2nd International Service-Learning Summit
From October 23-25, 2013, the Buffett Institute for Global Studies hosted 110 attendees at Northwestern University for the 2nd International Service Learning Summit, co-sponsored by DukeEngage and the Gephardt Institute for Civic and Community Engagement at Washington University, and in collaboration with the Building Bridges Coalition (BBC). With the goal of building a community of practice in global service-learning, summit participants gathered to examine critical issues facing the field while also creating an agenda for developing and measuring our success as international educators. The ISL Summit followed up on the success of the 1st International Service-Learning Summit held at Washington University in 2011, which gathered participants “to reflect on the field as it stands on the threshold of a new era.” Eighteen months later, the ISL Summit gave continued attention to exploring the leading trends in higher education related to global service-learning with a particular focus on creating higher standards for responsible global engagement through community-based, experiential or service-learning courses and programs. The summit brought together a group of socially concerned educators committed to the ongoing, constructive examination of our work, ready to engage in critical conversations about our impact on student learning and in communities abroad.
A full conference program is available here. Proceedings and outcomes appear below.
Keynote Address:
- “Knowledge, Democracy and Action: Re-examining ‘Service’ in Service Learning”
- Budd Hall, UNESCO Co-Chair, Community-Based Research and Social Responsibility in Higher Education
Opening Plenary:
- “Can ISL be a Fair Trade? Developing a Roadmap for Higher Standards”
- Eric Hartman, Providence College
- Richard Kiley, Cornell University
- Matthias Brown, Amizade Global Service-Learning
- Patrick Green, Loyola University Chicago
Panel:
- Pre thru Post ISL: Examining Approaches from Preparation through Re-integration
Format, Process and Outcomes:
With an innovative and interactive agenda, the meeting was designed to create opportunities to get everyone actively working together, sharing experiences and insights, and producing concrete recommendations that would establish critical questions and action steps for the field. Major themes and issues were framed by panel presentations and followed up by small group discussions. Various break-out sessions provided a chance for small groups of panelists and participants to discuss content and issues raised and report back to the larger group with 3-5 conclusions or items for continued consideration and action. This process brought practical attention to best practices, opportunities for collaboration, as well as the common dilemmas relevant to our campuses, organizations and community partners. As the summit concluded, each group made a five-minute presentation on their most important takeaways and recommended action steps. Among the outcomes of this collaborative learning process, was a highly engaged and energized cohort of educators eager for an action-oriented framework to move the field forward around issues of program design, pedagogy, evaluation and assessment, diversity and inclusion, ethical standards, and institutional concerns related to aligning and operationalizing these commitments across different resource contexts.
Methodical representation of participant experience of outcomes was gathered and represented by Dr. Benjamin Lough and Dr. Cynthia Toms, who completed a qualitative analysis of 121 outcomes statements generated by participants.
ISL Summit attendees called for greater attention to the knowledge community in GSL/ISL, expanding opportunities for sharing and disseminating research in the field and taking stock of the growing network that has been established around best practices, guidelines, values and ethical standards at the program design level. Across issues of diversity and inclusion, attendees highlighted the importance of student and community voice and involvement, calling for more tangible reciprocity and access. Action steps include increased opportunities for community participation in programs, related conferences and in processes of practical implementation and program feedback or evaluation. Research questions include the need to better understand the development of international service learning economies in different settings and what this implies in terms of program/partnership selection and termination.
Summary and image provided by Northwestern University.