/lower costs
 Brainstorm Incentives/Disincentives for each dimension
 4 small groups: Student, Faculty, Institutional, Community
Partner
 For each, list their interests in one column, obstacles in
another

7. +
How can we align faculty incentives/interests with those of
students, institution, community partner?

8. +
PBSL for faculty buy-in
 Start with premise we are not promoting service—focus on
academic learning
 Entry point for faculty to SL—get foot in the door but also
 “Smarter,” more “democratic” orientation to engagement

9. +
PBSL Key Concepts
 Clear identification of learning outcomes
 Partnering with community partner with a problem that
directly relates to course learning outcomes
 Presenting students with a problem to solve related to
learning outcomes that demands some type of service to
community partner
 Preparing students for their PBSL work by building
knowledge, skills, and abilities
 Employing on-going feedback—reflection and assessment

10. +
Appeal of PBSL
 Relates directly to course outcomes
 Not overly complicated logistics
 Problem statement written by faculty member to
specifically address community need and desired learning
results
 Usually requires student teamwork—real problems too
complex for any one person
 How to achieve course outcomes, work with a community
partner, how to prepare students, how to manage logistics

11. +
Examples
 “Generic” issues: Program evaluation, work by similar
organizations, future trends in the field
 Siena Ed Program Evaluation: Social Sciences, Stats, etc.—
Apply theory to practice
 Embedded: Environmental Studies intro course

12. +
How does this lead to Deep
Partnerships?
 Partnerships
build over time—Around
problem/issue solutions

13. +
Within Course/Discipline
 Colby Sawyer College—Psychology—theories of youth
development and playground violence
Needs analysis, program research, program selection and
planning, implementation

14. +
Across Disciplines
 Unity House—Wraparound services in low income community
 Problem to solve: How to improve student academic performance/
graduation?
----Initial connection through needs assessment for youth
education—
 Initial direct service—youth afterschool/tutoring (Education dept)

Leads to workshops on parenting (Psych, Counseling)

Adult literacy (Education, Psych)

Food and nutrition (Nutrition)

Fundraising, development and budget management
(accounting)

Strategic Planning (Business and Management)

15. +
How do we get from technocratic
engagement to democratic?
 PBSL alters the framework: Rather than how can faculty do
SL in a course, to what role does a faculty (or dept. or
institution) have with an issue/problem we aim to
address?

16. +
Activity 2 Development from
initial project to deep
 Project Generation Game
 5 year path along each of these 4 dimensions from initial
project to Deep, Democratic Civic Engagement.

18. +
Closure: Book Proposal Ideas
 Book Proposal Ideas: PBSL—Pathway to Democratic Civic
Engagement