A Survey of Best Practices of Global Service­Learning Programs

in UGA

Sponsored by: The Office of Service-Learning

In collaboration with:

The Office of International Public Service and Outreach

2

A Survey of Best Practices of Global Service­Learning Programs

in UGA Principal Investigator: Deborah Gonzalez, Esq. Publication of the Office of Service-Learning http://isdweb.isd.uga.edu/blog/ Office of International Public Service and Outreach www.uga.edu/internationalpso University of Georgia July, 2009

3

A Survey of Best Practices of Global Service-Learning Programs in UGA

T A B L E O F C O N T E N TS Page Executive Summary 4 Introduction: Defining Global Service-Learning 6 Research Methodology 8 Survey Results

Global Service-Learning vs. Local Service-Learning 9 Essential Elements of Global service-Learning Programs 10 Uniqueness and Innovation 12 Instructional Tools 13 Assessment and Evaluation 15 Partnerships and Collaborations GSL 16 Challenges and Solutions for GSL 19 Lessons Learned 20 Requirements for a Better GSL Program 21 Other Issues to Share 22

Recommendations 23 Conclusion 24 References 25 Appendices Appendix A. Side Note: Kiely and the Chameleon Complex 29

Appendix B. Side Note: Non-US GSL Programs 30 Appendix C. Case Study: Fiji 31 Appendix D. Research Investigator 35 Appendix E. List of Survey Respondents 37

Appendix F. GSL Survey Questionnaire 38 Appendix G. List of Global Service-Learning Organizations 39 Appendix H. UGA Global Service-Learning Programs Comparison Chart 40 Appendix I. Personal Reflection Prompts 42

4

E X E C U T I V E SU M M A R Y Taking up service-learning has helped me understand life a little better. It has helped me look at the world as a whole and not from just my point of view. In addition, I feel good that I can try to make a difference in someone else's life. ~ College Student

Students in Armenia GSL program

In fall 2008 I was appointed the Senior Scholar of Global Initiatives for the Office of Service-Learning (OSL) at the University of Georgia (UGA). OSL Senior Scholars provide campus-wide leadership for targeted initiatives and existing OSL programs. They work as members of the OSL Leadership Team and contribute to long-range planning for service-learning at UGA. As one of five Senior Scholars, my particular responsibilities included:

Develop best practices of international public service and engagement including service-learning;

Facilitate a Faculty Learning Community (FLC) on “Globalizing the Curriculum: Trends, Driving Forces, and Cross Cultural Exchanges” that will include global service-learning; and

Provide leadership for integration of service-learning in study abroad and international outreach by developing curricular tools and faculty development opportunities.

It was in this capacity that I undertook this survey to answer the question: What does global service-learning look like at UGA? I hoped that the answers would provide guidance for faculty members who design and run these programs; for administrators to understand the nuances of service-learning in an international context; and for the OSL to see what its role should be in providing support and resources for faculty in this area. I developed a 10-question instrument that focused on defining GSL, essential elements of GSL programs, instructional and assessment tools used, challenges, and lessons learned. I then invited participants to respond in late fall 2008. Ten individuals obliged and various conversations ensued for the next 8 months focusing on nine UGA programs: Armenia, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Costa Rica, Fiji, Ghana, Ireland (with existing service-learning components) plus Peru (volunteer program) and Croatia (in SL pre-implementation phase). Respondents gave ample data to provide a broad image of GSL at UGA as one that is academically rigorous, collaborative, challenging, valuable, and transformative. Throughout the conversations and survey results one thing comes across very clear – the focus of these programs needs to be on the development of people – this is the academic business of human capacity

5

building – students, faculty, and community members. At its core, when done correctly, it is about transformation – we are preparing future leaders who will transform our world by being transformed themselves. In reviewing the survey data, the following recommendations are presented:

1) Faculty support is greatly needed in all areas to lessen burn out and feelings of frustration and isolation.

2) Expectations of all partners need to be managed better (students, faculty and community partners).

3) A change in perspective from short-term one-shot semester offerings to long-term sustainable projects needs to be embraced.

4) The knowledge gained during the GSL program must be captured and shared by all participants.

5) GSL needs to be an integral part of the strategic plan for internationalizing the campus. The question is where does GSL fit on the campus? As you review the diagram below keep in mind that GSL can transcend all the territorial boundaries, for the world is now present in our own backyards.

But GSL is pedagogy, a tool; its effectiveness is dependent on the “user” – in our case, the faculty. To wield this powerful educational weapon faculty must be prepared and armed with the necessary resources before being let loose to fight against ignorance and prejudice. Let us remember Talya, the student dealing with the dissonance of her international experience, “international education entails navigating the social, historical, and political realities of what it means to be American in a world of undeniable difference and inequality.” GSL promises to do just that. But we must be up to the task. But history will judge you, and as the years pass, you will ultimately judge yourself, in the extent to which you have used your gifts and talents to lighten and enrich the lives of your fellow men. In your hands lie the future of your world and the fulfillment of the best dualities of your own spirit. ~ Robert F . Kennedy

6

IN T R O DU C T I O N: D E F ININ G G L O B A L SE R V I C E-L E A RNIN G Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I may remember. Involve me and I will learn. ~Benjamin F ranklin

Dr. Denise Lewis with students in Cambodia

GLOBAL OR INTERNATIONAL One of the key questions in the survey deals with terminology. There is significant debate over the use of “global” vs. “international” not just in the service-learning arena, but in the international education arena as well. The literature can be scanned using either title, although “international” seems to be of specific reference to an overseas destination. According to Shannon Wilder, Director of UGA’s Office of Service-Learning:

“We have traditionally used the term global service-learning because we thought it was more inclusive than international and could connect to local or state-level programs with a global focus as well. I think with all of the talk of “globalizing” the curriculum in the past few years on campus, that we picked up on the language and concept as well.”

For this report, the following definition of global service-learning (GSL) will be used. It draws from and synthesizes scholarly literature in service-learning and promotional materials:

Global service-learning is a course-based form of experiential education wherein students, faculty, staff and institutions a) collaborate with diverse community stakeholders on an organized service activity to address real social problems and issues in the community, b) integrate classroom theory with active learning in the world, c) gain knowledge and skills related to the course content and advance civic, personal and social development, and d) immerse themselves in another culture, experience daily reality in the host culture and engage in dual exchange of ideas with people from other countries (Bringle and Hatcher, 1995; Grusky, 2000; Kiely, 2005; University of Denver, 2006).

As the first question of the survey, defining GSL was meant to give context and parameters for the rest of the questionnaire. UGA faculty had their own “working” definitions of what GSL is and how they apply it to their programs:

7

Participation of students with community members in another country.

Global Service-Learning can be defined as volunteer “hands on” work by students that

supports the programs operated by nonprofit agencies/organizations that enhances student learning regarding the country or course focus. GSL allows students to have an enriching experience by getting to know the local people and NGOs that work with them. Many study abroad programs appear to be “classrooms abroad” taught by the same professors as their home institutions, i.e., UGA.

Volunteer “hands on” work by students that supports the programs operated by nonprofit

agencies/organizations in other countries.

Global service-learning (GSL) is both a philosophy and methodology for collaboration with international community members that leads to the application of academic skills and knowledge to a real-life problem or issue. It combines study of a region and/or its people and culture (a traditional study abroad) with (1) learning about a local issue, (2) collaborating with local people or groups to create actions based on the issue, (3) implementing the collaboratively created plan for addressing the issue, and (4) engaging with community partners to evaluate and adjust the plan to better suit local needs.

GSL is similar to domestic service-learning but the global piece adds an international

audience. However, it is important to make the connection back to the States.

Dr. Cheryl Dozier with students in Ghana.

8

R ESE A R C H M E T H O D O L O G Y

" How wonderful it is that nobody needs to wait a single moment before starting to improve the world. " Anne F rank This research project was designed to be completed within three phases to ensure a comprehensive series of data that would prove valuable to UGA faculty and administrators concerned with academic standards and program effectiveness for global service-learning programs:

Phase I: Review of service-learning/study abroad program Websites, Online materials, and marketing materials (brochures, postcards, etc.) to gather public information on such programs;

Phase I I: In-person and telephone survey interviews; and Phase I I I: Fiji Research Site Visit for Case Study Analysis

Selection of UGA Faculty Participants Faculty participants were self-selected to participate in the survey. An email invitation outlining the purpose of the survey and including the survey questions was put out on the Office of Service-Learning listserve in fall 2008. This was followed up with telephone calls to confirm participation and schedule the interview that would be conducted face to face or by phone. Special consideration was given to ensure the survey contained at least one country from each of the world’s geographic regions. Interviews were conducted in spring 2009. There were eight in-person interviews; one telephone conversation; and one participant who just sent in written responses to the questionnaire.

UGA Global Service Learning Survey Programs in Survey

Peru

Croatia

Ghana

Armenia Bulgaria

Costa Rica

Cambodia

Fiji

Ireland

9

SUR V E Y R ESU L TS GLOBAL SERVICE-LEARNING VS. LOCAL SERVICE-LEARNING As part of the definition inquiry, survey participants were asked to identify how global service-learning (GSL) differed from local service-learning (LSL). The key difference is the idea that you are immersed in another culture (far from home) and that immersion adds a new dimension to the learning, understanding, and appreciation of that culture.

You have more engagement and you get to know people on a more intimate level by contributing to the community.

GSL has an international context which LSL does not. The circumstances may be similar but the “service” is very different. Accessing resources for service-learning are quite different. Students get to meet and work along side people from other cultures and learn from them at the same time they are doing a service activity.

GSL allows students to meet and work beside individuals from other cultures, thereby

allowing them to acquire a global/international perspective on politics, social services, educational policies, and the concepts of “service” itself, etc.

GSL is different from LSL because it requires participants and community partners to

work across different cultural ideologies and, at times, across different languages. GSL differs from LSL because participants are immersed in the culture at all times; unlike LSL opportunities which tend to be more limited in the amount of day-to-day interactions. Students in GSL live in the country, eat local foods, and hear the local language. Even when they leave the project at the end of the day and return to their lodging, they continue to experience local traditions, sights and sounds.

2008 Ireland Study Abroad Group at the COPE Foundation

10

ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF GLOBAL SERVICE-LEARNING Participants were asked to list essential elements of global service-learning, essential being defined as key factors to make the program successful.

Interdisciplinary – GSL allows the opportunity for students and faculty from different disciplines to merge their learning and knowledge to find solutions together, offering all the opportunity of alternative perspectives and synergetic opportunities.

Orientation to Local Culture (history, politics, etc.) – GSL can be best leveraged when students are sufficiently prepared for their encounter in a new cultural environment through pre-departure training in culture, history and socio-economic reality.

Engagement – GSL requires interaction between and among students with community

members and faculty, community members with students and faculty, faculty with community members and students. This interaction must be genuine, honest, and mutually beneficial.

Collaboration - this goes beyond the simple agreements to work side-by-side with local

community members; it also expands to include the resources of international nonprofit organizations, nongovernmental organizations, local and regional government agencies, chambers of commerce and business leaders, educational institutions, and even the other departments and/or colleges on your own campus. It also means reciprocal partnerships that are based on equality and mutual exchange. Partnerships that ensure respect, trust and commitment from each party.

Application of knowledge – GSL is about academics first. The exotic locations (and

even a barrio in Brazil can be exotic) serve only as the context of the learning and the opportunity to apply knowledge concepts. GSL programs must fulfill the learning objectives of the course in which they take place. Students must be able to better understand those concepts through their application via the service they are doing.

Satisfies a need defined by the community – GSL cannot be about exchanges that have

no value to the partners. The community has enough burdens, it does not need to “create” artificial situations for students to resolve – that is the function of laboratory simulations and case studies. GSL needs students to get realistic about the issues most critical to the community. If that issue or community and the GSL program are not a good match, then a new match must be found. This concept also highlights the necessity for us to listen to the community – it has a voice and is able to tell us – the academics – what it needs. We need to learn to listen first.

Reflection on experiences – GSL can be a powerful experience. It can also be

overwhelming. Taking time to understand what happened and why and how we feel about it is critical for learning to be lasting. Students are not always equipped to deal with certain feelings they may experience – whether it be homesickness, culture clash, or dissonance between their home reality and their GSL situation. Faculty must assist students through this.

11

Sustainability – The longer the interaction is continued, the more lasting the impact. There are a number of reasons why GSL programs are not sustainable. One of the most common is that most GSL programs are championed by one committed faculty member and when that faculty member leaves or cannot dedicate more time to the program, the program ends. Sometimes an institution can help by providing support to the faculty member or having the department adopt the program with rotating faculty or team faculty teaching it. This ensures that knowledge created through the GSL can provide insights for future students and faculty for a long time.

F lexibility and Variety – Successful GSL programs incorporate contingency plans just in case the original agenda cannot be followed – backup activities, sites, speakers, etc. Anything can happen in an international location – from a political coup to a missed flight to a coral scratch. This is why it is important that the academic director or faculty running the program has done a run through of the program and knows the country site well. This will also allow the faculty member to be spontaneous and take advantage of teachable moments when they appear although they were not in the original plan. It can lead to a richer experience for the students and the faculty member. In addition, effective GSL programs incorporate a variety of teaching methodologies and delivery methods to keep the student interested and engaged. (See more on Instructional Tools below.)

Service-learning in Armenia with Habitat for Humanity

The list compiled from the participants mirrors many of the elements listed in the International Partnership for Service-Learning’s Principles of Good Practice: (http://www.ipsl.org/pdfs/DeclarationofPrinciplesEnglish.pdf) The best-designed and executed service-learning programs ensure that:

There is reciprocity between the community served and the university or college, and their relationship is built on mutual respect.

The learning is r igorous, sound, and appropriate to the academic level of the students. The GSL experience does not offer foregone conclusions but rather, in the spirit of academic inquiry, expose students to a wide range of points of view, theories, and ideas, asking that they critically examine these ideas and their experience in service, thereby reaching their own thoughtfully considered insights.

12

The service is truly useful to the community or agency. Experience has shown that the

agency or community is best qualified to define what is useful. The time and quality of the service must be sufficient to offset the agency time spent in planning, supervising, and evaluating the program; otherwise the institution and the student are exploiting the very people they intend to assist.

There is a clear connection between the studies and the service. The studies may focus on the general culture of those served or be more specific in relating subject matter and the service experience. Either pattern is effective.

Students are allowed and, indeed, encouraged to develop and demonstrate leadership skills, using their own initiative when appropriate, bearing in mind that they should first listen to the community and be responsive to its values and needs.

Opportunity for personal reflection on the meaning of the experience in relationship to the student's values and life decisions is built into the program in a structured way. The keeping of a journal is a common means of providing this opportunity for the students to connect what they are learning and experiencing with their own lives.

Support services are provided. Students and the community are prepared for their service in which they will serve. Provision is made for their health care if it should be needed, and students are advised on issues of safety. Ongoing advising services are available.

UNIQUENESS FACTOR

Chief’s Bure in Fiji.

Participants were next asked to evaluate what makes their GSL program different from the others and therefore, more attractive for students looking for a GSL experience. The responses served as a snapshot into the marketing and recruitment strategies for the programs. In many cases what was identified as the “uniqueness factor” did not appear on the brochure or website although it was promoted during face to face conversations at study abroad/service-learning fairs, or individual inquires by students.

Students begin the experience before leaving UGA (Ghana) The country destination itself.

13

Types of activity students get involved in. The community partners – NGO’s, host families, other volunteers and students. (for

example – individuals with intellectual disabilities, etc.) The program is multi-disciplinary. Students’ experiences and growth opportunities (Cambodia) – “students find themselves

moving beyond the role of student to occupy a multiple of roles, such as teacher, leader, researcher, colleague, mentor, and many more.”

Only program of its kind in a specific geographic region. INSTRUCTIONAL TOOLS

At the Saramej Women's Union a local woman instructs a student in the

proper techniques for make " lavash, " Armenia's traditional unleavened bread.

Educators will tell you that the instructional tools they use in their teaching are of extreme importance in terms of how students learn. We have plenty of research on the multiple intelligences and different learning styles of students. Many educators have a favorite tool they use – one exercise or activity that they can always count on for the outcome they are looking for. But in today’s multimedia environment, it is becoming essential that an educator’s toolbox contain a diversity of tools that fit different learning styles and attitudes of students. Sometimes it is just a question of educators being exposed to the “new” tool in the first place and how it has been used by others. The following list was compiled from the survey responses. They are varied and at times country/culture-specific bringing the cultural competency objective into play.

Journals – if there is one tool mostly associated with service-learning it is the trusted old journal, the forum that allows students to explore meaning in everyday experiences through the written word. What has changed however is the “medium” of the journal – today it can be electronic on a laptop, or virtual on the Internet. Blogs and Travel podcasts are also being used along with social networking sites such as Facebook and LinkedIn. Some faculty believes that journals offer a connection which binds the student to the subject matter of the class. It can contain insights, questions, comments, criticisms, and discoveries.

Guided Questions – freehand writing is ok, but most GSL professionals will insist that you use guided questions to help prod the students into deeper exploration of their experiences and feelings. Some of the questions can be site or experience specific or they

14

can be general. See Appendix F for a List of Personal Reflection Question Prompts prepared by The Fanning Institute at UGA.

Reflective exercises (pre, during, post) - these exercises can be written or oral, can be done in a group or individually. They include games, Q&A, question cards, quotes for discussion, etc. One program used a pre and post test on cultural competency. A good online source for a series of intercultural competency assessment tools is: Assessment Tools of Intercultural Competence: http://www.vtcampuscompact.org/Fost_Glo_Cit_Post/workshops/Assesment_Evaulation_resources.pdf.

Course packs (with readings) – along with the essentials such as a syllabus and itinerary,

student course packs should contain all the background materials students need to be prepared for their GSL experience. Some faculty believes selecting required readings is an art form. You need to make sure you assign the appropriate amount with enough incentives so students will actually do the readings so they can better understand what they are doing, where they are doing it, and why. Do you decide on 30-page academic journal articles or do you select instead the 3-page New York Times article. The first may have the underlying concepts; the second may have the illustration of the concept to help the student understand. You may need a combination of both for the course, depends on the academic objectives of the course and the faculty style of teaching.

Regular discussions for group processing (Kasa Kasa, Kava Circle, Talanoa) – A Kasa

Kasa (in Ghana) or a Kava Circle (in Fiji) convey the same tradition – coming together informally and sharing the experiences of the day or one’s life. The talanoa (also from Fiji) is the art of storytelling – to discuss a concept through narrative or anecdote. These discussions can be scheduled or happen on the spur of the moment. They can occur in a classroom, out in the field, on a bus or at a restaurant. They can be held in the morning or in the evening. The important thing is that they be held so they can provide students with the opportunity to get out of their minds what they have experienced. The faculty role transitions from instructor to facilitator with this tool. Lectures will not be of interest to the student – it is their voice that must be heard now and the faculty must be skilled at helping the student finds the words to express his or her thoughts so that the experience can be of value.

Reports and Oral Presentations – All of the programs reviewed in this survey required

one or more formal, written reports from the students, either on a specific topic explored in the course or on the GSL experience itself. These reports are more comprehensive then regular short assignments required during certain segments of the GSL program. One of the issues for faculty to determine is when should the report be due? Some of the programs require the reports at specific times during the program, at the end of the program, or within a certain time period after the students return from the program. Some programs also require an oral presentation. It is interesting to note that in a couple of the programs, the students are required to give an oral presentation to the community partner as part of their service.

Art-Based Projects – This is a more guided activity than just allowing students some

flexibility in terms of how they want to express their experience. Structured art projects with general instructions can offer a creative outlet for some students.

15

Photo Essay – the cliché that “a photo can say a thousand words” is only half the story.

Whose thousand words is it expressing? The one who took the picture or the one who views it? The importance of the photo essay lies in the captions that accompany the photos, not only taken by the student, but selected and organized in a certain order and format, to tell a story from the student’s perspective. Two of the programs used this tool. Unfortunately, there was no follow-up with it. Photo essays need to be shared. Loading them on a course website (with prior permission of the student of course) or having a “screening” with the students “reading” their stories to others deepen the internal processing of the GSL experience for the student, as well as being a great recruitment tool for future program participants.

The service activity itself – experiential hands-on learning. Leonardo da Vinci is quoted as

saying “I have been impressed with the urgency of doing. Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Being willing is not enough; we must do.” The doing makes it real to the students. It brings the abstract to their realm of understanding and gives them a visceral insight that adds comprehension to their knowledge base.

ASSESSMENT AND EVLAUATION

Student in the GSL program in Bulgaria, 2008.

A key point to the GSL programs evaluated in the survey is the faculty (or faculty team) commitment to continuous improvement of the student experience for academic, cross-cultural, and transformative value. Faculty surveyed offers a myriad of methods for assessing their programs beyond the standard OIE evaluation (which many felt was too superficial and general, and did not offer them needed insights for their purposes. A lot of what the faculty deem valuable as commentary about the programs are acquired in informal and anecdotal ways, gleamed from reflective papers submitted as assignments from students, or mentioned casually in a course wrap-up celebratory meal. Faculty also keeps their own journals or notes relating to the program. One program director had a series of journals, one for each year, which she would use to prepare the next year’s program. None of the programs have used a formal, third party evaluator mainly due to issues of cost and lack of resources to do so. Survey respondents provided the following list of assessment tools:

Faculty journal (during the GSL) Student feedback (during and after the GSL experience) OIE Evaluation Form (least helpful)

16

Reflective papers Student Journal entries & writings (are journals graded? what rubric does the faculty

use?) Close, casual supervision (observations, etc) during the GSL Department Program Evaluation Quizzes (on academic content) Mid-Point and Final evaluations Informal meetings with students and community members/partners Formal evaluation sessions with community partners Ph.D. student dissertation results

A different type of assessment of concern for some of the respondents was the “grading” for class participation in a GSL course. I found the following from a syllabus for a service-learning course in Denmark: http://www.dis.dk/Academic/Courses1/syllabi/learningseminar.pdf.

Students are expected to come prepared to discuss the assigned reading and their service experiences at each session. You will be graded on (a) the seriousness of your effort (i.e., whether or not you come to class prepared, and whether or not you are physically, emotionally, and intellectually present); (b) the nature of your interaction with other class members (i.e., whether you listen carefully and respectfully to what others say, your willingness to challenge others and defend your points of view, and whether you provide opportunity and encouragement for others to participate); (c) your faithfulness in meeting your responsibilities in terms of the one-on-one meetings outside of class; (d) your willingness to interact thoughtfully with guest speaker(s); (e) your willingness to share experiences from your service site; (f) successful completion of various assessment instruments used in the course; and (g) the quality of your overall effort.

GSL PARTNERS

UGA faculty with Joeli Veitayaki from the University of the South Pacific

Partnership development for GSL programs is crucial. The lone faculty who does everything from logistics to academic content is a sad image, leading to frustration, disappointment and burn out. One of the advantages to GSL programs is that they are multi and interdisciplinary by nature, insisting by its very structure that multiple perspectives be used to explore and understand the surrounding culture and socio-economic constructs embedded into the academic curriculum in an international location. One of the programs (Croatia) uses a faculty-team approach. Offering 4 courses to students in specific disciplines, the four faculty meet periodically to share their syllabus and objectives and design shared activities or visits where all the students will be

17

present and can all take advantage of the multiple areas of expertise of al the faculty. Another program (Fiji) uses the faculty team approach in the pre-program design. A hybrid between these two can also be offered in which a multidisciplinary faculty team designs the program and then team members rotate in the actual facilitating of the program. This is of particular interest to departments where the GSL program may not recruit sufficient student participants to cover the expenses of more than one faculty member. Internal partners are not the only ones required to make GSL programs work. Off-campus partners include governmental offices, nongovernmental organizations, foreign institutions, etc. Most of the programs surveyed indicated that they selected the destination country based on “personal” contacts they had in the country due to prior research or work in or related to the country. These personal contacts are then leveraged to become professional partners to implement the program. On the opposite end are partners who are recruited because of their importance to the program’s academic objectives. Many times these partnerships are facilitated by the “personal” contacts of the faculty members. Partnership development entails not just formulating the initial partnership but also maintaining it, leading to a long-term sustainable joint venture. As indicated in a prior section, the partnership needs to be reciprocal between equals and include respect, trust, and commitment. In the international arena “trust” is between individuals, not between institutions, where the term itself can conjure fear. An interesting concept of reciprocity is explored in the article by Porter and Monard (see References) on the Bolivian tradition of Ayni. In its simplest terms ayni is an exchange of comparable work or goods as part of an ongoing cycle of reciprocity (pg 5) and entails a dynamic series of encounters. This means it is active, not passive; there is more than one interaction; and these interactions are face to face. In this way it nurtures a sustaining relationship built on trust, mutual respect, and commitment (as indicated above). On-Campus Partners O ff-Campus Partners Armenia College of Agriculture and

Environmental Sciences, Office of Global Programs Office of International Education

USDA-FAS Habitat for Humanity International Center for Agribusiness Research and Education (Armenia) Center for Agribusiness & Rural Development (CARD/NGO) World Bank – Armenia Office Armenia Tree Project Saramej Women’s Organization Agricultural Teaching Center (Armenia)

Bulgaria Lamar Dodd School of Art College of Environment and Design Warnell school of Forestry and Natural Resources Office of International Education

US Embassy in Bulgaria National Parks Office of Bulgaria Fulbright Sofia University, Dept. of Ecology & Natural Resources Ministry of Environment & Waters of Bulgaria

18

Cambodia Office of International Education Ms. Phymean Noun, Executive Director, People Improvement Organization (PIO) Mr. Montana Pen, Director of Education (PIO) Royal University of Phnom Penh Psychology Department Royal University of Phnom Penh Foreign Language Institute Mr. Paul Nuth, volunteer Mr. Visal Phauk, Exec. Director, Khmer Helping Khmer Aspara Foundation

Costa Rica UGA Costa Rica Campus Office of International Education

GIFT Program – GA Internship & Fellowships for Teachers (for scholarships)

Fiji Center for Integrated Conversation Research Office of International Education

Soso Village Waitabu Village University of South Pacific University of Fiji

Ghana African studies Institute Lamar Dodd School of Art School of Social Work Family and Consumer Sciences College of Education Office of International Education

KNUST – Kwame Nkrumah University of Science & Technology (lecturer did a Fulbright at UGA) Morningstar Elementary School (daughter of founder & her husband are UGA alumni) Land Tours Ghana, Ltd. University of Ghana Asheshi University Sugashee Village Afani Children’s Home Kumasi Children’s Home University of Cape Coast

Ireland Office of International Education COPE Foundation (Ireland)

Croatia Office of International Education University of Zagra Evo-Pilar Institute of Social Sciences

Peru Latin American and Caribbean Studies Institute

Catholic Charities – Athens Various Community Agencies

The faculty team for Croatia program.

19

CHALLENGES A lot of people are waiting for Martin Luther King or Mahatma Gandhi to come back -- but they are gone. We are it. It is up to us. It is up to you. ~ Marian Wright Edelman

Dr. Denise Lewis with elementary students in Cambodia.

For some respondents GSL is a web of challenges to be met waiting to ensnare the unwary and the unprepared. But as one respondent put it “the greatest challenge is that there is always something new. Even after you think you have prepared for everything, something always happens that gives you a “new” issue to deal with.” The unforeseen may be the greatest challenge for some, but it was not the only one highlighted by the faculty respondents. Responses included the basics of partnership development, student recruitment and retention, academic rigor, etc. But underlying concerns also made themselves known as the conversation on student recruitment segwayed into the issue of student diversity and elite access of international programs for students of a specific socio-economic background. Another large group of challenges centered on safety and health issues of the students and the faculty, some of which are country or activity specific. So how did the survey participants respond to the challenges? Many times with frustration as communication channels were not always the best, institutional policies discriminate against international program (i.e. reimbursements, etc.) and many things are outside of their control (political situation of a country, etc.). Perseverance and carrying your own receipt book were advised more than once.

Financial resources for students Compensation policies for paying faculty – timing, restrictions. Trying to coordinate an interdisciplinary program that must meet all student requirements Keeping the students safe and healthy (water, energy, cuisine) Language Recruiting students – funding for marketing Helping international community partners understand what we want to do and that we

want to help them Building trust with the international community partners Time to market and recruit (maintaining the website, visiting classes, participating in

fairs)

20

Students do not do the readings and so are not prepared for the experience Alcohol Policy (vs. kava, a local concoction from Fiji) Need to keep the students’ focus (for example, coming from another program like

Australia) Duration of the program (sometimes not enough time) Finding international community partners Securing additional spaces for students at the participating foundation and in the

participating national schools Working with the UGA system of record keeping and receipt gathering Safety & responsibility for student’s safety Host-country issues – like one teacher decided not to go to school and so the school was

closed Funding for local projects

LESSONS LEARNED The most important thing I learned was that doing little things can help. ~ College Student

Students in Costa Rica for the Entomology GSL.

One of the reasons to conduct surveys such as this one is to provide a resource where faculty can learn from other faculty’s experiences. It is this peer-to-peer sharing that proves valuable to faculty who sometimes believe they are alone in their misery or just don’t know how else to proceed. Innovation in GSL programs usually stems from adapting a concept from one GSL program for a different location or academic discipline. Responses to this question were diverse in nature – from the very practical (call to confirm every agenda item more than once) to the more ideological (trust the community to know what it needs). Some responses were unexpected (purchase your stuff on site), and some were more obvious (every group of students is different). But each of the lessons discussed by the respondents and listed below was learned the hard way through trial and error.

The local community knows what’s best for them – we need to trust them Let go of thinking that what is in the US is best and purchase or get the “stuff” you need

in the host country

21

Start small in your objectives – the local may need only the local view not the world view Every group of students is different Letting go of our “privilege” – students struggle with this all the time Make sure the people you are working with – the community partners – buy into what

you are doing and cooperate. Plan in some down time and socialization – but balance it. Too much down time is a

recipe for disaster – students can lose focus on the project. Home stays make the most impact on a student. Communicate frequently with the host organization starting 10-12 months before students

arrive; remember that people in different cultures may be slower to respond to e-mails and calls. Communication once you arrive in the country is also essential.

Flexibility is the key to success Cultural knowledge and negotiations are critical for assuring all parties learn from and

are satisfied with the program. Keeping an eye on the big picture while addressing the small details are what males a

GSL program sustainable. Be extremely flexible and go with the flow. Expect to have challenges, but move forward, don’t let it dampen yours or your students’

spirits Be prepared (for anything!) Have a run through of your schedule and program Do GSL as a team effort – it is a 24 hour job as teacher, mentor and parent for the

students, be careful of burnout. Set up boundaries with your students when on site.

REQUIREMENTS FOR A BETTER GSL PROGRAM The next to the last question on the survey focused the discussion on what does the respondent believe he or she needs to have a better GSL program, in whatever way they define “better.” More funds were an expected response, but it came within the context of more funds for student scholarships to diversify the student population who can take advantage of the GSL experience. As the list was compiled some ideas are quick and easy to implement, but time consuming and requires a certain amount of resources. Others will take more time and higher authority to implement.

More time for students for the GSL activity and process. Residential location – not so much traveling around from place to place- focus. Get academic units to support study abroad Need more students to go Scholarships for students OIE permission to allow directors to use program fees to pay for more than one day prior

to and one day after student arrival to help set up and shut down the program, e.g., 3 day start up and 1-2 day shut down

“I would have liked to have had a strong mentor as I developed my GSL program.” More support on budgeting, scheduling, etc. Potential list of collaborators (community partners) in the host country

22

OTHER ISSUES " It is a privilege to serve people, a privilege that must be earned, and once earned; there is an obligation to do something good with it. " Barbara Jordan

Student in Cambodia GSL

The last question on the survey was to be able to capture any other outstanding issues of interest to the respondents in terms of GSL at UGA that had not been addressed by the preceding questions on the survey. Some of the responses were repeated from previous answers to emphasis how important they are – like communication and preparing students for their experience. But one of the most profound statements for faculty considering GSL was simply “do it.”

Need to prepare students better for their experience abroad – like selecting room mates (what do you have in common, do you snore, etc.)

Students need to bond before going overseas Students need to learn about their destination country before departure Faculty need to be prepared to address diversity issues abroad Faculty should have some previous experience and personal contacts in the host country – gives the student a sense of safety and confidence (the faculty should feel comfortable in the country)

It would be nice if recognition were given for the amount of time needed to simply plan a study abroad/SL program. There also is little acknowledgement of the conditions under which faculty in least developed nations work.

Pre-planning is priceless. Communicate with partners – using intermediaries can be a challenge. Think about what you are doing and why you are doing it. Teachable moments happen all the time. No matter the challenge, do it. It is valuable.

" Do what you can, with what you have, where you are. " Theodore Roosevelt

23

R E C O M M E ND A T I O NS

Primary School in Peru’s VEN program.

The purpose of this survey was to learn about the state of GSL on UGA and what issues GSL faculty face while designing and running their programs so that offices in UGA, such as OIE, OSL, and IPSO, can better facilitate and support them. The following are presented for consideration:

1) Faculty support is greatly needed in all areas to lessen burn out and feelings of frustration and isolation. The support required includes: infrastructure, professional development, and financial and non-monetary resources.

2) Expectations of all partners need to be managed better:

a. For students – ensuring participation in pre-departure orientations, preferably more than one focusing not only on health and safety, but also cultural norms to lessen cultural shock. Faculty need to anticipate student reaction to adverse/difficult and different conditions from what they are used to.

b. For faculty – need to understand what they are responsible for and what they can expect from their department, from their community partners, and from UGA in terms of support; development of a GSL protocol for specific country locations will go a long way in providing valuable information and access to resources for GSL faculty.

c. For community partners – they need to understand that academic learning is the most important aspect for the students and faculty of the GSL project. The students will learn while being of service, but it must be connected to the course objectives. In IPSL’s Principles of Engagement, they state that “when academic credit is awarded it is not for the service performed, but for the learning; which the student demonstrates through written papers, classroom discussion, examinations, and or other means of formal evaluation.” Community partners also

24

need to understand their responsibilities as part of the partnership – Memorandums of Understanding formalize the relationship and help protect all parties involved.

3) A change in perspective from short-term one-shot semester offerings to long-term

sustainable projects need to be embraced. By institutionalizing (for example, through department ownership and faculty teams) the program, quality and value can be streamlined and enhanced.

4) The knowledge gained during the GSL program must be captured and shared by all participants – students, faculty and community partners – with each other and with non-participants. There are so many new technologies that students can play with that this should not be difficult to organize.

5) GSL needs to be an integral part of the strategic plan for internationalizing the campus. The question is where does GSL fit on the campus? As you review the diagram below keep in mind that GSL can transcend all the territorial boundaries, for the world is now present in our own backyards.

25

C O N C L USI O N

According to the Campus Compact booklet Lessons Learned on the Road to Student Civic Engagement “students need and want to become active, engaged community members and professionals” (Germond, et al, 2006, pg. 3). They look at college “as the place where we gain the life knowledge that will assist us in developing into the people we want and need to become” (Germond, et al, 2006, pg. 39). According to the International Partnership for Service-Learning (IPSL), “GSL can be especially rich, as it exposes students to many conditions, ideas, assumptions, and people that are substantially different from those with which they are familiar.” Students participate in GSL for a number of reasons (Grusky, 2000):

General yearnings for travel, adventure, and romance; Altruistic sentiments; Academic curiosity; To prepare for a career in foreign service or in international affairs; and/or A combination of these.

Faculty develops GSL for their own reasons ((Grusky, 2000):

Mix of research, travel and educational goals; and/or Range of knowledge, contacts, or experience in the country being visited.

In reviewing the survey data, the following recommendations are presented:

1) Faculty support is greatly needed in all areas to lessen burn out and feelings of frustration and isolation.

2) Expectations of all partners need to be managed better (students, faculty and community partners).

3) A change in perspective from short-term one-shot semester offerings to long-term sustainable projects needs to be embraced.

4) The knowledge gained during the GSL program must be captured and shared by all participants.

5) GSL needs to be an integral part of the strategic plan for internationalizing the campus. The question is where does GSL fit on the campus? As you review the diagram below keep in mind that GSL can transcend all the territorial boundaries, for the world is now present in our own backyards.

But GSL is pedagogy, a tool; its effectiveness is dependent on the “user” – in our case, the faculty. To wield this powerful educational weapon faculty must be prepared and armed with the necessary resources before being let loose to fight against ignorance and prejudice. Let us remember Talya, the student dealing with the dissonance of her international experience, “international education entails navigating the social, historical, and political realities of what it means to be American in a world of undeniable difference and inequality.” GSL promises to do just that. But we must be up to the task.

26

R E F E R E N C ES Annette, John. Service Learning in an International Context, Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, Vol. 8, 2001. http://www.frontiersjournal.com/issues/vol8/vol8-01_annette.htm Boettcher, Christopher, Jessica Friedrichs, and Eric Hartman, Taking Students from Me to We: A Global citizenship Course Model for Students Participating in Service Learning, presentation, 2nd Annual Fostering Global Citizenship Conference, Vermont, 2008. http://www.vtcampuscompact.org/2008/Fost_Glo_Cit_Post/workshops/AmizadeGSLpresentationFINAL1.ppt Fantini, Alvino E., Assessment Tools of Intercultural Competence, 2006 http://www.saintmarys.edu/~cwil/php/intercultural.learning/documents/feil_appendix_f.pdf Fischer, Maj and Hugh Wing, Syllabus: Service Learning Seminar: Denmark, Spring, 2009 http://www.dis.dk/Academic/Courses1/syllabi/learningseminar.pdf Grusky, Sara. Service Learning: An Exciting Model for International Development Education, World Hunger.org web, http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/us/deved/grusky.htm Grusky, Sara. International Service Learning: A Critical Guide from an Impassioned Advocate, American Behavioral Scientist, 2000, 43 http://abs.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/43/5/858 International Partnership for Service Learning and Leadership, Declaration of Principles, pamphlet http://www.ipsl.org/pdfs/DeclarationofPrinciplesEnglish.pdf International Partnership for Service Learning and Leadership, Why Service-Learning, website http://www.ipsl.org/programs/servicelearning.html Kiely, Richard. Global Service-Learning: Pedagogy, Program Models, Tools and Design, 2nd Annual Institute on Global Service-Learning, NY, 2007 http://www.psc.cornell.edu/downloads/Excerpts_from_Kiely.pdf Kiely, Richard. A Chameleon with a Complex: Searching for Transformation in International Service-Learning, Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, Spring 2004, pp 5-20. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/mjcsl/images/3239521.0010.201.pdf Kiely, Richard, Education for Global Citizenship: Fostering Diversity through Local/Global Service-Learning Programs http://www.coe.uga.edu/diversity/seminars/kiely.pdf Kiely, Richard, Global Service Learning PowerPoint Presentation, http://www.psc.cornell.edu/downloads/GslInstitute2ndNutsBoltsKiely2009Final.pdf Pandor, Naledi, “The Evolution of Civic Engagement: South Africa”, presentation at Tadamunn: Towards Civic Engagement in Arab Education, American University of Cairo,

27

13 October 2008. http://www.tufts.edu/talloiresnetwork/downloads/Pandorcivicengagementspeech.pdf Richards, Leon and Franco, Robert. Engagement and Global Citizenship: Local Roots and Global Reach. Campus Compact website: http://www.compact.org/resources/future-of-campus-engagement/engagement-and-global-citizenship-local-roots-and-global-reach/4237/ Weinberg, Adam. Working Session on Global Citizenship, 2nd Annual Fostering Global citizenship Conference, Vermont, 2008. http://www.vtcampuscompact.org/2008/Fost_Glo_Cit_Post/workingsession.php Zemach-Bersin, Talya. American Students Abroad Can’t Be Global Citizens, Commentary, The Chronicle of Higher Education, March 7, 2008, http://www.yale.edu/yalecollege/international/pdf/orientation/global_citizens.pdf

28

APPENDICES

29

APPENDIX A - SIDE NOTE ON LITERATURE REVIEW: KIELY AND THE CHAMELEON COMPLEX

Doing some background research on and looking for some accepted issues concerning GSL, Richard Kiely, formerly of UGA kept coming out. Two of his articles were especially helpful, one of the general concepts of GSL and the other entitled “A Chameleon with a Complex: Searching for the Transformation in international Service-Learning.” Both are listed in the Reference section of this report. It is the second article I would like to focus on in this side bar. “The article reports findings from a longitudinal case study investigating how students experience perspective transformation from their participation in an international service-learning program with an explicit social justice orientation.” In this article Kiely explores the dark side of GSL programs’ ability to transform students by looking at dissonance and how it affects students’ worldview and lifestyle once they return to the US and their regular lives. He quotes from a Eyler and Giles study (1999) where they claim that “service-learning as a transformative learning process is not about accumulating more knowledge, but about seeing the world in a profoundly different way, one that calls for personal commitment and action” (pg. 129). But what happens when the student is chastised for wanting to make a personal change in their lifestyle because of what they experiences in their GSL program and to match their new values? What happens when their friends don’t understand their new awareness of environmental and social rights issues and talk about parting and the American way? This article reminds faculty and GSL staff that the student experience is not over once they board the flight to go back home. The program may be over, but the internal processing for some students may just begin when they debark the plane and return to campus. Are we doing enough for these students in terms of support and guidance for coming to terms with dissonance and intense emotional conflict? Kiely’s work is important – especially since it helps us understand why some students have a negative experience with GSL and study abroad in general. One of the most poignant examples I came across was a commentary by a student named Talya Zemach-Bersin in the Chronicle of Higher Education, March 7, 2008 issue. She entitled her opinion piece “American Students Abroad Can’t Be Global Citizens” (http://www.yale.edu/yalecollege/international/pdf/orientation/global_citizens.pdf). She attended a study abroad to India in 2005 and participated in a home stay as part of her program. Her reflection on her experience illustrates Kiely’s theory: “As a first-world student, I had literally purchased a third-world family for my own self-improvement as a global citizen.” This idea repulsed Talya and she ended up questioning the value of such programs. As I used this commentary in discussion with survey participants, all were in agreement that the faculty of the program had failed Talya. How many others do we fail by not considering Kiely’s chameleon complex?

30

APPENDIX B - SIDE NOTE ON LITERATURE REVIEW: NON-US GSL

PROGRAMS Let us not presume that service-learning is a US-only phenomenon. As more countries experiment with experiential learning, they are turning to service-learning as a credible pedagogy. Below are listed a few examples to demonstrate the broad reach of GSL.

1) UK Council for Citizenship and Learning in the Community (CSV/CCLC) and the

British Learning Council Youth in Action Programme (http://www.britishcouncil.org/connectyouth.htm).

2) The British Council also has a community service program in partnership with the University of Jordan linked to Muslim faith and the development of civil society (http://www.britishcouncil.org/Jordan).

3) South Africa Community Higher Education Service Partnership Project sponsored by the Ford Foundation; Partnership for Higher Education in Africa (http://www.foundation-partnership.org/pubs/southafrica/index.php?chap=chap1&sub=c1e).

4) Office of University Engagement, Pro-Vice Chancellor of Engagement, University of Western Sydney (http://www.uws.edu.au/community/in_the_community/oue).

5) Requirement of Mexican Universities for students to complete “Servicio Social” – social service – in order to graduate. (www.tufts.edu/talloiresnetwork/downloads/MexicoMeetingOverview.doc).

6) International Association for Youth Service (http://www.ianys.utas.edu.au/index.html).

Student with host “father” in Fiji.

31

APPENDIX C - CASE STUDY: FIJI

UGA student with kindergarten students at the Soso Village Elementary School.

Deborah Gonzalez accompanied the South Pacific Study Abroad Program to Fiji, Session 1, from June 5 – 13, 2009 and continued with specific research travel June 13 – 18, 2009. The focus on the trip was to research and explore opportunities for service-learning in an international setting and to test an international service-learning protocol currently being developed for Costa Rica by Kris Irwin of the Warnell School of Forestry & Natural Resources. Two villages, Soso, Naviti Island, and Waitabu, Taveuni Island, were visited and key village leaders interviewed. The initial rapid survey analysis indicates that current program partners, UGA and others are in an ideal situation to enhance current program activities with slight modifications. The program offers students an enriching service-learning experience and provides community partners much needed support and access to external knowledge resources. The program consisted of 32 students, 1 academic director (Dr. Peter Brosius), the assistant director of Study Abroad in the South Pacific (Dr. Uttiyo Raychadhuri), and the principal investigator of the survey (Deborah Gonzalez).

The F iji programs includes a Village Homestay. UGA student with homestay family.

32

I tinerary The Fiji Short Program Session 1 ran from June 5 – 13th. The program itinerary was as follows: Day Location Activity June 5 Skylodge, Nadi, Fiji Arrival, Orientation June 6 Skylodge, Nadi, Fiji Initial Lectures: Fiji Culture and Commerce

Tour of Village with BBQ lunch and Waterfall Hike June 7 Botaria Resort, Naviti Island Boat trip to Botaria Resort; Intro Conservation

Lecture June 8 Botaria Resort, Naviti Island Conservation Projects June 9 Botaria Resort, Naviti Island Soso

Village Conservation Project Wrap-Ups, Hike to Village

June 10 Soso Village Village Community Activities Lovo, Meke

June 11 Soso Village Botaria Resort, Naviti Island Skylodge, Nadi, Fiji

Village Market Return to Botaria Boat back to Nadi

June 12 Skylodge, Nadi, Fiji Day at Nadi – Markets; Port Denerau June 13 Skylodge, Nadi, Fiji Evaluation

Conclusion of Program

U ttiyo, Deborah and Dr. Joeli Veitayaki at University of the South Pacific (USP).

Research Extension – Deborah Gonzalez & Uttiyo Raychaudhuri Day Location Activity June 14 Garden Island Resort

Taveuni Island Arrival, Island Tour

June 15 Garden Island Resort Taveuni Island

Waitambu Village Visit Buoma Projects Visit

June 16 Nanette’s Accommodations Suva

University of South Pacific Visit Fiji National Museum Suva Markets Visit

June 17 Hideaway Resort Mtg with Joeli V., USP June 18 Skylodge, Nadi, Fiji Conclusion, Departure for US

33

Program Objectives As most of the Study Abroad in the South Pacific programs, the Fiji short program has three objectives in regards to student learning:

1) introducing a sense of global citizenship through developing a sense of humility and respect for others;

2) intercultural interaction and immersion through the concept of self-representation and honest interaction; and

3) creating a sense of environmental stewardship through awareness and natural interaction. Although these three objectives are standard principles, they are abstract and difficult to measure in the short-term. Student evaluations indicate an initial positive response to the three goals, but without long-term longitudinal studies of program participants, it is impossible to identify a true lasting impact on student decision making, behavior, and attitudes towards global citizenship, intercultural competence, and environmental consciousness. The academic content was divided into three sections:

1) environmental sustainability 2) ecotourism 3) ethnographic study of village members

There are many opportunities to integrate service-learning in each of these three academic content areas at times combining the first two elements. Environmental Sustainability and Ecotourism Example Helen Sykes and Chinnamma Reddy offered a 2-day marine conservation workshop for the students. Extremely well organized and professional, their expertise in this arena was appreciated by the students who highlighted it as a “best liked” aspect of the program. These projects also provide an opportunity for service-learning enhancement. For example, as students do a survey of the marine life, they can take underwater photos and create a visual reference chart for visitors to use when snorkeling around the resort to help them identify the species they are seeing. Students can also help create interpretive signage (such as one that shows where the path is) that can educate and make visitors aware of some of the eco-friendly provisions made by the resort. Economic and Community Development Example The two villages visited indicated a need for assistance in terms of small business development and training. These are areas that UGA students can help support in service-learning programs depending on their major discipline. Examples include:

o Leadership training o Microfinance/credit o Personal Financial Education o Management training o Health Education o Vocational skills – i.e. plumbing, carpentry, computer technology

34

The Fiji program faces two big challenges:

1) its timing is short – a mere 9 days; and 2) it follows two strenuous programs – Australia and New Zealand.

These challenges can be met by restructuring the program to fit within a service-learning infrastructure. This will allow the program to fulfill a niche in the academic offerings of the South Pacific Study Abroad program. The following strategies/action items are suggested: an academic repackaging of course objectives and materials needs to be conducted

o new lecturers o new activities o Indo-Fijian content

a decision as to which village UGA will focus on also needs to be made, since Soso or Waitabu offer unique opportunities for service-learning;

once the focus village is decided, a service-learning in Fiji protocol should be created based on the international service-learning protocol in Costa Rica currently being designed by Kris Irwin of the Warnell School of Forestry;

a family questionnaire of the villagers needs to be conducted to create family profiles an ethnographic study;

an inventory of community service projects to be held at the village(s) needs to be compiled; service-learning reflection pieces need to be created for the different components of the

program; and a village guide/manual needs to be created for students.

35

APPENDIX D - RESEARCH INVESTIGATOR

Deborah Gonzalez, Esq. Assistant Director, Office of International Public Service and Outreach Principal Research Investigator 1224 S Lumpkin Street, Cobb House Athens, GA 30602 706-542-6654 Fax: 706-542-7891 dgonzale@uga.edu Deborah Gonzalez is a renaissance professional with over 20+ years of experience in international projects, including work with UN diplomats, NGO’s and international institutions of higher education. This combination of knowledge and experience has lead to the cultivation of the skills of interconnecting and interrelating disparate trends and assets in a network of resources and global contacts. In addition, Deborah is a licensed New York attorney with a J.D. from New York Law School. Deborah served as Senior Scholar for Global Initiatives for the Office of Service-Learning for 2008-2009. The Office of Service-Learning at the University of Georgia The goal of the Office of Service-Learning is to provide campus-wide support to faculty members who wish to develop academic service-learning opportunities for University of Georgia students. Special attention is being given to form or strengthen collaborations among the public service units and academic units related to service-learning and civic engagement, and to create student and faculty opportunities for academically-grounded, service-learning experiences in developing countries. The Office of Service-Learning supports UGA faculty members in creating and expanding service-learning opportunities for students in campus-based and study abroad courses. The Office also cultivates community-based partner-ships that respond to expressed community needs. The Office of Service-Learning is jointly supported by the Office of the Vice President for Public Service and Outreach and the Office of the Vice President for Instruction. The Office of International Public Service and Outreach at the University of Georgia The Office of International Public Service and Outreach (IPSO) extends the University of Georgia’s outreach mission to communities facing global challenges through programs of applied research, capacity building, training, and exchanges. Our geographical scope is worldwide, and projects have included a children's orphanage in Honduras, a school library and community learning center in Guatemala, a women’s clinic in Uganda, an entrepreneurial center in Mali, a school bag drive in Athens, healthcare outreach for the immigrant community, and the list goes on and on. What these projects have in common is their economic development focus and the leveraging of limited resources to achieve sustaining results. IPSO takes a multidisciplinary approach to developing strategic partnerships with UGA units and departments focused on public service and outreach-oriented international programs and activities. Through local, state, and federally-funded initiatives, the Office brings together UGA faculty, staff, and students with private sector, non-governmental organizations, and community organizations around the world to find collaborative solutions to complex issues. (http://www.uga.edu/internationalpso).

36

University of Georgia The University of Georgia, a land-grant and sea-grant university with state-wide commitments and responsibilities is the state's flagship institution of higher education. It is also the state's oldest, most comprehensive and most diversified institution of higher education. Its motto, "to teach, to serve and to inquire into the nature of things," reflects the university's role in the conservation and enhancement of the state's and nation's intellectual, cultural and environmental heritage. The University of Georgia is accredited by the Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools to award associate, bachelor's, master's and doctoral degrees. In addition, a number of the individual university departments, degree programs, and service functions are accredited by appropriate professional organizations. (www.uga.edu).

37

APPENDIX E - LIST OF SURVEY RESPONDENTS

Glenn C W Ames Armenia Director International Public Service & Outreach 706-542-7887 games@uga.edu http://www.uga.edu/internationalpso/armenia/index.html

Denise C . Lewis Cambodia Assistant Professor Family and Consumer Sciences 706-542-0254 dlewis@fcs.uga.edu http://www.fcs.uga.edu/ss/sa_cambodia.html

Peter Brosius Fiji Director Center for Integrative Conservation Research 706-542-3922 pbrosius@uga.edu http://www.pacific.uga.edu/programs/fiji-may.php

Uttiyo Raychadhuri Fiji Assistant Director UGA Study Abroad in the South Pacific Warnell School of Forestry & Natural Resources 706-542-6273 uttiyo@uga.edu http://www.pacific.uga.edu/programs/fiji-may.php

Carol Cotton Bulgaria Academic Professional, Undergraduate Field Experience Coordinator Health Promotion and Behavior College of Public Health 706.542.2804 cpcotton@uga.edu http://www.uga.edu/croatia/

Marianne Robinette Costa Rica Program Coordinator Department of Entomology 706-542-1238 entomolo@uga.edu http://www.uga.edu/costarica/program_summer_entomology.htm

Cheryl Dozier Ghana Associate Provost & Chief Diversity Officer Office of Institutional Diversity 706-583-8195 cdozier@uga.edu http://www.uga.edu/westafrican/

Sara H . Schweitzer Bulgaria Professor Wildlife Ecology and Management Warnell school of Forestry and Natural Resources 706-542-1150 schweitz@warnell.uga.edu http://www.uga.edu/bulgaria/

David L . Gast Ireland Professor, Department of Communication Sciences and Special Education College of Education (706) 542-5069 dlgast@uga.edu http://www.coe.uga.edu/saireland/

K er ry Steinberg Peru Graduate Assistant, Romance Languages 706-542-8582 kerrys@uga.edu http://www.venperu.org/EN/index.php

38

APPENDIX F – GSL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

Global Service Learning Best Practices Research Primary Sources:

Telephone/Onsite Survey Questions Date: Name: Program/Country: Semester # of Students How many years run? 1. How do you define global service learning (GSL)? What makes GSL different from

traditional study abroad programs? What makes GSL different from local service-learning? 2. What are the essential elements of your GSL program? Describe the service-learning activity

your students are engaged in. 3. What makes your GSL program unique? 4. What instructional tools have you used in your GSL program to link the service experience

with the learning outcomes? 5. What assessment tools do you use to measure outcomes, impact, success, etc. in your GSL

program? 6. Who are your on-campus and off-campus principal partners? 7. What challenges do you face or have faced in regards to GSL? How did you approach them? 8. What lesson(s) have you learned about GSL? 9. What would help you to provide a better GSL experience? (institutional resources,

professional development, etc.) 10. Are there any other issues that you have encountered that you think would be helpful to

others?

39

APPENDIX G - GLOBAL SERVICE LEARNING RESOURCES (ORGANIZATIONS)

American Council on Education: Center for International Initiatives

http://www.acenet.edu/Content/NavigationMenu/ProgramsServices/cii/index.htm

Campus Compact

http://www.compact.org/

Gulf South Summit – 2010

UGA

Institute for Global Education & Service Learning

www.igesl.org

International Partnership for Service Learning and Leadership

http://www.ipsl.org/

National Service-Learning Clearinghouse

http://www.servicelearning.org/

40

APPENDIX H - UGA GLOBAL SERVICE LEARNING PROGRAMS COMPARISON CHART Program Name/ Website

Country Program Director/Faculty Service-Learning Component

Dates Cost/ Comments

International Business & Relations http://www.uga.edu/internationalpso/armenia/index.html

Armenia Dr. Glenn CW Ames (Director, CAES) Habitat for Humanity – Building Homes

2007 Maymester

$2,100

Natural & Cultural Resources Based Tourism in Bulgaria http://www.uga.edu/bulgaria/

Bulgaria Dr. Sara H. Schweitzer (Director) Dr. James K. Reap (Environmental Design) Dr. Craig A. Miller (Natural Resources Recreation & Tourism) Dr. Asen Kirin (Art & Art History)

Ecotourism – National Parks

2007 – 2008 Maymester

$2,000

Intergenerational Studies in Cambodia http://www.fcs.uga.edu/ss/sa_cambodia.html

Cambodia Dr. Denise C. Lewis (Director, FCS) Collaboration with local organizations to teach children and teach adults – English and child development and business skills

2008 – 2009 Summer

$5,000 (Airfare included)

Entomology and Ornithology in Costa Rica http://www.uga.edu/costarica/program_summer_entomology.htm

Costa Rica Marianne Robinette (Coordinator/Director)

Creating collections of insects on displays for area schools.

2005 – 2009 Summer

$1,500 - $2,000

Sustaining Human Societies & the Natural Environment http://www.pacific.uga.edu/programs/fiji-may.php

Fiji Mike Tarrant (Director) Dr. Pete Brosius (CICR) Dr. Uttiyo Raychauduri (Warnell)

Painting a village school

2005 – 2009 Summer

$2,595/ $1,050

Summer in Ghana Study Abroad http://www.uga.edu/westafrican/

Ghana Dr. Cheryl Dozier (Director) Prof. Diane Edison (Studio Art) Dr. Patricia Hunt-Hurst (Textiles, Merchandizing and Interiors) Dr. Tony Lowe (Social Work) Dr. Bettye Smith (Workforce

Women’s Empowerment – shae Butter School Uniform Project Art Mural for

2001 – 2009 Summer

$3,200

41

Education, Leadership & social Foundations) Dr. Kaarim Traore (Comparative Literature) Prof. Michael Radyk (Fabric Design)

School Sugashee Village – Medical/Social work

Service Learning in Developmental Disabilities http://www.coe.uga.edu/saireland/

Ireland Dr. David L. Gast (Director) COPE Foundation – providing services for persons with developmental disabilities

2007 – 2009 Summer

$2,638

Society & Culture in Transition http://www.uga.edu/croatia/

Croatia Dr. Carol Cotton (Director, Health Promotion and Behavior) Dr. Keith Langston (Germanic and Slavic Studies) Dr. James K. Reap (College of Environment & Design) Dr. Jaroslav Tir (SPIA)

Possibilities: Community/ economic development, Refugees, women’s empowerment

2005 – 2009 Maymester

$2,400

VEN – Peru Volunteer & Education Network http://www.venperu.org/EN/index.php

Peru Kerry Steinberg Rural school – assist teaching English, etc. Animal shelter/community learning center Medical clinics School for Blind and disabled Children and Adults Boy’s Orphanage Organic Farm

2007 – 2009 Summer

$50 Suggested Contribution + Travel Expenses

42

APPENDIX I – PERSONAL PROMPTS

http://www.fanning.uga.edu/

Personal Reflection Question Prompts

The following are some prompts to help you in capturing your experiences:

What? This pertains to the substance of the experience and what happened to you. It deals with facts and leads naturally to interpretation.

What happened in this experience? What did I do? What did I learn?

So what? Pertains to the difference the experience made to you. It looks at the consequences of your experience and gives meaning to it.

What difference does this make? How is this important? What have I learned about myself?

Now what? This involves the process of taking lessons learned from the experience and reapplying them to other situations and the larger picture. It is a time for goal setting and long­term planning.

Where do I go from here? What will I do differently next time? What am I going to do about what I’ve learned?