Session Information
11 SES 04 A, Career in Teaching: Teachers' Motivation and Professionalism
Paper Session
Contribution
The concern for youth civic commitment is shown in several recent years phenomena. On the one hand, educational systems of different countries have introduced civic or citizenship education in their official curricula, cross-curricular content and compulsory subjects, with diverse results (Davies and Chong, 2016; Johnson and Morris, 2012; MacLaughlin , 2000; Peterson, 2011). On the other hand, this interest concerns not only basic education, but also higher education, observing a change in the way the university links with the society in which it is located (Farnell, 2020). In this sense, the European Economic and Social Committee (2016) significantly has introduced the term “civic universities”, which goes beyond connections motivated by employment and economic growth, and underlines cultural and civic interconnection. Initiatives such as the TEFCE Project, whose objective is "To develop innovative and feasible policy tools at the university and European level for supporting, monitoring and assessing the community engagement of higher education institutions", the Living Knowledge Network (2023), the Foundation For Women in Science, or Horizon 2020 line 16: Science with and for Society, are some examples of this turn that higher education has been making.
Likewise, this scenario seems like responding to the alarm expressed by different authors, related with the questioning of the democratic system's quality. Jeffrey Stout (2004) warned of a progressive deterioration in the citizens' ethical-political training, which could pose a risk to democracy maintenance. More recently, Shoshana Zuboff (2018) finds in the current social technology a significant decrease in the citizens capacity for action, paradoxically hidden in the rhetoric of empowerment. For his part, Keith E. Whittington (2019) shows concern that the university is losing its status as an open space to dialogue, to exchange ideas and confrontate positions, typical of an academic community in a democratic setting.
In this situation, different initiatives arise from the institutions and university classrooms with pedagogical proposals focused on promoting the students' civic engagement. Service-Learning (S-L) is perhaps one of the most significant methodologies, that allows practical learning in social settings, while promoting the links with the nearby community, through a service that solves a real problem (Annette, 2005; Boston, 1997). Therefore, it represents an improvement both for the individuals themselves and for their social context (Arthur, Harrison and Taylor, 2015).
Such growing activity related to S-L, highlights the need to assess these programs and, specifically, the consequences, benefits and lessons that can be learnt, in order to improve the development of S-L proposals and the strengthening of this practice in education (Fuentes, Sirera and Redondo, 2022). But the adaptable and flexible nature of S-L, as well as its inherent ethical dimension (Alexander, 2016; Wright, Warren and Snow, 2020), gives rise to very heterogeneous proposals and interventions, which complicates the assessment and makes the tests standardization really difficult. Consequently, mixed assessment are needed, taking into account qualitative research that helps us to understand and explain the great diversity of capacities promoted by S-L.
The aim of this paper is to analyze the contributions of S-L methodology to the educator initial training, focusing on its capacity to promote ethical-civic engagement. Other critical aspects will also be analyzed by comparing four groups of different Degrees in Education that carried out projects with different social entities at Complutense University of Madrid, linked to curricular subjects.
Method
We follow a qualitative paradigm corresponding to a service-learning case study that has been carried out at the Faculty of Education, Complutense University of Madrid (Spain) during the academic year 2020-2021. A mixed method research has been used for data collection and analysis. First, in order to evaluate the S-L methodology, a validated quantitative likert-type questionnaire (León, Sanchez & Belando, 2020) was applied. Second, an exploratory and descriptive content analysis of students’ reflexive essays and focus groups was carried out. The sample group for the questionnaire consisted of 128 students from 4 different undergraduate degrees (Pedagogy, Primary Education, Pedagogy-Primary Education double degree, and Social Education Degree). The content analysis had a sample group that consisted of 139 students, with their corresponding reflective essays, which correspond to the total number of participants of the four focus groups. The data collected through the questionnaire was analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics 27, carrying out descriptive, inferential and correlation analyses. In the analysis of data, three dimensions were taken into account: training, learning, and service. An initial descriptive analysis was performed, afterwards correlational analysis were carried out in order to observe the relationship between the different dimensions and items. Finally, ANOVA and t-test analysis were made to see possible differences between variables such as gender or the degree to which they belong. Regarding the qualitative content analysis of the reflective essays and focus groups, a descriptive and exploratory design was followed. A coding process was carried out using Atlas.ti 22 software, in which a mixed category system was used: deductive and inductive. After the analysis a triangulation of the data obtained through the different techniques of data collection was carried out. The categories that we have obtained from it are: civic commitment, learning of curricular and experiential content through the service, teaching identity construction, teacher training impact, project evaluation, general satisfaction, transversal competencies acquisition, competential learning through theory-practice relationship, and consciousness about the relevance of ethical and civic values and emotions in education. Finally, the information from the qualitative and quantitative results was integrated which allowed us to deepen its interpretation.
Expected Outcomes
As a general conclusion of the study, we found that S-L methodology in the initial educators training improves their formation regarding different dimensions. Considering the quantitative analyses, the average scores stand out at a very high level in the three dimensions studied: impact on training, learning and service. In addition, there is a statistical correlation between them. Analyzing all the sub-dimensions, they also have high scores, highlighting the implied training in the S-L methodology. The development of communication skills is associated particularly strongly with a better perception of professional and personal development. Also, it is related to project planning. Moreover, project planning is essential for a better perception of the training implied in the methodology, professional development and participation in the service. Regarding the qualitative analysis, students show a better development of civic engagement, both as students and as future educators, thanks to the S-L methodology. They highlight the awareness of social commitment and responsibility as university students and particularly as education students. Another conclusion is that learning is different with service-learning than with a traditional methodology. It requires reflecting after the service to recognize the meaning of their learning deeping in the subject. On the other hand, carrying out the service in an activity close to their contexts increased their impact on them. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses, indicate differences between the students of diverse Degrees. However, the difference between the number of participants of each degree and the diversity of entities make it difficult to compare in this regard. Furthermore, this diversity of activities offers a clear vision of advantages and disadvantages of specific characteristics of different projects.
References
Alexander, H. A. (2016). Assessing virtue: measurement in moral education at home and abroad. Ethics and Education, 11(3), 310-325, Annette, J. (2005). Character, Civic Renewal and Service Learning for Democratic Citizenship in Higher Education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(3), 326-340. Arthur, J., Harrison, T. y Taylor, E. (2015). Building Character Through Youth Social Action. Research Report. Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues - University of Birmingham. Boston, B. (1997). Their best selves: Building character education and service learning together in the lives of young people. Council of Chief State School Officers. Davies, I. and Chong, E. (2016). Current challenges for citizenship education in England. Asian Education and Development Studies, 5(1), 20-36. European Economic and Social Committee (2016). Engaged universities shaping Europe. https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/our-work/opinions-information-reports/opinions/engaged-universities-shaping-europe Farnell, T. (2020). Community engagement in higher education. European Union. Fuentes, J. L., Sirera, A. Redondo, P. (2022). Towards a civically engaged teacher identity: qualitative analysis of a Service Learning project in the training of educators. En A. Gromkowska et al. (Ed.). In Search of Academic Excellence: Social Sciences and Humanities in Focus (pp. 83-107). Peter Lang. Johnson, L. and Morris, P. (2012). Critical citizenship education in England and France: a comparative analysis. Comparative Education, 48(3), 283-301. Living Knowledge (2023). Preamble https://livingknowledge.org/about-living-knowledge-network/ MacLaughlin, T. H. (2000). Citizenship Education in England: The Crick Report and Beyond. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 34:4, 541-570. León, V., Sánchez, S. y Belando, M. (2020). Diseño y validación de un cuestionario para evaluar la metodología Aprendizaje-Servicio. Estudios sobre Educación, 39, 247-266. Peterson, A. (2011). The common good and citizenship education in England: a moral enterprise? Journal of Moral Education, 40(1), 19-35. Stout, J. (2004). Democracy and Tradition. Princeton University Press. TEFCE (2018). Towards a European framework for Community Engagement in Higher Education. https://www.tefce.eu/project Wright, J. C., Warren, M. T. and Snow, N. (2020). Understanding virtue: theory and measure. Oxford University Press. Zuboff, S. (2018). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. PublicAffairs.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.