Those of you familiar with the service-learning literature have likely seen the name Dr. Andrew Furco. He's responsible for, among many other publications, an often-cited figure that lays out the "distinctions among service programs." It highlights the fact that service-learning mutually benefits the student (service provider) and the community partner (service recipient). The figure also points out that service-learning is NOT the same as community service or internships and other types of experiential learning. I was fortunate enough to meet Dr. Furco two weeks ago on my very own campus. He had been brought to Wright State with some grant funds, and he took time to speak with faculty about service-learning scholarship (among other topics). I met with him in a small group setting to tell him about my work with service-learning, and he made some very valuable suggestions about future research that could be done in terms of library support for service-learning courses. One research idea he mentioned was to compare two high-impact practices - undergraduate research and service-learning. How would the librarian's role be similar or different in supporting those two high-impact practices. This idea was just off the top of his head - food for thought. This experience got me to thinking again about the social nature of research. It really is a conversation (OF COURSE). I've been fortunate enough to have been in the same room as service-learning experts, the people I cite all the time - George Kuh, Julie Hatcher, Robert Bringle, Patti Clayton, and now Andrew Furco. I've been able to add to the conversation a little bit in print, but also to speak with them in person has been pretty cool [nerd alert]! Of course most of what I've written has been contributed to the library literature, so at some point (maybe after a little more practice), I'll need to consider what I can contribute to the service-learning literature. There are a ton of opportunities for continuing the conversation.
Search UNI
