Date Presented 3/31/2017
This session will reveal results of student participation in the Centralized Service Learning Model (CSLM), a course design framework that facilitates creative and active learning opportunities in the community through service. Results support the effectiveness of the CSLM as a viable teaching model to influence student learning.
Primary Author and Speaker: Lauren Milton
Additional Authors and Speakers: Robyn Otty
BACKGROUND: The ability to create and cultivate an environment of optimal learning is a constant challenge for higher educators. With research supporting the use of teaching pedagogy to support student engagement, educators have a responsibility to systematically examine the complexity of learning. The Centralized Service Learning Model (CSLM) presents the benefits of experiential learning, allowing students to learn in a real-world context. By providing an environment of authentic problem solving, students can gain the necessary skills expected in professional practice (Yardley, Teunissen, & Dornan, 2012). The CSLM was conceived, developed, and implemented within two graduate-level courses to create an active learning context. This unique model integrates separate learning objectives with one service learning project.
To determine the effectiveness of the CSLM as a viable teaching model to influence student learning from the students’ perspectives, the researchers collected data to answer the research question, What are the students’ perceptions related to an experiential-based service learning experience using the CSLM? Literature supporting an innovative teaching model similar to the CSLM could not be located. Combining the need to creatively foster academic scholarship and develop contextually meaningful learning experiences is the niche that separates CSLM from other proposed learning models.
DESIGN: To explore student perspectives, a narrative qualitative approach was used (Merriam, 2009). A total of 27 students enrolled in their final didactic coursework participated in this study. Each student was asked to complete a reflection consisting of 11 open-ended questions based on their service learning experiences.
METHOD: Approval to conduct this research was completed through an institutional review board before study commencement. Data were collected within a course reflection assignment containing open-ended questions based on Accreditation Council for Occupational Therapy Education objectives. Using a summative content analysis method, transcripted data were initially coded and quantified to explore the students’ perceptions (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005) independently by three different researchers. The researchers then determined categories and themes through constant comparative analysis for agreeable categories and resulting themes.
RESULTS: The appreciation of being given the opportunity to create a new program within the context of directly influencing others was prevalent among the students’ responses. Three key themes related to their understanding and perceptions of experiential-based learning: learn by doing, advocacy, and falling through the cracks. Many students indicated that CSLM allowed them to actively learn by doing. Students also indicated a need to create a voice for others who had difficulty doing so for themselves; through such efforts, many students valued advocacy as an avenue to create an opportunity to receive services. Finally, in creating a voice, many reported filling the gap of occupational therapy services through the created programs and preventing them from falling through the cracks.
CONCLUSION: The results confirm positive student perceptions about the CSLM that align with past research studies examining experiential learning contexts (McGeary, VanOss, & Sanders, 2015; Seif et al., 2014). Students who experienced this original model of teaching largely supported CSLM implementation and its unique perspective on learning that traditional “sage on the stage” learning lacks the ability to provide. With the advent of a new vision for the next centennial, occupational therapy educators should also commit to modifying their teaching practices to reflect the changing needs of the profession.
References
Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
McGeary, S., VanOss, T., & Sanders, M. (2015). Analyzing the use of reflections in service learning. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 69, 6911510213. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2015.69S1-PO6091
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Seif, G., Coker-Bolt, P., Kraft, S., Gonsalves, W., Simpson, K., & Johnson, E. (2014). The development of clinical reasoning and interprofessional service-learning at a student-run free clinic. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 28, 559–564. https://doi.org/10.3109/13561820.2014.921899
Yardley, S., Teunissen, P. W., & Dornan, T. (2012). Experiential learning: Transforming theory into practice. Medical Teacher, 34, 161–164. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.643264
