What Psychology Students Want From Service-Learning

Abstract

Background:

Limited research has examined how service-learning (SL) outcomes align with learning goals proposed for the undergraduate psychology major by the APA Board of Educational Affairs Task Force on Psychology Major Competences.

Objective:

To obtain student perspectives of SL, and to evaluate learning and inform curriculum development of SL specific to psychology learning goals.

Method:

Undergraduate psychology students (N = 400) participated in a concurrent mixed-methods survey examining empathy, civic engagement, and professional identity between students who had and had not taken an upper-division SL course.

Results:

SL students reported increased engagement with APA learning goals of Ethical and Social Responsibility and Professional Development compared to students who did not take SL. SL students scored higher on civic engagement behaviors and professional identity. Students reported wanting more exposure to a range of psychology subdisciplines, various service opportunities, and multicultural diversity to support professional development.

Conclusion:

SL is a high-impact teaching practice that aligns with psychology learning goals.

Teaching Implications:

Findings informed the development of a generalist psychology SL course that introduced students to different domains of psychology. We discuss how to integrate learning activities to increase multicultural and other awareness, motivate social justice action, enhance career clarification, and increase professional self-efficacy.

Keywords

service learning psychology student learning psychology learning outcomes

Service learning (SL) is a high-impact practice that places learning and teaching in the context of the community; it is defined as an “educational experience in which students participate in an organized service activity that meets identified community needs and reflect on the service activity in such a way as to gain further understanding of the course content, a broader appreciation of the discipline, and an enhanced sense of civic responsibility” (Bringle & Hatcher, 1995, p. 112).

Thus, SL is well-positioned to meet educational goals of the psychology major (American Psychological Association [APA], 2013); however, limited research has examined the effect of SL on learning outcomes in psychology to inform the integration of SL into the psychology curriculum. For example, in a meta-analysis on the effects of SL across 103 independent samples, the majority of studies (about 77%) were from disciplines other than psychology or a related discipline (Conway et al., 2009), and therefore, curricular recommendations are often extrapolated from data on students mostly from disciplines outside of psychology.

Overall, research has found the use of SL in undergraduate courses is associated with positive academic, personal, social, and citizenship outcomes for students (Celio et al., 2011; Conway et al., 2009; Novak et al., 2007; Warren, 2012). Studies have found SL enhances the development of personal efficacy (Astin et al., 1999), personal identity (Driscoll et al., 1996), moral development (Boss, 1994), and interpersonal skills (Driscoll et al., 1996); reduces stereotyping (Astin et al., 1999); and increases social responsibility (Eyler et al., 1997), empathy (Everhart, 2016; Wilson, 2011) and exam scores (Lundy, 2007). These research studies suggest SL experiences have a positive impact on factors related to students’ personal, academic, and professional lives, which align with learning goals for the undergraduate psychology major (APA, 2013).

The APA Board of Educational Affairs Task Force on Psychology Major Competencies outlines five comprehensive educational goals to describe and develop high-quality undergraduate programs in psychology, including Knowledge Base in Psychology (Goal 1), Scientific Inquiry and Critical Thinking (Goal 2), Ethical and Social Responsibility in a Diverse World (Goal 3), Communication (Goal 4), and Professional Development (Goal 5). SL can be integrated throughout the psychology curriculum to contribute to learning in all five of these learning goal domains for the undergraduate major (Bringle et al., 2016). In particular, SL experiences closely align with Goal 3 and Goal 5.

APA Goal 3 emphasizes developing values that will contribute to building a society responsive to the world’s increasing diversity and social concerns (APA, 2013). Achieving this goal could be facilitated by development of greater empathic understanding and civic engagement. Empathy refers to the ability to understand how another person is feeling, and this can include vicariously experiencing another person’s feelings and thoughts from the past or present (Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 2018). Lundy (2007) found students who participated in a SL component within a psychology course demonstrated increased emotional empathy, though there is less research on the ways SL experiences may be related to social empathy (Segal et al., 2013). Civic Engagement has been defined in multiple ways (Alder & Googin, 2005), but for the purposes of this study we define civic engagement as a set of attitudes and behaviors intended to strengthen the community and make positive social change. Civic engagement, as a curricular outcome, has remained largely unaddressed in research; research is needed to investigate the impact of SL experiences on development of values for active, engaged civic participation (Saltmarsh, 2005).

APA Goal 5 involves developing professional skills and values that optimize success in a chosen career after graduation (APA, 2013). It is important to examine the impact of SL on professional identity, especially when formal internship placements may not be widely available to undergraduate students. SL experiences, as opposed to isolated intellectualized learning, are more likely to get students intellectually, personally, and interpersonally involved in content and community issues in a way that integrates these experiences into their identity (Bringle et al., 2015). Research has found undergraduate SL experiences are positively associated with involvement in service-related careers among alumni, above that accounted for by community service (Fenzel & Peyrot, 2005).

The purpose of this study is to utilize a concurrent mixed methods design to replicate and extend previous research on SL outcomes for psychology students to inform curriculum development of a psychology specific SL course. At the institution where this study was conducted, institutionalization of SL (Bringle & Hatcher, 2000) is represented at the university-level by the campus mission, at the faculty-level as it is integrated into course curriculum and scholarship on SL, and at the student-level through required SL classes of all upper-division students who participate in an average of 30 hr of service. SL courses are offered by a number of instructors and faculty, and are distributed within and across departments and programs at the institution. Notably, all SL-certified courses specify learning outcomes needed to be achieved in the SL course, focusing on: (a) self- and social-awareness, (b) service and social responsibility, (c) community and social justice, and (d) multicultural community building/civic engagement. Although psychology majors are required to take a SL course, there were no SL courses offered in the psychology department; students took a wide range of courses across other disciplines. The psychology department was moving toward offering a SL course, and gathering data on outcomes and experiences was an important step in this process.

Thus, we aim: (a) to examine whether SL experiences facilitate greater achievement in APA Learning Goals 3 and 5 compared to the other three learning goals (APA, 2013), (b) to affirm indices of empathy, civic engagement, and professional identity are higher among psychology students who have taken a SL course compared to those who have not, and (c) to analyze student feedback of their SL course experience to inform curriculum development.

Method

Participants

Participants consisted of 400 undergraduate psychology majors and alumni, the majority of who were currently enrolled students (67.25%; n = 269); 41 were lower-division students and 228 were upper-division students. Approximately 30% were alumni of the undergraduate psychology program at the university (2014-2017), and four participants did not identify their class standing. Response rates were 35.7% for enrolled majors and 11.3% for alumni with active emails. Approximately half of the participants were transfer students (51.6%; n = 199). There was a fairly even split between participants who had (n = 177) and had not (n = 182) completed an upper-division SL course. For those who had completed an upper-division SL course, courses were taken in the following departments: Service Learning (n = 32), Social and Behavioral Sciences (n = 15), Kinesiology (n = 7), Humanities and Communication (n = 7), Visual and Performing Arts (n = 7), Global Studies (n = 3), Business (n = 3), Biology (n = 3), various other departments (n = 7), and 93 students were uncertain about which department they took their SL course in or declined to answer this question. Participants were predominantly female (n = 332, 83%), heterosexual (n = 327, 81.8%), Hispanic/Latino (n = 182, 45.5%) or White (n = 122, 30.5%), and single (n = 178, 44.5%) or dating (n = 99, 24.8%). There was a range in household incomes from $15,000 or less (n = 94, 23.5%) to $50,000 or more (n = 98, 24.5%). The average age of participants was 24.84 years (SD = 6.74), ranging from 18 to 69 years. Those who completed the SL course were older (M = 26.73, SD = 7.01), compared to those who had not completed the SL course (M = 22.87, SD = 5.78), t(355) = 5.67, p < .001; they were also more likely to be alumni of the psychology program at the university, χ²(5) = 212.13, p < .001 and married, χ²(7) = 37.18, p < .001. There were no other significant differences in demographics between participants who had and had not completed a SL course (ps > .05).

Measures

APA learning outcomes

The authors developed a 15-item questionnaire that maps onto the APA Guidelines for the Psychology Major (APA, 2013; see Online Appendix A) to assess engagement in the five learning goals among students who completed an upper-division SL course. The measure includes five subscales, each corresponding to one learning goal assessed by three items. Each subscale taps the range of explicit student learning outcomes identified in the APA Guidelines. Participants are asked to identify how often they participated in each learning outcome during their SL experience: Never (1), Rarely (2), Occasionally (3), A Moderate Amount (4), A Great Deal (5). Subscale scores are created by averaging item responses, with higher scores indicating more engagement with the learning outcome during the students’ SL experience. Internal consistency for each of the subscales was: α = .88 (Goal 1: knowledge base in psychology), α = .83 (Goal 2: scientific inquiry and critical thinking), α = .62 (Goal 3: ethical and social responsibility in a diverse world), α = .75 (Goal 4: communication), α = .75 (Goal 5: professional development).

Empathy

The 15-item Interpersonal and Social Empathy Index (ISEI; Segal et al., 2013) was used to assess macro perspective taking (e.g., “I believe government should protect the rights of minorities”) with five items, cognitive empathy (e.g., “I can consider my view and another person’s point of view at the same time”) with four items, self-other awareness (e.g., “I am aware of what other people think of me”) with three items, and affective response (e.g., “When I see someone receive a gift that makes them happy, I feel happy myself”) with three items. Participants were asked to rate how closely a list of items reflected their feelings or beliefs using a six-point scale from never (1) to always (6). Total scores for each subscale are computed by summing item responses, with higher scores indicating higher levels of interpersonal and social empathy. Internal consistency for the four subscales ranged from .64 (affective response) to .77 (macro perspective taking) in the development sample (Segal et al., 2013). Internal consistencies in this study were in similar range, from .65 (self-other awareness) to .75 (cognitive empathy).

Civic engagement

The Civic Engagement Scale (CES; Doolittle & Faul, 2013) is a 14-item measure for use in educational settings that assesses attitudes (e.g., “I believe I should make a difference in my community”) with eight items and behaviors (e.g., “I participate in discussions that raise issues of social responsibility”) affected by a SL experience with six items to assess indices of civic engagement. Participants were asked to rate the level to which they Disagree (1) or Agree (7) with each statement. Total scores for each subscale are computed by summing item responses, with higher scores indicating greater civic engagement. Internal consistency in the development sample was high, ranging from .85 (behaviors) to .91 (attitudes). Internal consistencies in this study were in a similar range, from .89 (behaviors) to .91 (attitudes).

Professional identity

The Professional Identity Survey (PIS; Chin Pei, 2014) is a measure to assess professional identity based on five domains: knowledge about professional practices, having the professional as a role model, experience with the profession, preference for a particular profession, and professional self-efficacy. The PIS was developed in a sample of students being prepared to become new practitioners in their chosen field. Student participants were asked to identify the response that most accurately identified their experience on a scale from Never True (1) to Definitely True (5). For the purposes of this study, only the 5-item subscales for experience with the profession (e.g., “I follow developments in the industry in newspapers and on television”) and professional self-efficacy (e.g., “I am sure I will have no problems dressing and behaving professionally in my industry”) were used to assess ‘psychology’ professional identity, as these are most in-line with constructs that would be relevant for a SL experience. Total scores for each subscale are computed by summing item responses, with higher scores indicating higher levels of professional identity. Internal consistency in this sample ranged from .60 (professional self-efficacy) to .70 (experience with the profession).

Procedure

Student invitations to participate in this concurrent triangulation mixed-methods study were extended to all current psychology majors (796 students; 35.7% response rate) at the authors’ university and past 3-year alumni with active emails (1,024 alumni; 11.3% response rate). Participants were recruited via university-registered email and flyers posted at the university. This study was approved by the university’s Institutional Review Board. Students accessed the online survey with a hyperlink directing them to a web-based survey on Qualtrics. Participants consented online by clicking the appropriate button directing them to the online questionnaires that took approximately 30 min to complete. Students completed a series of validated measures (for quantitative analysis) and answered open-ended questions (for qualitative analysis). Twenty-five participants were randomly selected to receive a $20 gift card for their participation.

Quantitative Data Analysis

Data was exported from Qualtrics online survey software into IBM SPSS Version 24, which was used for statistical analyses. Descriptive statistics examined demographic information and average engagement in APA learning goals. Paired-samples t tests examined differences in engagement with APA Goal 3 compared to APA Goal 1, 2, and 4, as well as APA Goal 5 compared to APA Goal 1, 2, and 4 among those who completed upper-division SL. To control for familywise error rate, statistical significance was determined with a Bonferroni Correction, setting statistical significance at p < .017 (.05/3 subscale comparisons).

To examine whether taking a SL course was related to indices of empathy (macro perspective taking, cognitive empathy, self-other awareness, affective response), civic engagement (attitudes, behaviors), and professional identify (experience with the profession, professional self-efficacy), eight hierarchical linear regression analyses were conducted. Ethnicity (collapsed: Hispanic [n = 182], White [n = 122], Other [n = 84]) and SES were covariates entered on step one to control for the potential effects of these demographic variables on dependent variables of empathy, civic engagement, and professional identity. On Step 2, the independent variable SL course (dummy coded as: 0 = not taken, 1 = taken) was entered to examine the effect of taking a SL course on dependent variables, over and above ethnicity and SES. To control for familywise error rate, statistical significance was determined with a Bonferroni Correction within each dependent variable category based on the number of subfactors within the category, which ranged from two (civic engagement and professional identity p < .025) to four (empathy p < .013).

Qualitative Data Analysis

Data was exported from Qualtrics online survey software into NVivo Analysis software for qualitative analyses. Responses to the following questions were analyzed to gather greater depth about student perspectives to expand upon the quantitative results: (1) “What did you gain from your service learning course?” (for those who completed SL) and “What would you like to gain from a psychology service learning course?” (for those who had not completed SL), (2) “How did service learning contribute to your career goals?” (for those who completed SL) and “How would you like service learning to be tied to your career goals?” (for those who had not completed SL), and (3) “What suggestions do you have for how to make the course relevant to your major?” (asked of all participants). The research team followed the steps of inductive thematic analysis outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006): (a) read and immersed self in data, (b) generated codes, (c) identified and reviewed themes, and (d) defined and named themes. Participant responses were independently coded by at least two student researchers, and consensus was reached with a third coder (second author). The undergraduate research team consisted of four culturally diverse undergraduate female students, two who had completed their upper-division SL course and two who had not. The research team consistently reflected on biases and expectations while challenging interpretations via questions and comparisons of themes. Researchers maintained a data log and documented choices regarding themes along with example quotes to confirm the themes were rooted in the data.

Results

APA Undergraduate Learning Goals

Mean item ratings for the degree to which students engaged as part of their SL experience in each learning outcome among the five learning goals in the APA Guidelines (APA, 2013) are reported in Table 1. Consistent with hypotheses, paired-samples t-tests showed students who completed upper-division SL engaged more with learning outcomes in APA Goal 3 (Ethical and Social Responsibility in a Diverse World; M = 11.60, SD = 2.68) than Goal 1 t(129) = 13.25, p < .001, d = 1.06, Goal 2 t(122) = 14.78, p < .001, d = 1.33, and Goal 4 t(118) = 12.12, p < .001, d = 0.98, even after correcting for familywise error rate and setting statistical significance at p < .017 (.05/3 subscale comparisons). Paired samples t-tests showed students who completed an upper-division SL course engaged more with learning outcomes in APA Goal 5 (Professional Development; M = 12.99, SD = 2.21) than learning outcomes in Goal 1 t(138) = 15.31, p < .001, d = 1.61, Goal 2 t(129) = 17.73, p < .001, d = 1.91, and Goal 4 t(122) = 15.40, p < .001, d = 1.55, even after correcting for familywise error rate and setting statistical significance at p < .017 (.05/3 subscale comparisons).

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics for APA Learning Goals Among Service Learner Students.

APA Learning Goals	Mean Item Average	Standard Deviation
One: Knowledge Base	2.77	1.15
Two: Critical Thinking	2.50	1.14
Three: Ethical and Social Responsibility in a Diverse World	3.87	0.89
Four: Communication	2.90	1.07
Five: Professional Development	4.33	0.74

Note. N = 177. Participants were asked to identify how often they participated in each learning outcome during their SL experience on the following rating scale: Never (1), Rarely (2), Occasionally (3), A Moderate Amount (4), A Great Deal (5).

Empathy, Civic Engagement, and Professional Identity Learning Outcomes

Results showed taking a SL course was not related to macro-perspective taking, cognitive empathy, affective response, or self-other awareness (see Table 2) when controlling for ethnicity and SES, as well as correcting for familywise error rate using a Bonferroni Correction and setting statistical significance at p < .013 (.05/4 subscale comparisons). After controlling for ethnicity and SES, taking a SL course was associated with more civic engagement behaviors (p = .002; see Table 3) and more experience with the profession (p < .001; see Table 4).

Table 2.

Hierarchical Linear Regression Analysis Predicting Empathy.

Indices of Empathy	B	SE·B	β	Adj. R²	F for ΔR²
Macro Perspective Taking				−.01
Step 1:
Ethnicity	0.12	0.21	.03
SES	-0.003	0.09	-.002
Step 2:				.000	0.98
Ethnicity	0.11	0.21	.03
SES	−0.01	0.09	−.003
Taken SL	0.54	0.33	.09
Cognitive Empathy
Step 1:				.01
Ethnicity	0.35	0.18	.10
SES	0.01	0.08	.01
Step 2:				.09	2.00
Ethnicity	0.33	0.18	.10
SES	0.01	0.08	.01
Taken SL	0.41	0.28	.08
Self-Other Awareness
Step 1:				.01
Ethnicity	0.26	0.17	.07
SES	0.16	0.08	.11*
Step 2:				.03	4.18*
Ethnicity	0.24	0.17	.07
SES	0.16	0.08	.11*
Taken SL	0.62	0.27	.12*
Affective Response
Step 1:				.002
Ethnicity	.24	.15	.09
SES	−.03	.07	−.02
Step 2:				−.001	0.43
Ethnicity	.25	.15	.09
SES	−.03	.07	−.02
Taken SL	−.05	.24	−.01

Note. N = 177. ⁺Bonferroni correction p < .013, *p < .05.

Table 3.

Hierarchical Linear Regression Analysis Predicting Civic Engagement.

Indices of Civic Engagement	B	SE·B	β	Adj. R²	F for ΔR²
Attitudes				−.003
Step 1:	−0.51	0.57	−.05
Ethnicity	−0.04	0.25	−.01
SES
Step 2:				.005	0.18
Ethnicity	−0.04	0.25	−.01
SES	−0.04	0.25	−.01
Taken SL	1.82	0.90	.11*
Behaviors
Step 1:				−.001
Ethnicity
SES
Step 2:				.023	3.76*
Ethnicity	0.25	0.52	.03
SES	0.25	0.23	.06
Taken SL	2.56	0.82	.16**

Note. N = 177. **p < .01, ⁺Bonferroni correction p < .025, *p < .05.

Table 4.

Hierarchical Linear Regression Analysis Predicting Professional Experience.

Indices of Professional Development	B	SE B	β	Adj. R²	F for ΔR²
Experience with the Profession				−.004
Step 1:
Ethnicity	0.23	.034	.04
SES	0.04	0.15	.02
Step 2:				.081	11.16
Ethnicity	0.12	0.33
SES	0.06	0.15	.02
Taken SL	2.97	0.52	.02
Professional Self-Efficacy			.30***
Step 1:				−.005
Ethnicity	0.01	0.18	.004
SES	0.03	0.08	.01
Step 2:				−.003	0.63
Ethnicity	0.00	0.18	.00
SES	0.03	0.08	.02
Taken SL	0.38	0.28	.07

Note. N = 177. ***p < .001, ⁺Bonferroni correction p < .025.

Gains From SL Experience

Based on data from 148 participants who completed their upper-division SL course and 154 students who did not, the researchers identified 44 initial themes. Initial themes were grouped and categorized into eight overarching categories (Table 5), including: field experience and skills (completed SL n = 105, no SL n = 57), career exploration and clarification (completed SL n = 57, no SL n = 16), multicultural and other awareness (completed SL n = 6, no SL n = 55), professional relationships and working with others (completed SL n = 15, no SL n = 31), community contribution (completed SL n = 33, no SL n = 10), integration of science and knowledge (completed SL n = 18, no SL n = 13), self-development (completed SL n = 4, no SL n = 26). A subset of students who completed SL reported gaining nothing (n = 4). Among students who had not completed SL, the most prominent themes were field experience and skills and multicultural and other awareness; whereas, field experience and skills and career exploration and clarification were the most prominent themes among those who completed SL.

Table 5.

Domains, Themes, and Frequencies of Student Responses to SL Gains.

Domains and Themes	Category Definition and Examples	Total Count	% SL (% no SL)
Field Experience and Skills	Acquire work experience and exposure to specific work environments and populations of interest (e.g., children in schools, homeless, foster youth). Development of professional skills such as teaching skills and time management skills; e.g., “I believe that the experience was one of the highlights of my academic career at CSUMB. It was an opportunity to learn more about the homeless population and the medically underserved population, specifically in Salinas”	162	70.95 (37.01)
Career Explorationand Clarification	Discover different career options and field-relevant experiences. Gaining clarification on career goals, preparing for graduate school, and networking for future jobs; e.g., “I want my service-learning course to open my eyes and help me go into the field I am interested in rather than just taking a class that requires me to do meaningless volunteer hours.”	73	38.51 (10.40)
Multicultural and Other Awareness	Increase awareness and knowledge about social issues, the local community, and diverse cultural groups. Develop empathy and greater understanding; e.g., “I became aware of many issues the homeless faced in their day-to-day activities in addition to some of their adventures. Some of the stories I heard really depressed me, such as one family going hungry because they didn’t have any food.”	61	4.05 (35.71)
Professional Relationships	Build connections with professionals in the field. Practice interpersonal, communication, and leadership skills; e.g., “I would like to create networks within the company”	46	10.14 (20.13)
Community Contribution	Serve people in the community and having a positive impact; e.g., “I want people to feel comfortable in their community and safe when addressing issues they face.”	43	22.30 (6.49)
Integration of Science and Knowledge	Apply psychology concepts and research methods in the community; e.g., “Through this experience I was reminded how unique a person’s story is. The person I interview had an amazing story which ultimately influenced his life, I was able to identify several developmental psychology theories as I kept re-playing my interview”	31	12.16 (8.44)
Self-Development	Gain insight, a sense of purpose, self-confidence, inspiration, and motivation; e.g., “I was always judgmental, growing up, yet I had very little knowledge about people who do drugs and working women. This program opened my eyes and showed me that there are people in this world who need our help. It doesn’t make us better than them, but if we have the tools, we should consider helping people live that best lives possible.”	30	2.70 (16.88)
Gained Nothing	No benefit; e.g., “Honestly, not much. Museum setting is not what I am interested in, and only partook because of the class requirement”	19	2.70

Note. N = 192.

SL Experience Alignment with Career Goals

Among 132 students who completed SL and 143 who did not complete SL, 40 initial themes were identified that were grouped and categorized into six overarching categories (Table 6), including: career clarification (completed SL n = 71, no SL n = 94), exposure to different domains of psychology (completed SL n = 28, no SL n = 38), community focus (completed SL n = 26, no SL n =12), communication and listening skills (completed SL n = 13, no SL n = 21), insight and perspective (completed SL n = 26, no SL n =1), and specific populations and settings (completed SL n = 11, no SL n =13). Two students reported their SL experience did align with their career goals but did not indicate how. Three and 28 students said they were either unsure of, or did not see, a connection between SL and career goals, respectively. For both those who completed and did not complete SL, the most prominent themes were career clarification and exposure to different domains of psychology.

Table 6.

Domains, Themes, and Frequencies of Student Responses to Alignment With Career Goals.

Domains and themes	Category definition and examples	Total Count	% SL (% no SL)
Career Clarification	Gain work experience and aiding in career exploration/clarification. Apply skills and identify possibilities for future internships; e.g., “It really helped me evaluate and consider what I wanted to do in the future.”	170	53.79 (65.73)
Domains of Psychology	Learn about different domains of psychology (i.e., clinical, counseling, educational, experimental, industrial and organizational, social, sports, environmental, and biological psychology); e.g., “Have service learning be available in areas (environments, settings) of employment that deal with psychology on some level either industrial and organizational, social or clinical.”	66	21.21 (26.58)
Community Focus	Connect and work with people in the community; e.g., “Maybe meet people from the field I want to go into. Also helping me know what steps to take to get out there and start helping people”	38	19.70 (8.39)
No Alignment or Unsure	Nothing or unsure; e.g., “It didn’t influence me one way or another honestly. I did not think about education until years after graduating.”	35	22.73 (3.50)
Communication and Listening Skills	Build foundations for relationships and interpersonal skills that can lead to future jobs; e.g., “I really just want to gain experience in any field of psychology so I can have my ‘foot in the door’ when applying for jobs in the future.”	34	9.85 (14.69)
Insight and Perspective	Gain insight into other people’s experiences in the community; e.g., “Putting myself in someone else’s shoe”	27	19.70 (0.70)
Specific Populations and Settings	Serve a site in a specific setting or with a certain population of interest; e.g., “I would really like to work with youth who have mental health issues or are more prone to having mental health issues as it directly relates to my career goals of being a child psychologist.”	24	8.33 (9.09)

Note. N = 275.

Suggestions for Creating a Psychology SL Course

Among 120 students who completed SL and 119 who did not complete SL, 49 initial themes were identified that were grouped and categorized into seven overarching categories (Table 7), including: SL site characteristics (completed SL n = 34, no SL n = 53), various psychology domains (completed SL n = 43, no SL n = 27), career clarification (completed SL n = 34, no SL n = 25), course characteristics (completed SL n = 17, no SL n = 20), professional skills (completed SL n = 12, no SL n = 10), community and culture (completed SL n = 10, no SL n = 10), and perspective taking and reflection (completed SL n = 7, no SL n = 3). For both those who completed and did not complete SL, the most prominent themes were SL site characteristics, various domains of psychology, and career clarification.

Table 7.

Domains, Themes, and Frequencies of Student Responses to Suggestions.

Domains and Themes	Category Definition and Examples	Total Count	% SL (% no SL)
SL Site Characteristics	Offer opportunities across a variety of settings and specific work environments; e.g., “I suggest having a variety of listings to volunteer with different psychology careers.”	70	28.33 (44.54)
Various PsychologyDomains	Cover different psychology domains, broad psychology topics, and resources; e.g., “It would be good to have different aspects of psychology incorporated, depending on the student’s preference they can do their service in different areas like: developmental, social, cognitive, forensic.” “Have it be more broad, not everyone in PSY goes into PSY!”	59	35.83 (22.69)
Career Clarification	Provide opportunities to reflect on professional goals and career options; e.g., “Give students the opportunity to realize that they don’t actually enjoy what they thought they wanted to do, and give others the chance to come across a job that they love.”	38	28.33 (21.01)
Course Characteristics	Integrate guest speakers, professor expertise, research experience, and continual student feedback; e.g., “I also feel that there should be guest speakers to talk about various topics in regards to LGBTQ+, disabilities, race, gender, etc. awareness.”	38	14.17 (16.81)
Professional Skills	Increase communication and coordination with sites to help support skill development; e.g., “More relevant service-learning sites. More formal service-learning sites. Both sites that I had were very informal without real guidance or supervision in the field”	24	10 (8.40)
Community and Culture	Focus on community needs and cultural knowledge; e.g., “I believe that a psychology SL course with a professor dedicated to connecting with the community is invaluable.”	20	8.33 (8.40)
Perspective Taking and Reflection	Support the development of social consciousness, self-awareness, and knowledge of diverse cultures; e.g., “Focus on understanding the psychological implications of discrimination and marginalization as well as methods for supporting clients to see their potential beyond marginalization.”	10	5.83 (2.52)

Note. N = 275.

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to examine learning outcomes among psychology students who completed an upper-division service-learning (SL) course and garner student feedback about SL to inform curriculum development of a psychology-specific SL course. Quantitative findings showed students who completed a SL course engaged more with APA Learning Goals 3 and 5 in their SL course compared to the other three APA learning goals. Qualitative student narratives supported and aligned with quantitative findings; participants endorsed student learning outcomes from their SL experience mapping onto APA Goal 3 (Ethical and Social Responsibility in a Diverse World) and Goal 5 (Professional Development).

Empathy and Civic Engagement

Related to APA Goal 3, ethical and social responsibility in a diverse world, we hypothesized empathy and civic engagement would be higher in students who completed an upper-division SL course compared to those who had not. Inconsistent with hypotheses, results revealed there were no differences in indices of interpersonal and social empathy between student groups. Lack of significant differences might be a function of not measuring empathy right after the SL experience, as previous research has done (e.g., Lundy, 2007), when it would likely have shifted the most. Also, students’ empathic development could have been tied to the specific experience they gained at their SL site; students were part of various SL experiences across departments, and their SL sites ranged from homeless shelters to outdoor restoration of native plants. The level of focus on interpersonal and social empathy across SL sites likely varied. In fact, the most frequent suggestion students discussed in their narratives was the desire to have more opportunities across a variety of settings and work environments (SL characteristics), but it appeared they wanted these opportunities to be grounded in the disciplines of psychology and opportunities to connect and work with people in the community (domains of psychology and community focus were in the top three themes endorsed by students when asked how SL contributed or could contribute to career goals). Narratives also demonstrated that students who completed a SL course minimally endorsed multicultural and other awareness (opportunities to increase awareness and knowledge of social issues, the local community, and diverse cultural groups) as something they gained from the experience, but this theme was the second most endorsed theme when students who had not taken SL were asked what they want to gain from their SL experience.

Partially consistent with hypotheses, students who completed a SL course, compared to those who had not, reported greater civic engagement behaviors, but not attitudes. The finding that civic engagement behaviors, but not attitudes, were higher in the student group who completed SL, compared to those who had not, may have been due to a ceiling effect in the data; the means for civic engagement attitudes were high in both groups. Students who hold more positive attitudes toward civic engagement and value helping others may self-select into the field of psychology, and the participants in the present study also self-selected to participate in the survey. Thus, student attitudes may be less sensitive to change based on exposure to an SL course, but behaviors may be more likely to change because SL provides an entry point for engaging in service after the course. This finding is important because service learning can help shift people from values to action, and this shift is important for social change and professional development.

Professional Development

Related to APA Goal 4, professional development, we hypothesized indices of professional identity would be higher in students who completed an upper-division SL course compared to those who had not. Partially consistent with our hypothesis, students who completed a SL course, compared to those who had not, reported greater experience with the profession, but not professional self-efficacy. Nonsignificant results related to professional self-efficacy could again reflect the types of SL experiences psychology students participated in. Psychology majors were taking SL courses in other departments across campus, with limited focus on professional experiences specific to psychology. Career clarification was one of the most prominent themes that emerged across the three open-ended questions asking what students gained or wanted from SL. Aspects of career clarification were defined by gaining clarification on career goals, applying skills, identifying possibilities for future internships, and reflecting on professional goals and career options. Professional self-efficacy is important for confidence when entering the job market, and psychology-specific SL courses could help students participate in relevant psychology professional experiences and improve student self-efficacy as they continue along their career trajectory, even outside of formal internship experiences. This is particularly important for ethnic minority and first-generation college students who may be more likely to experience feelings of imposter phenomenon – academic anxiety related to being an intellectual fraud (e.g., Cokley et al., 2013). This was also an important consideration for our curriculum development because a large proportion of the students at our institution identify as Latinx/Hispanic and first-generation college students.

Implications for Curriculum Development

We used the findings from this study to identify gaps and inform the development of a psychology-specific SL course. SL is a high-impact practice that can be integrated into any psychology course (e.g., Clinical Psychology, Cognitive Psychology, etc.), but we intentionally developed a course that was broad and generalist. This decision was directly based on students’ suggestions and desires to gain exposure to different domains of psychology, different types of sites, and career-relevant experiences. Thus, we named the course “Psychology in the Community” and curated a list of diverse local service sites that were aligned with different domains of psychology (e.g., clinical/counseling, environmental, developmental, social psychology). Students were given the option of what psychology domain they wanted to focus on during the semester that best aligned with their career goals, and this was then used to inform the development of a concept map and action/deliverable for their site. The concept map assignment also incorporated aspects of professional self-efficacy by having students gather research and creative evidence to develop knowledge around their site and to inform their deliverable.

In the following bullet points, we outline some of the key ways we used results from the present study to inform readings, assignments, and assessments in the course.

Multicultural and other awareness

ˆ Readings/videos and reflections included topics such as: mental health stigma, multicultural and social justice guidelines, implicit bias, colorism, privilege and oppression, intersectionality, microaggressions, neurodiversity, cultural strengths, and radical healing.

ˆ Facilitated class discussions focused on developing self-awareness of social identities.

ˆ Integrated virtual reality (VR) assignments to: (a) enhance perspective taking and empathy; (b) introduce students to innovative ways technology is used within psychology; and (c) include local and global social justice issues within the course, such as the experience of homelessness/houselessness and the refugee crisis in Syria, respectively. Students checked out 360° goggle headsets from the library and scheduled an appointment for an interactive VR experience (i.e., Becoming Homeless; https://vhil.stanford.edu/becominghomeless/) to complete these assignments.

Social justice action

ˆ Created a “Dramatic Dialogue” assignment and rubric for students to write a script and role play how they would engage in awareness raising and advocacy in a conversation about homelessnes/houslessness. Barkley and Major (2016) identified dramatic dialogues as a learning assessment technique for the human dimension of learning.

Career clarification and domains of psychology

ˆ Specified the relevant subdiscipline(s) of psychology for each reading and in-class discussion topic to help students understand similarities and differences within the field (e.g., liberation psychology, positive psychology, cognitive psychology).

ˆ Formed discussion and reflection groups (4-6 students) around students with similar SL sites. Larger class discussions represented the various small group perspectives, and this structure provided exposure to the functions of different types of psychologists and psychology-related professions.

Professional self-efficacy

ˆ Incorporated course assignments with opportunities for application of psychology-specific knowledge and reflective practice. For example, self-care was introduced early in the semester and incorporated throughout to emphasize the importance of this practice in helping to prevent and mitigate compassion fatigue/burnout.

ˆ Created “Thinking Like a Psychologist” assignments that guided students to describe a challenging or rewarding experience, and reflect on this experience by identifying their feelings, thoughts and biases, and behavioral responses. Students were asked to link this experience to a specific psychology principle, theory, or concept, as well as a primary domain of psychology to demonstrate the relevance of the psychology discipline.

Limitations and Future Directions

These findings can be used to help guide decisions around curriculum development, but findings must be interpreted in light of important limitations. First, the study design was cross-sectional and outcomes may not be causally connected to the SL class. Other factors such as time/maturation and concurrent classes students were enrolled in could have been responsible for learning outcome differences. A longitudinal design measuring within-subject changes in scores would improve the ability of researchers to track the impact of SL courses. However, it is important to note the intention of this research study was to gather current experiences and suggestions from students to incorporate their voice in decisions and evaluation for curriculum development, and so the cross-sectional and non-experimental design allowed for examining a snapshot of students’ experiences before designing a new curriculum.

Second, this study utilized convenience-based sampling; the response rates were low for current students and lower for alumni. Participants who elected to enroll in the study could have differed from those who did not participate in important ways. For example, participants’ scores on the interpersonal and social empathy scales and civic engagement attitudes were generally high with limited variability. Relatedly, given that SL is a requirement at the university this study was conducted, it may be that students who enroll at such a university inherently have higher civic engagement attitudes and/or levels of empathy. Third, the sample included psychology majors collected from one university who were predominantly Latina women, and therefore, generalizability of results is limited. However, most SL research up to this point has primarily included European-American or white samples, and so the ethnic diversity of this sample is an important addition to the literature on SL. Fourth, the APA learning outcomes measure developed for the purpose of this study has not been validated and reliability is unknown.

Future research would benefit from a within-subjects design to further evaluate improvements in empathy, civic engagement, and professional identity following a SL experience. Additionally, other measures may capture related constructs that align with psychology learning goals. The APA Goals for the Undergraduate Psychology Major 2.0 (APA, 2013) also include an appendix of measures that can be used to assess learning goals in specific courses. Bringle and colleagues (2016) also provide additional resources useful in the development and assessment of psychology SL courses.

Conclusion

The APA Goals for the Undergraduate Psychology Major 2.0 (APA, 2013) specify the importance of students learning social responsibility in a diverse world and professional development in their education. SL is an evidence-based, high-impact teaching practice associated with positive learning outcomes in civic engagement (e.g., Celio et al., 2011), and the present study provides additional support and ideas for how SL can meet psychology learning outcomes, improve civic engagement behaviors and attitudes, and increase professional identity of psychology students.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material, sj-pdf-1-top-10.1177_00986283211021075 - What Psychology Students Want From Service-Learning

Supplemental Material, sj-pdf-1-top-10.1177_00986283211021075 for What Psychology Students Want From Service-Learning by Christine E. Valdez and Jennifer L. Lovell in Teaching of Psychology

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank student researchers involved in data analysis of results, including Rebekah Newman, Rhiannon Saunders, Erin Keeton, and Fattima Momini. Research reported in this publication was also supported by the California State University, Monterey Bay, Undergraduate Research Opportunity Center.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The American Psychological Association Division 2 Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Research Grant funded this work.

ORCID iDs

Christine E. Valdez

Jennifer L. Lovell

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Alder

R. P.

Goggin

(2005). What do we mean by “civic engagement”? Journal of Transformative Education, 3(3), 236–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344605276792

American Psychological Association. (2013). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major: Version 2.0. https://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/about/undergraduate-major

Astin

A. W.

Sax

L. J.

Avalos

(1999). Long-term effects of volunteerism during the undergraduate years. The Review of Higher Education, 22, 187–202. https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1110&context=slcehighered

Barkley

E. F.

Major

C. H.

(2016). Learning assessment techniques: A handbook for college faculty. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Boss

J. A.

(1994). The effect of community service work on the moral development of college ethics students. Journal of Moral Education, 23(2), 183–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305724940230206

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Bringle

R. G.

Clayton

P. H.

Bringle

K. E.

(2015). From teaching democratic thinking to developing democratic civic identity. Partnerships: A Journal of Service-Learning & Civic Engagement, 6(1), 1–26. http://libjournal.uncg.edu/prt/article/view/1021

Bringle

R. G

Hatcher

A. (1995). A service learning curriculum for faculty. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 2(1), 112–122. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/mjcsl/3239521.0002.111?rgn=main;view=fulltext

Bringle

R. G.

Hatcher

J. A.

(2000). Institutionalization of service learning in higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 71(3), 273–290. https://doi.org/10.2307/2649291

10.

Bringle

R. G.

Reeb

Brown

M. A.

Ruiz

(2016). Service learning in psychology: Enhancing undergraduate education for the public good. American Psychological Association.

11.

Celio

C. I.

Durlak

Dymnicki

(2011). A meta-analysis of the impact of service-learning on students. Journal of Experiential Education, 34(2), 164–181. https://doi.org/10.5193/jee34.2.164

12.

Chin Pei

(2014). Educating for professional identity development. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Erasmus University Rotterdam]. http://repub.eur.nl/pub/77318

13.

Cokley

McClain

Encisco

Martinez

(2013). An examination of the impact of minority status stress and imposter feelings on the mental health of diverse ethnic minority college students. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 41(2), 82–95. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2013.00029.x

14.

Conway

J. M.

Amel

E. L.

Gerwien

D. P.

(2009). Teaching and learning in the social context: A meta-analysis of service learning’s effects on academic, personal, social, and citizenship outcomes. Teaching of Psychology, 36(4), 233–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280903172969

15.

Doolittle

Faul

A. C.

(2013). Civic engagement scale: A validation study. SAGE Open, 3(3), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244013495542

16.

Driscoll

Holland

Gelmon

Kerrigan

(1996). An assessment model for service-learning: Comprehensive case studies of impact on faculty, students, community, and institutions. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 3, 66–71. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/mjcsl/3239521.0003.107?rgn=main;view=fulltext

17.

Everhart

R. S.

(2016). Teaching tools to improve the development of empathy in service-learning students. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 20, 129–154. https://ojsprod.galib.uga.edu/jheoe/article/download/1281/1278

18.

Eyler

J. S.

Giles

D. E.

Braxton

(1997). The impact of service-learning on college students. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 4, 5–15. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/mjcsl/3239521.0004.101/1/--impact-of-service-learning-on-college-students?page=root;size=100;view=text

19.

Fenzel

L. M.

Peyrot

(2005). Comparing college community participants and future service behaviors and attitudes. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 12(1), 23–31. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/mjcsl/3239521.0012.102/1/--comparing-college-community-participation-and-future-service?view=image

20.

Lundy

B. L.

(2007). Service learning in life-span developmental psychology: Higher exam scores and increased empathy. Teaching of Psychology, 34(1), 23–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280709336644

21.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary. (2018). Empathy. https://www.merriam-webster.com/

22.

Novak

J. M.

Markey

Allen

(2007). Evaluating cognitive outcomes of service learning in higher education: A meta-analysis. Communication Research Reports, 24(2), 149–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824090701304881

23.

Saltmarsh

(2005). The civic promise of service learning. Liberal Education, 91(2), 50–55. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ697354

24.

Segal

E. A.

Cimino

A. N.

Gerdes

K. E.

Harmon

J. K.

Wagaman

M. A.

(2013). A confirmatory factor analysis of the interpersonal and social empathy index. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 4(3), 131–153. https://doi.org/10.5243/jsswr.2013.9

25.

Warren

(2012). Does service-learning increase student learning: A meta-analysis. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 18, 56–61. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/mjcsl/3239521.0018.205/--does-service-learning-increase-student-learning-a-meta?g=mjcslg;view=image;xc=1

26.

Wilson

J. C.

(2011). Service-learning and the development of empathy in U.S. college students. Education and Training, 53(2/3), 207–217 https://doi.org/10.1108/00400911111115735

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.29 MB