The United States K-12 public school system faces a dilemma with regard to teaching methodology. With the constant increase of diverse students entering K-12 public school systems, teacher’s jobs are more challenging. How are teachers supposed to teach a diverse classroom effectively? For decades, researchers have examined this dilemma and come to a variety of conclusions. One conclusion, and the focus of this paper, is a teaching strategy that allows students to find a real-world connection to the material taught in the classroom, a strategy that has been effective in Japan, one of the world’s top countries in education (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2007). For example, Mayer, Sims, and Tajika (1995) examined the comparison of how textbooks teach mathematical problem solving in Japan versus in the United States. Their findings suggest that mathematics teaching in Japan is in part more successful than the United States, because Japanese textbooks provide students with concrete analogies that connect the material being taught to familiar life situations, while textbooks in the United States do not. Thus, as teachers and current educational leaders, how do we change our teaching methodologies to adapt to the needs of an increasing diverse student population entering the K-12 public school system so that all students learn effectively? This paper addresses this question by introducing an intervention strategy known as service-learning in an attempt to build students’ connections with material taught in the classroom to real-world situations for purposes of learning efficacy for diverse student populations. However, this paper does not infer that this method is the sole intervention needed to solve this public school system issue; rather it suggests a method for small but significant educational reform.
Defining Service-Learning
There are numerous definitions of service-learning in the literature. For example, The National Society for Experiential Education (1994) defines service-learning as “any carefully monitored service experience in which a student has intentional learning goals and reflects actively on what he or she is learning throughout the experience,” while The Corporation for National Service (1990) has an even more specific definition, which is as follows:
The term “service-learning” means a method under which students or participants learn and develop through active participation in thoughtfully organized service that:
· is conducted in and meets the needs of a community;
· is coordinated with an elementary school, secondary school, institution of higher education, or community-service program and with the community;
· helps foster civic responsibility;
· is integrated into and enhances the (core) academic curriculum of the students, or the educational components of the community-service program in which the participants are enrolled; and
· provides structured time for the students or participants to reflect of the service experience.
However, for purposes of this paper, our definition is more simplistic. We will define service-learning, as adapted from Billig (2000), as a teaching strategy that clearly ties community-service experiences to classroom instruction. Service-learning will not focus on civic engagement like most of the research, but rather will focus on its importance related to learning for students from diverse populations.
Foundations for the Development of Service-Learning
There are many researchers involved in the development of service-learning. However, two researchers in particular have had a strong influence on the formation of this teaching strategy. They are John Dewey (1954), who was influential in the development of the Pragmatic philosophy, and Jean Piaget (1950), who developed the Theory of Cognitive Development. Furthermore, they, among several others, Lev Vygotsky, Jerome Bruner, and Ulrick Neisser, formed the basis of the constructivist theory of learning and instruction (Huitt & Hummel, 2003). However, for purposes of this paper, we will be discussing Dewey and Piaget with respect to the foundations of development for service-learning.
John Dewey
Dewey, along with two other American philosophers, Charles S. Peirce and William James, developed a new philosophy in the early 20th century called Pragmatism. It emphasized the practical application of ideas by testing them in human experience, which opposed earlier philosophical theories that focused on a metaphysical system. According to Pragmatists, ideas are not universal concepts and do not transcend human experience, rather, they are instruments for solving life’s problems (Gutek, 2004). This theory, in particular, is significant to education in the United States, because it fits well with the American outlook and temperament, especially our tendency for action, practicality, and experimentation (Gutek, 2004).
Dewey had significant influences on education with his variety of Pragmatism. His version is termed either Experimentalism or Instrumentalism. According to Experimentalism, “we think most accurately and completely when we use the experimental, or scientific, method to test an idea to see if it works, solves our problem, and brings about the results we want” (Gutek, 2004, p. 71). This is formulated in Dewey’s The Complete Act of Thought (Gutek, 2004), which will be discussed later.
Specifically, Pragmatists are concerned with ideas that differ from previous theories. First, with regard to metaphysics, Dewey believed the universe is in constant flux and change, and the methods for solving problems should be flexible. That is, individuals should arrive at flexible hypotheses or answers that can be revised, and reformulated to meet the changing situations during the course of human life. Second, with regard to epistemology, Dewey believed in what he termed experience. It is the process of interaction that occurs between the human and the environment. Therefore, humans’ essential problems exist between the transactions or interactions they have with their environment. Will these interactions enhance or sustain survival and make life satisfying? This is the question we, as humans, need to address. Third, with regard to axiology, Dewey and Pragmatists argue that human values arise as we find these survival enhancements and satisfying ways to live that enrich our experience. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the teacher to aid students in examining and clarifying their values. Lastly, with regard to logic, they rely on empirical verification, which validates ideas presented in human experience by scientifically testing them. This rejects deductive reasoning and is essentially inductive (Gutek, 2004).
In sum, Pragmatism has identified three important principles: (1) in order for our ideas to be validated, they need to be tested empirically in actual human experience; (2) experience results when the person has an interaction with his or her environment; and (3) during the course of experience or environmental interaction, the person encounters new challenges that block ongoing experience or activity (Gutek, 2004).
The Complete Act of Thought. Based upon the aforementioned principles, we can now discuss how we go about solving problems. According to Dewey, real thinking occurs when we use the scientific method to solve problems. The following is Dewey’s five-step adaptation of the scientific method, which he termed The Complete Act of Thought (Gutek, 2004):
1. Individuals are in a problematic situation when ongoing activity is blocked by running into something new and different, which is a “deviant” from our experience.
2. In order to figure out what is blocking our ongoing activity, we need to reflect on the situation and define the problem.
3. Once the problem is identified, we can begin to examine it. We can look back to our experiences and see how our problem compares, whether it is similar or different from what we have experienced. Here we can utilize our critical thinking and research skills by visiting the library or using the Internet to gather information or discuss our problem with close family and friends who have experienced it.
4. After research is completed, we can begin to think about potential ways to solve the problem by brainstorming alternative modes of action. Here we can work out the potential modes of action in our minds and think of potential consequences or outcomes, and more specific, which outcome has the most desirable consequences.
5. After all above steps have been carried out, we have a potential mode of action. However, it is in this step where we complete this process by choosing the best alternative and testing it by acting on it in hopes that this alternative brings about the desired outcome. If it does not, then we cannot move forward in our experience until it is solved. Therefore, in order to solve the problem, we need to review the process, make the needed changes, and try it again.
Therefore, based upon Dewey’s rendition of the scientific method, our thinking is complete when we can test our ideas. From this, we arrive at the most effective method of teaching and learning which is process-based problem solving. A method that can be applied to different types of problems that occur, no matter the magnitude. Hence, problem solving, according to the scientific method, requires individuals to act and judge a solution by its consequences (Gutek, 2004).
Educational Implications. As aforementioned, Dewey is a highlighted theorist because of his influence on the philosophical basis of service-learning within the larger scope of education. His philosophies of education differ than previous philosophies in terms of its goals and purposes of education, role of a school, and curriculum.
According to Dewey, genuine educational goals come from within a person, and from the person’s own activity in the environment. The sole goal of education is growth, which means “that a person is learning more effective, meaningful, and satisfying ways to live, in order to deal with a changing reality and direct the course of her or his own life” (Gutek, 2004, p. 76).
Dewey’s concept of the role of the school is that it serves as a social agency. A social agency that (a) simplifies the complexity of cultural and social heritage, (b) purifies the heritage by emphasizing positive elements, and (c) integrates the heritage. The school, itself, should be designed with the idea that teachers and students are a community who mutually are engaged in the learning process. It is a specialized environment where experiences are broken down, cleaned up, and equalized. Since the environment is inherently complex, experiences are broken down based upon students’ readiness and their own interests. Experiences are cleaned up when the school does not feed those experiences that are harmful to students and hinder their potential for growth. Lastly, experiences are equalized by showing students how one experience affects and can lead to another experience (Gutek, 2004).
With regard to curriculum, Dewey and other Pragmatists believe curriculum should not be planned. Rather, curriculum should be derived from students’ experiences or their interests, needs, and problems. According to Dewey, there are three stages of curriculum. First, making and doing, this makes learning direct and active. At this stage, students establish a problem, form hypotheses to resolve the problem, carry out the appropriate research, and act on the selected hypothesis to test it in experience. Second, history and geography, which involves students’ conceptions of space (place) and time (past-present-future). This is an important stage, because when students complete activities at this stage, they begin to understand these concepts in relation to human experience. In that, students learn that “things that happened, are happening, and will happen” (Gutek, 2004, p. 77) as well as the notion of settings and environments of human places as interrelationships of space. Lastly, the third stage is science, which refers to bodies of tested hypotheses in various areas of human cognition, research, and venture. It is in this stage when student’s make generalizations in which to base actions. However, note that these various sciences are not final or fixed truths; rather, they are tentative and are subject to future research and possible changes.
In conclusion, Dewey is an influential figure to service-learning because of the significance he placed on interaction with the environment to learning and the idea that education depended upon action (Terry, 2006). That is, his focus on active learning and learning being purpose-driven (Billig, 2000) was influential because it aided in the development of student’s critical thinking skills (Terry, 2006). Furthermore, Dewey contended that if students learned by experience, then they would not only gain knowledge, but would develop skills, habits, and attitudes necessary in solving a wide variety of problems. Simply, Dewey and Pragmatists, put the “learner in the learning” (Terry, 2006). That is, they involved the learner in the learning process, which for the first time, connected the student to their environment, and allowed the student to see how their interests, needs, or problems connected to their education. Hence, allowing students the opportunity to apply what they learned in class to real-world situations. Therefore, instead of the learner’s actions being interpreted by others, the learner is interpreting their own actions and determining the correct decision to be made based upon their own thought processes (Terry, 2006).
Jean Piaget
Piaget was one of the most influential researchers in the field of developmental psychology during the 20th century. His original training was in the areas of biology and philosophy. His main interests were in how we as organisms come to know, and that the distinguishing factor between human beings and animals is our ability to do “abstract symbolic reasoning” (Huitt & Hummel, 2003).
While working in Paris, Piaget became interested in how children think. He noticed the differences between young children and older children’s responses on the Binet IQ Test. This did not suggest to him that the younger children were dumber than the older children were, but rather, younger children responded to the questions differently because they thought differently. From this, Piaget developed the Theory of Cognitive Development, which focuses on the following two major aspects: (1) the process of coming to know, and (2) the stages we move through as we gradually acquire this ability (Huitt & Hummel, 2003).
Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development has significant influences on education, because of its explanation of children’s’ thinking processes and development. It provided a concrete tool for educators to understand how children thought according to age range.
Process of Cognitive Development. With Piaget’s work in the field of biology, he termed what he called intelligence as how an organism adapts to its environment. Behavior (i.e., adaptation to the environment), therefore, is controlled by mental organizations called schemes. Schemes are what individuals use to represent the world and designate action. This adaptation is motivated by a biological drive to obtain balance between schemes and the environment, which he termed equilibration (Huitt & Hummel, 2003).
Piaget posited that infants are born with schemes operating from the time they are born, which he called reflexes. Reflexes control behavior throughout life for other animals, but for human beings they are used differently. Infants use these reflexes to adapt to the environment, then as the infant adapts, these reflexes are quickly replaced with constructed schemes (Huitt & Hummel, 2003).
There are two processes used by human beings in an attempt to adapt to their environment. One is assimilation and the other is accommodation. Both are used throughout life, as an individual continually has to adapt to their environment in ways that are more complex. The first process, assimilation, is the process of twisting the environment so that it can be placed into the individual’s preexisting cognitive structures. For example, when an infant uses a sucking schema that was developed by sucking on a small bottle and uses this schema to attempt to suck on a larger bottle. The second process, accommodation, is the process of changing cognitive structures in order to accept something from the environment. For example, when a child needs to modify a sucking schema developed by sucking on a pacifier to one that would fit successfully for sucking on a bottle. Both of these processes are used simultaneously and alternatively during the course of an individual’s lifetime (Huitt & Hummel, 2003).
Furthermore, structures are formed when schemes become increasingly more complex throughout life, and become responsible for behaviors that are more complex. It follows deductive reasoning or general to specific logic. That is, as one’s structures become more complex, they become organized in a hierarchical manner (Huitt & Hummel, 2003).
Stages of Cognitive Development. Piaget identified four stages of cognitive development. Within each of these stages are several substages. For purposes of this paper, we will only address the four stages in general; each stage in its entirety will not be discussed in detail. The four stages are as follows:
1. Sensorimotor stage. From birth to age two years, the infant is centered on trying to make sense of the world. During this stage, an infant’s knowledge of the world is limited (but developing) and based upon sensory perceptions and motor activities. Behaviors are limited to simple motor responses caused by sensory stimuli (Wagner, 2005). By the end of this stage, children have acquired skills and abilities associated with memory, mobility, and language (Huitt & Hummel, 2003) in an attempt to learn more about their environment (Wagner, 2005).
2. Pre-operational stage. This stage occurs between ages two and six years. One of the hallmarks of this stage is language development (Wagner, 2005). Intelligence is demonstrated by the use of symbols, memory and imagination (Huitt & Hummel, 2003). However, children at this stage do not yet understand concrete logic and are unable to see the viewpoint of others, which he termed egocentrism (Wagner, 2005). This thinking dominates at this stage.
3. Concrete operational stage. This stage occurs approximately between ages seven and eleven years. In this stage, children gain a better understanding of mental operations (Wagner, 2005). Intelligence is demonstrated through logical and systematic manipulation of symbols related to concrete objects (Huitt & Hummel, 2003). That is, children begin thinking logically about concrete events, but have a difficult time understanding concepts that are abstract and hypothetical (Wagner, 2005). Therefore, operational thinking develops or children learn mental actions are reversible, and egocentric thought diminishes (Huitt & Hummel, 2003).
4. Formal operational stage. This stage occurs from approximately twelve years to adulthood. In this stage, individuals develop the ability to think about abstract concepts, and skills such as logical thought, deductive reasoning, and systematic planning begin to emerge (Wagner, 2005). In addition, egocentric thought briefly returns at the beginning of this stage (Huitt & Hummel, 2003).
Educational Implications. Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development has been influential in education, especially for pre-school and primary grades. As aforementioned, his theory was a major contributor to the foundation of constructivist learning. Two primary instructional techniques that have shown to be effective are discovery learning and supporting the developing interests of the child. Based upon this theory, it is recommended that teachers challenge student’s abilities instead of presenting material or information that it too far ahead of the child’s level. In addition, it is recommended that teachers use a wide range of concrete experiences to help the child learn (Huitt & Hummel, 2003), which was what Mayer, Sims, and Tajika (1995) found when they examined the differences between mathematical textbooks between Japan and the United States. Japanese textbooks were more successful with regard to student learning in part, because they included many concrete analogies that allowed students to apply what they were learning to real-world situations.
Summary
Therefore, Dewey contributed the “hands-on” experience and Piaget contributed the “minds-on” experience to service-learning (Billig, 2004, p.1), which are the foundations of this teaching strategy.
Service-Learning Efficacy
Service-learning as a teaching strategy has the significant potential to increase learning for a variety of student populations, and in turn, also contributes to enhancing community life (Kielsmeier, Scales, Roehlkepartain, & Neal, 2004). However, the focus, as aforementioned, is on student learning not civic engagement.
When service-learning is designed and implemented appropriately, it has the capability to lead students to make connections between the content they are learning in the classroom to real-world life experiences (Soslau & Yost, 2007), especially for younger students (Johnson, 2002; Marzano, 2003; and Wiggins & McTighe, 1998). Research suggests its effectiveness, because it involves problem-based learning and it connects students to real-world social dilemmas. It provides students the opportunity for effective, meaningful learning and problem-solving (Soslau & Yost, 2007).
Service-learning has been linked to increasing student academic performances. For example, Soslau and Yost (2007) examined three factors of service-learning in two urban fifth grade classes. These three factors are as follows: (1) gains in student’s ability to link curriculum to real-world connections, (2) increases of student’s benchmark performances, and (3) increases of student’s attendance and decreases in suspension occurrences that indicates enhanced motivation. Their findings suggest that for all three factors, the experimental group improved significantly as compared to the control group. With regard to the first factor, students in the experimental group did make more real-world connections to their class learning. In addition, they were able to retain their ability to make real-world connections in the academic year that followed. Second, with regard to the second factor, students in the experimental group showed that service-learning had more of a positive impact on their academic achievement. Third, with regard to the last factor, students in the experimental group had increased attendance, 1.79 percent higher, and it was demonstrated that students in this group were less likely to be suspended. It should be noted that for the last factor, Soslau and Yost (2007) assumed that showing up to class and lack of suspension occurrences implied increased motivation or a desire to learn.
Wyatt and Peterson (2008) demonstrated similar findings with regard to academic achievement as Soslau and Yost (2007) with some differences. Wyatt and Peterson (2008) examined students of all levels, kindergarten to college. Their focus was related to health education and promoting its importance. They found that implementation of service-learning in a health education classroom was effective. It enhanced students’ knowledge and advocacy of health literacy standards by linking classroom content to experiential experience.
Another example of service-learning efficacy is a study conducted by Muscott (2000). Muscott (2000) examined the efficacy of service-learning for students with emotional or behavioral disorders across eleven K-12 programs. The findings were consistent with previous research on the effects of service-learning for K-12 youth without disabilities. The author suggests that there is further research needed on service-learning that focuses on assessment of student learning outcomes, however, despite the lack of quantitative data, there was one prominent finding for almost every service-learning program examined: “Participants, their teachers, their parents, and their community supervisors overwhelmingly agree that their [service-learning] programs are worthwhile, useful, enjoyable, and powerful learning experiences” (Conrad & Hedin, 1991, p. 545).
Furthermore, The National Service-Learning Cooperative (1998) states that there are eleven essential elements that occur when service-learning is implemented effectively. These elements are summarized as follows:
1. Clear educational goals are set and require the application of concepts, content, and skills from academic disciplines, and involve students in the construction of their own knowledge.
2. Students are engaged in tasks that widen and challenge them cognitively and developmentally.
3. Assessment is used to enhance student learning as well as to record and evaluate how successful students have met content and skill standards.
4. Students are engaged in service tasks that have clear goals, meet genuine needs in the school or community, and have significant consequences for themselves and others.
5. Formative and summative evaluation is employed in a systematic evaluation of the service effort and its outcome.
6. Student voices is maximized in selecting, designing, implementing, and evaluating the service project.
7. Diversity is valued as demonstrated by its participants, its practice, and its outcomes.
8. Communication and interaction with the community is promoted, and partnerships and collaboration are encouraged.
9. Students are prepared in all aspects of their service work. Students possess a clear understanding of tasks and roles as well as skills and information required by the tasks; awareness of safety precautions; and knowledge about and sensitivity to the people with whom they will be working.
10. Student reflection takes place before, during, and after service; uses multiple methods that encourage critical thinking; and is a central force in the design and fulfillment of curricular objectives.
11. Multiple methods are designed to acknowledge, celebrate, and further validate students’ service work.
In conclusion, service-learning has shown to be effective for diverse student populations. However, future research is needed.
Teachers as K-12 Leaders (Case Study)
There has been much research conducted on the motivations and experiences of faculty who implement service-learning at higher education institutions, however, limited research has been conducted on the motivations of K-12 teachers (Krebs, 2008). Therefore, in this section, we present the characteristics needed for K-12 teachers to be effective catalysis’s in implementing this strategy. We label these teachers as teacher leaders, because of the effort, rapport, support, and initiative they took in undertaking a service-learning program at their school. Furthermore, it should be noted that only one case study example was included simply due to the lack of research on this topic.
Krebs (2008) conducted a study that focused on motivation of K-12 teachers to initiate a service-learning program. Participants included six teachers in K-12 public schools in Ohio and the author whom is a former high school teacher. Participants had varying years of teaching experience and varying degrees of experience implementing this strategy. There were four phases. During the first three phases, participants went through a series of interviews. In the last phase, the interviewer transcribed all interviews and coded the transcriptions.
Three major themes emerged from the interviews that describe the experience of these teacher leaders with regard to the implementation of service-learning. The first theme was connections. Teachers repeatedly mentioned the importance of the connections they made when planning and implementing service-learning projects. Connections with other teachers, administrators, students, and parents, connections made with the curriculum (i.e., links between service and academic learning), and connections made with members of the community (Krebs, 2008).
The second theme was resonance in the heart of the teacher. Teachers claimed that this resonance comes from a deep, personal belief about the importance of making a positive difference in the world and teaching this belief to students. As one teacher stated, “You have got to do things for the goodness of mankind” (Krebs, 2008, p. 144). In addition, teachers claimed that resonance comes from three other places. First, from their personal experiences with role models (e.g. their mother, father, teacher, etc.). Second, from their professional development experiences. Third, from mentoring and motivating other teachers (Krebs, 2008).
The third and final theme was the right fit with teaching philosophy and style. Krebs (2008) found in this theme the importance of creating a well-balanced, harmonious relationship between service-learning and a teacher’s student-centered philosophy and experiential teaching style. Teachers valued the importance of educating children to be functioning members of society, connecting students to their surrounding community, and helping students find meaning and purpose in their lives. They viewed this as their responsibility to teach students the importance of the link between learning and purpose, between students and society (Krebs, 2008).
In sum, the teachers in this study were motivated to initiate service-learning for both personal and professional reasons. By implementing this method, they found unique connections with their students, with other teachers, with parents, administrators, the curriculum, and with the community. They found this method particularly useful for their at-risk students’ desire to value learning (Krebs, 2008). Therefore, teachers that exemplify these characteristics are leaders in that they are leading our children in the direction to be future leaders themselves.
Limitations of Service-Learning
There are several limitations of service-learning other than those previously mentioned. First, there is not much research base to support the effectiveness of programming (Terry, 2006). Bradley (2003) believed this to be attributed to practitioners not always linking program design and assessment to existing developmental and learning theories. Second, it is often difficult to attain accurate information about a service-learning program. Student learning outcomes are not pinpointed or as accurate as needed, which does not satisfy current accountability issues (Terry, 2006). Third, even though this strategy has taken a developmental approach, there needs to be more research examining the social, emotional, and moral development of students at different levels of service-learning (Terry , 2006). Lastly, service-learning programs are in need of becoming fads if efforts towards sustainability are not met (Terry, 2006), especially in our present day budget climate. These limitations seem to be consistent across the literature, but do not encompass all limitations of using this strategy.
Conclusion
As posed at the beginning of this paper, we addressed the question: as teachers and current educational leaders, how do we change our teaching methodologies to adapt to the needs of an increasing diverse student population entering the K-12 public school system so that all students learn effectively? An attempt to answer this question was made by discussing the efficacy of service-learning as a teaching strategy. The goal was to show that service-learning is in part effective because it builds students’ connections with material taught in the classroom to real-world situations. However, this paper did not infer that this method is the sole intervention needed to solve this public school system issue; rather it suggests a method for small but significant educational reform.
We defined service-learning as a teaching strategy that clearly ties community-service experiences to classroom instruction. Primarily, our focus was on the importance of this strategy with regard to student learning, personally, socially, cognitively and developmentally, across diverse populations, rather than the focus being on civic engagement like many other studies. John Dewey and Jean Piaget were highlighted because of their significant contributions to this teaching strategy.
From the empirical support provided, we conclude that service-learning is an effective teaching strategy, when used appropriately, for students of all ages and diversity. In addition, we introduced a case study example of the characteristics teachers need in order to implement this strategy successfully. We termed these teachers teacher leaders, because of the effort, rapport, support, and initiative they took to undertake a service-learning program at their school.
Despite the limitations of service-learning, research has shown its effectiveness. However, further research is needed to support its implementation with regard to learning for diverse student populations. We conclude this paper with a statement from Soslau and Yost (2007), “Students who are actively engaged in their own learning take ownership of it and thus are more motivated to learn. The personal investment students make as a result of their service-learning project provides for a more powerful learning opportunity” (p. 52).
References
Billig, S. H. (2000). Research on K-12 school-based service-learning: The evidence builds. Phi Delta Kappan, 81, 658-664.
Billig, S. H. (2004). Research matters. (Issue 8: Talk it up). Retrieved from http://www.service-learningpartnership.org/publications/archives.cfm?archive=tui.
Bradley, L. R. (2003). Using developmental and learning theory in the design and evaluation of K-16 service-learning programs. In Billig & A. S. Waterman (Eds.), Studying service-learning: Innovations in education research methodology (pp. 47-72). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Conrad, D., & Hedin, D. (1991). School-based community service: What we know from research and theory. Phi Delta Kappan, 72, 743-749. In Muscott, H. S. (2000). A review and analysis of service-learning programs involving students with emotional/behavioral disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 23(3), 346-368.
Corporation for National Service. (1990). National and Community Service Act of 1990. In Billig, S. H. (2000). Research on K-12 school-based service-learning: The evidence builds. The Phi Delta Kappan, 81(9), 658-664.
Dewey, J. (1954). The public and its problems. Athens, OH: Swallow Press.
Gutek, G. L. (2004). Philosophical and ideological voices in education. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Huitt, W., & Hummel, J. (2003). Piaget's theory of cognitive development. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cogsys/piaget.html.
Johnson, E. (2002). Contextual teaching and learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Kielsmeier, J. C., Scales, P. C., Roehlkepartain, E. C., & Neal, M. (2004). Community service and service-learning in public schools. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 13(3), 138-143.
Krebs, M. M. (2008). Service-learning: What motivates K-12 teachers to initiate service-learning projects? Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, 10(1 & 2), 135-149.
Marzano, R. (2003). What works in schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum and Development.
Mayer, R. E., Sims, V. & Tajika, H. (1995). A comparison of how textbooks teach mathematical problem solving in Japan and the United States. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 443-460.
Muscott, H. S. (2000). A review and analysis of service-learning programs involving students with emotional/behavioral disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 23(3), 346-368.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2007). Trends in international mathematics and science study (TIMSS). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/timss/results07.asp.
National Society for Experiential Education. (1994). Partial list of experiential learning terms and their definitions. Raleigh, NC. In Billig, S. H. (2000). Research on K-12 school-based service-learning: The evidence builds. The Phi Delta Kappan, 81(9), 658-664.
Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Soslau, E. G. & Yost, D. S. (2007). Urban service-learning: An authentic teaching strategy to deliver a standards-driven curriculum. Journal of Experiential Education, 30(1), 36-53.
Terry, A. (2006). A K-12 developmental service-learning typology. International Journal of Learning, 12(9), 321-330.
Wagner, K. V. (2005). Piaget’s stages of cognitive development. About.com. Retrieved from http://psychology.about.com/od/piagetstheory/Piagets_Stages_of_Cognitive_Development.htm.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum and Development.
Wyatt, T. J. & Peterson, F. L. (2008). Promoting social and health advocacy in the classroom through service-learning. The Health Educator, 40(2), 77-81.
No comments:
Post a Comment