ERIC EJ1137412: Service-Learning and White Normativity: Racial Representation in Service-Learning's Historical Narrative

2015·0.19 MB·English

by  ERIC

Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning Fall 2015, pp.5-17
Service-Learning and White Normativity: Racial Representation in
Service-Learning’s Historical Narrative
Melissa Bocci
University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Mitchell, Donohue, and Young-Law (2012) observe that in practice and theory, service-learning may be a
“pedagogy of whiteness – strategies of instruction that consciously or unconsciously reinforce norms and
privileges developed by, and for the benefit of, White people in the United States” (p. 613). In this historiog-
raphy of service-learning, I examine four scholarly texts and three well-accessed online historical summaries
published by service-learning practitioners. I explore how these historical narratives represent people of
color, what they include and exclude, and how these representations and inclusions/exclusions may reinforce
or challenge White normativity in service-learning. Additionally, I suggest supplemental events, figures, and
philosophies that could be considered part of the history of service-learning in order to challenge its prevail-
ing Whiteness.
In Butin’s (2006) article on the limits of service- are histories of efforts that have taken place outside
learning in higher education, he warns that “there is a the dominant, mainstream culture of the United
distinct possibility that service-learning may ultimate- States” (p. 38), I use historiographic methods to
ly come to be viewed as the ‘Whitest of the White’ investigate how scholars and practitioners have repre-
enclave of postsecondary education” (p. 482). His sented people of color within their general histories
observation that Whiteness prevails in service-learn- of the practice, who and what they have included and
ing theory and practice is reinforced by other scholars excluded, and how this representation and these
such as Mitchell, Donahue, and Young-Law (2012) inclusions and exclusions reinforce or challenge
who note that “service learning is being implemented Whiteness and White normativity within the histori-
mostly by White faculty with mostly White students cal narrative. Throughout the article, I also offer sup-
at predominantly White institutions to serve mostly plemental figures and events that, if included, could
poor individuals and mostly people of color” (p. 612). further challenge the prevailing Whiteness and White
They observe that in practice and theory, service- normativity. Such a challenge may have implications
learning may be a “pedagogy of whiteness – strategies beyond the historical narrative itself because, as
of instruction that consciously or unconsciously rein- Morton notes, “We need a rich history of service-
force norms and privileges developed by, and for the learning if we are to collectively or independently
benefit of, White people in the United States” (p. develop a ‘point of view’ that will allow us to
613). Thus, service-learning may suffer from both approach our work more deliberately and with less
Whiteness – a prevalence of White people positioned likelihood of doing harm” (p. 37).
as leaders/practitioners/servers and “White” ways of
thinking and acting dominating policy and pedagogy Introduction to Historiography and the Texts
– and White normativity, which McIntosh (1989,
2013) describes as the idea that those “White” ways A historiography’s goal is to dissect the construc-
of thinking and acting are “morally neutral, norma- tion of a historical narrative in order to illuminate the
tive, and average, and also ideal” (p. 216). By privi- facts, figures, and events that are included and exclud-
leging Whiteness, White normativity in service-learn- ed as well as the reasons for and implications of those
ing can lead to assimilative, discriminatory, and/or inclusions and exclusions. In this historiography, my
exclusionary practices that reinforce oppressive goal is to explore the representations of people of
socioeconomic power dynamics. color within service-learning’s “mainstream” histori-
While Butin (2006) and Mitchell et al. (2012) cri- cal narrative and to critique the ways that those repre-
tique Whiteness and White normativity in service- sentations contribute to or challenge the Whiteness
learning’s pedagogy, in this article I focus my critique and White normativity other scholars (Butin, 2006;
on service-learning’s historical narrative. Building on Mitchell et al., 2012; Sheffield, 2013) have identified
Morton’s (2011) assertion that “equally important as prevalent in its practice. To compile this “main-
and largely missing [from service-learning’s history] stream” historical narrative, I sought documents that
5
Bocci
satisfied two criteria: (a) present an overview or gen- Hoppe’s book is often cited in other scholarly texts
eral history of service-learning’s philosophy/practice and Web documents on service-learning.
and (b) are widely cited and/or readily available to Additionally, at the suggestion of Sheffield’s end-
both lay and academic audiences. As Sheffield notes, note on locating historical accounts of service-learn-
“full historical accounts of [community service-learn- ing, I included in this study three Web-published his-
ing] are relatively few and far between” (p. 20), but I torical narratives authored by institutions practicing
ultimately located one scholarly book and three book and/or advocating service-learning. I located these
chapters that met my criteria. summaries by searching the Internet for “history of
The first text I selected was Sheffield’s (2013) service-learning.” The search returned numerous
chapter “A Brief History” in his book Strong hits, mostly produced by universities, school districts,
Community Service Learning(2013). Sheffield’s stat- and service-learning companies and organizations.
ed reason for compiling this history is, through histor- Some of these Web texts were summaries of the
ical understanding, to glean “clues to [the] pedagogy’s scholarly works that I had already selected. Of the
philosophic muddiness” and to discover “valuable rest, I selected three based on their institutional
older ideas, while taking account of contemporary author’s prominence within the service-learning
context” (p. 20). As such, he chronicles the move- movement and the quantity of information provided.
ment’s philosophical roots as well as its practice. The first Web text was published by Bright Impact,
The second text, Stanton, Giles, and Cruz’s (1999) a leading service-learning software manufacturer
seminal book, Service-Learning: A Movement’s (www.brightimpact.com/history-of-service-learn-
Pioneers Reflect on Its Origins, Practice, and Future, ing/, 2013). For many educators, students, and par-
is the result of an interview- and focus group-based ents using this software to monitor and assess pro-
study with 33 pioneers (including the authors) of the jects, this “history” may be the first and/or only
service-learning movement that seeks to “reflect on account they see. Because of this visibility and its
and analyze their work combining service and learn- potential impact on how service-learning’s history is
ing” and to “assess existing practice and recommend viewed by a more lay than academic audience, I
steps for future policy and practice” (p. xvi). These chose to include it. For similar reasons, I selected the
pioneers were chosen because they began their work “History of Service-Learning in Higher Education”
prior to 1985 (the year Campus Compact was formed published by the National Service Learning
and service-learning became “mainstream”) and Clearinghouse and presented by Florida State
because a nominating panel considered them to have University (http://www.fsu.edu/~flserver resources/
“had a significant influence on the development of resource%20files/History_of_SL_in_HE_FINAL_
the field” and to represent “the most important, influ- May08.pdf, 2008) and the Los Angeles County
ential strands of service-learning history” (p. 9). The Office of Education’s (LACOE) “History of Service-
pioneers’ quotes are interspersed with the authors’ Learning” document (http://www.lacoe.edu/Portals/
thematic analysis to produce a text that addresses, as 0/Curriculum-Instruction/SLHistory_doc.pdf, n. d.).
with Sheffield, the history of the movement’s philos- I chose the first text because it was produced by the
ophy and practice. federal P-16 service-learning grant-funder Learn and
I located the final text by searching for other works Serve America, a division of the Corporation for
citing Stanton et al.’s book. This led me to Zieren and National and Community Service, formed in 1990 to
Stoddard’s chapter, “The Historical Origins of promote service-learning. As a potentially widely dis-
Service-Learning in the Nineteenth and Twentieth seminated document authored by a government
Centuries: The Transplanted and Indigenous agency, this account provides insight into how govern-
Traditions,” in Speck and Hoppe’s (2004) book ment-sanctioned national advocates have constructed
Service-Learning: History, Theory, and Issues. This the movement’s history.1The final online document is
chapter chronicles service-learning’s practice with a the first hit in a Google search for “history of service-
focus on social work’s influence on the movement. learning,” and as such it also has the potential to reach
Also from Speck and Hoppe’s book, I examined a wide audience interested in this topic.
Rocheleau’s (2004) chapter “Theoretical Roots of In examining these seven histories of service-
Service-Learning: Progressive Education and the learning (one book, three book chapters, and three
Development of Citizenship.” Because the first two Websites) for ways that they perpetuate or challenge
references in Rocheleau’s chapter chronicled the his- Whiteness and White normativity, I first reviewed the
tory of both service-learning’s practice and philoso- texts for mentions of people of color and/or non-
phy, I chose to look at this chapter along with Zieren Anglos2. How do people of color and non-Anglos
and Stoddard’s practice-oriented chapter in order to enter the narrative? How are they positioned? Given
have three scholarly accounts of both philosophy and these representations, what is the implication regard-
practice. As with the Stanton et al. text, Speck and ing people of color’s role in the history of service-
6
Service-Learning and White Normativity
learning’s philosophy and practice? Second, I exam- and commentators mentioned in the text are White;
ined how the authors understood the evolution of ser- though Freire’s critical pedagogy is mentioned as
vice-learning, organizing their chronologies into two influential, his name only appears in a parenthetical
main threads: the history of service-learning’s philos- citation. In the Bright Impact document, the four
ophy and the history of service-learning’s practice. people7mentioned by name are White. The National
Within the thread chronicling the history of the prac- Service-Learning Clearinghouse (2008) references
tice, two sub-threads emerged: the history of service- no people of color by name in its historical narrative,
learning within education and the history of service though it does allude to them as a group.
as a social concept, in which service was often con- The paucity of individuals of color in these histo-
flated with volunteerism. Within these threads, I ries underlines the overall perceived Whiteness with-
looked at who and which programs were included in service-learning. But does this underrepresenta-
and excluded in order to comment on how these his- tion reflect the reality? Have there been so few indi-
tories reinforce or challenge Whiteness and White viduals of color whose philosophies, practices, or
normativity in service-learning. views on education could have been considered in
the history of service-learning alongside the White
The Representation of People of Color and individuals presented in these references? I contend
Non-Anglos in the History of that the answer to these questions is a definitive no
Service-Learning and will suggest individuals of color and institu-
tions/organizations that could be incorporated into a
People of color and non-Anglos do appear in five revised history of service-learning.
of the seven documents’ historical narratives – only But while few individuals of color are directly dis-
Bright Impact (2013) and Rocheleau (2004) do not cussed in the documents, people of color do enter the
refer to people of color at all within their texts – but historical narratives in two ways – through allusions
how they are represented within those narratives can to institutions or movements associated with people
either contribute to or challenge service-learning’s of color and through collective or coded terminology.
Whiteness and White normativity. In this section, I LACOE’s document (n.d.) explicitly mentions people
first explore the numeric representation of people of of color as part of the history of service-learning in
color and non-Anglos in each document and then two places. First, they open with a nod toward the
examine the ways in which those people of color and “communal ethic” and tradition of volunteerism
non-Anglos are described and positioned within the among Native American peoples (p. 1). They then
historical narratives and the implications of that mention the civil rights movement and Martin Luther
positioning. King’s statement that “everyone can be great because
everyone can serve” (p. 1). While the civil rights
Numeric Representation
movement is not restricted to people of color nor syn-
While five of the documents allude to people of onymous with them, I include it as a reference to peo-
color, only three of the seven historical narratives ple of color because it is a cause directly involving
mention individuals of color by name, and they ref- many people of color. Like the LACOE document,
erence far fewer of them than they do White individ- The National Service-Learning Clearinghouse’s
uals. Of Stanton et al.’s (1999) 33 pioneers, but only (2008) only allusion to people of color is a reference
four – Jack Hasegawa, Herman Blake, Greg Ricks, to the civil rights movement as an example of civic
and Nadinne Cruz – identify as people of color. involvement. Stanton et al. (1999) also refer to the
Additionally, one pioneer references Dr. Charles, a civil rights movement throughout their text, as many
1970s Black service-learning practitioner, by name. of their pioneers were active in the movement. In
Sheffield’s (2013) chapter mentions 37 scholars, addition to allusions to the civil rights movement,
philosophers, educators, and practitioners whose Stanton et al.’s text includes four other references to
work has influenced the development of service- people of color as a group that I will elaborate on in
learning’s philosophy and practice3. Of these, Tania the next section.
Mitchell, Paulo Freire, and José Calderón are people Zieren and Stoddard (2004) allude to Black
of color and non-Anglos. In the LACOE document, Americans as a group in three places in their chapter.
10 of the 114people mentioned as influential in ser- In their chronicling of social work’s impact on the his-
vice-learning’s history are White. Zieren and tory of service-learning, they mention how “minori-
Stoddard (2004) mention 16 people by name5as sig- ty” populations were “investigated and their problems
nificant in service-learning’s historical development. incorporated into the social work curriculum” (p. 37).
None are people of color. Similarly, in Rocheleau’s I include this example as a reference because the word
(2004) chapter on the theoretical roots of service- “minorities” is often code for people of color. In their
learning, all twenty6 of the philosophers, educators, discussion of the 1890 Morrill Land Grant expansion,
7
Bocci
which I will return to momentarily, these authors also tioning within the service-learning construct when
refer to Black Americans as a group, commenting that they do appear also merits attention. Often White peo-
the expansion’s goal was to “include the underserved ple enter the narratives as providers and leaders while
educational needs of African-Americans” (p. 26). In a people of color are relegated to the role of “served” or
third group reference to people of color, the authors “needy” (or are ignored completely). This positioning
briefly mention Black Americans’ participation in ser- reinforces the White normative dynamic that Mitchell
vice-learning-like activities at Highlander during the et al. (2012) and Butin (2006) warn is too prevalent in
civil rights movement of the 1960s. But while they our current practice. Sheffield (2011) and Stanton et
repeatedly refer to Myles Horton, Highlander’s White al. (1999) do challenge this White normativity, repre-
founder, by name, they do not mention any of the senting people of color affirmatively and as leaders
influential Black Americans who worked or attended and service providers, but the general trend of White
there, including Septima Clark and Esau Jenkins, both leaders/servers over needy recipients of color remains
of whom went on to found Citizenship Schools meant prominent.
to engage African-Americans in social change. In LACOE’s (n.d.) mention of Native Americans
Institutional representation in the historical narra- and in each reference to the civil rights movement,
tives follows the same pattern. Many traditionally the depiction of people of color is affirmative; people
White (or at least not historically Black) universities of color in these brief comments are positioned as
and college programs are named and elaborated on as actors in their community rather than as needy recip-
early innovators (late 1700s through early 1900s) of ients of others’ service. However, because these com-
service or civic engagement blended with curriculum, ments are made in passing and do not elaborate on
including Harvard, Yale, University of Georgia, specific contributions to the service-learning move-
University of Virginia, West Point, Rensselaer, ment, they are little more than nods to the traditions
Michigan Agricultural College, University of of service and activism that run deep in many com-
Wisconsin at Madison (Zieren & Stoddard, 2004); munities of color (Stevens, 2003).
University of Cincinnati (Bright Impact, 2013; Zieren and Stoddard’s (2004) three previously
Stanton et al., 1999; Zieren & Stoddard, 2004); and mentioned references to people of color provide a bit
Dewey’s Lab School at the University of Chicago more detail, but in each instance they position people
(Rocheleau, 2004). Meanwhile, though the of color mostly as recipients of the service. In one of
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) their references to people of color, Zieren and
founded as part of the 1890 Morrill Land Grant Stoddard describe service-learning as a way for
expansion are referenced in Stanton et al.’s timeline social workers to better serve “minorities.” In this
and in Zieren and Stoddard’s chapter as examples of brief and coded reference to people of color, the
early service-learning-like programs, none are men- authors firmly position them as recipients of service-
tioned by name or elaborated on. The exception is learning provided by social workers. In their second
Sheffield’s (2013) lengthy discussion of the Penn reference, during their relatively lengthy discussion
Normal School, to which I will return momentarily. of Highlander, which they call the “epitome of ser-
By referring to people of color and their institu- vice-learning in action” (p. 34), Zieren and Stoddard
tions and movements predominately as a collective state that service-learning-like participation was “one
(and only occasionally), and White people and their of the key elements in black Americans acquiring the
institutions by name (and frequently), are the authors skills needed for difficult tasks ahead in the civil
implicitly advancing the notion that, while people of rights movements” (p. 34). The authors’ wording
color have participated in service-learning and its could indicate that people of color at Highlander
forerunners, no individual person, institution, or spe- were active participants in service which taught them
cific group of people of color merits name acknowl- those skills that they needed. However, because the
edgement? Moreover, given that individual White authors gloss over Black Americans’ leadership roles
philosophers, activists, educators, and institutions at Highlander and only mention their participation in
whose role in the history of service-learning may this one instance (and as a collective), their wording
have been little more than ancillary are acknowl- could also imply that people of color were the
edged, such as Thomas Jefferson (Rocheleau, 2004; “needy” recipients of the educational and training
Zieren & Stoddard, 2004) and Horace Mann
“services” provided by Highlander.
(Sheffield, 2013), are they implicitly advancing a his-
But while their positioning of people of color in
tory devoid of people of color?
the Highlander example may be ambiguous, in their
discussion of Black Americans and the land grant
The Positioning of People of Color
colleges, Zieren and Stoddard (2004) firmly locate
In addition to the paucity of and limited allusions to them as recipients. They assert that “the service ori-
people of color as a group in the histories, their posi- entation of the land grant colleges was evident when
8
Service-Learning and White Normativity
they expanded their scope to include the underserved leaders, not just needy recipients, of service. His
educational needs of African-Americans” (p. 26), account of the Penn Normal School (PNS) is the pri-
implying that the creation of agricultural and techni- mary example of this inclusion and positioning. PNS
cal colleges for Black students was itself a “service” was a school for ex-slaves founded in South Carolina
of which the Black students were the recipients. in 1862. Sheffield calls it “one of the earliest experi-
Reinforcing this positioning of Black students in ments with community service learning education” (p.
HBCUs as the recipients of the institutions’ “ser- 21). While the administrators of the school were White
vice,” Stanton et al. (1999) postulate that one way northern abolitionists, the student body was Black, as
institutions of higher education understood “service” were some of the teachers, and all were engaged in
was in terms of the school itself providing “access to learning through projects designed to resolve “felt
education…and employment” for “nontraditional community problems” and “blur the classroom/com-
populations” (p. 17). munity line” (p. 22). By including this example, and
While Zieren and Stoddard solely position people detailed discussions of José Calderón and Tania
of color as recipients of the HBCUs’ “service,” Mitchell’s more recent scholarly contributions to ser-
Stanton et al. (1999) complicate this positioning, pro- vice-learning’s development, Sheffield begins to chal-
viding an additional detail about HBCUs – that they lenge some of the White normativity present in most
were founded on “principles of combining work, ser- of the general historical narratives by presenting peo-
vice, and learning” (p. 250). Stevens (2003), whose ple of color specifically and positioning them as active
article “Unrecognized Roots of Service-Learning in leaders and contributors to that history.
African American Social Thought and Action 1890- By its nature, Stanton et al.’s (1999) first-person
1930”8offers a starting point for challenging the pre- narrative history also challenges White normativity
vailing Whiteness of the other seven historical narra- by implicitly positioning its four pioneers of color as
tives, elaborates on Stanton et al.’s description, stat- active leaders in service-learning’s development,
ing that “students who attended black colleges [were] though they are vastly outnumbered by their White
encouraged to participate in community service” (p. colleagues. Still, Stanton et al. and their pioneers are
29) and detailing one such program that demonstrat-
transparent about this underrepresentation, evident in
ed “principles that undergird service-learning peda-
two of the four moments within the narrative text that
gogy” (p. 32) and represented “an antecedent to ser-
they explicitly mention race. In the first instance,
vice-learning courses” (p. 30). The program,
Stanton et al. state that “the pioneers identified a lack
designed by George E. Haynes at Fisk University,
of diversity…[and] wondered…if this lack of diver-
required students to “utilize social science knowl-
sity in service-learning students was due to a similar
edge and skills in field experiences and service in the
lack in the population of service-learning practition-
black community” (p. 30). Given these details from
ers” (p. 203). John Duley elaborates on this lack of
Stevens, Stanton et al.’s reference to people of color
diversity and recalls how in 1973, Dr. Charles, “the
vis-à-vis the HBCUs positions them partly as actors
only Black officer the [Society for Field Experience
(student service providers) and partly as needy recip-
Education] had,” left the society after having his con-
ients of service (from the institution and from those
ference plans rejected in what “felt like” a “racist
student service providers). But, while these late nine-
remark” (p. 203). Reflecting on race in the early days
teenth century HBCUs may have had programs that
of service-learning scholarship and practice, Duley
could be considered forerunners of service-learning
states “We did not attract many blacks into our mem-
in which Black Americans such as Haynes played
bership. Those who were in the university were steer-
prominent leadership roles and Black students were
ing clear of fringe operations” (p. 203). Duley’s com-
positioned affirmatively as social actors, none of the
ments reflect both the lack of representation of peo-
HBCUs, their programs, or their participants are
ple of color among early service-learning practition-
named or elaborated on in any of the seven general
ers that Stanton et al. identify and the lack of repre-
histories. Thus, while Stanton et al. do position peo-
sentation and racism in the academy at large that may
ple of color at least generally as actors in the HBCU
have contributed to it.
reference, more specific examples and elaborations
In the second instance, Kenneth Reardon (in
on early programs run by people of color similar to
Stanton et al., 1999), echoing Mitchell et al.’s (2012)
the specifics and elaboration provided for programs
concern, elaborates on the previously identified early
run by White individuals and institutions are needed
lack of diversity, asserting that it is still an issue today
to strengthen this affirmative positioning.
and that it is more than demographics, it bleeds over
Sheffield’s (2011) narrative, while it may numerical-
into practice:
ly underrepresent the influence of people of color in
service-learning’s history, does consistently position A lot of what we have are individuals from pre-
people of color affirmatively and as providers and dominately white, male-run, middle-class, acad-
9
Bocci
emic institutions going into lower-income com- those of their White counterparts. In terms of posi-
munities of color. The dynamics of reciprocity tioning, while the four pioneers of color in Stanton et
and partnership need real attention because of al.’s text are clearly positioned as active and impor-
our unconscious replication of oppressive ways
tant participants and while Sheffield elaborates on
of working with communities. (p. 220)
several individuals of color and the PNS’s contribu-
His comments critically attend to the ways that unex- tions to service-learning’s history, most of the histor-
amined racial assumptions, a prevailing Whiteness ical narratives present people of color as needy recip-
among servers, and White normative practices have ients of service or do not include or elaborate on their
influenced how, where, with, and for whom we con- involvement at all. Such positioning and exclusions
duct service-learning. of people of color, in contrast with how and how
But alongside the criticality evident in these reflec- many White people enter the narratives, highlight
tions, in these two instances, as in most of the other White normativity in service-learning. It reinforces
documents, people of color enter the historical narra- the assumption that, from the earliest influences on
tive as either largely absent (if the focus is on schol- what would become service-learning, White people
ars, practitioners, and students) or as the recipients of have been the empowered, capable servers and inno-
service (if the focus is on the service-learning con- vators whose contributions are central and important,
struction itself). The third explicit reference to people while servers and innovators of color have been
of color in Stanton et al.’s (1999) text follows a simi- ancillary at best, absent at worse, and most people of
lar pattern. Joan Schine recalls that her “passion… color have only received services, not provided them.
was largely combatting racism: to convince minority In the following section I examine the constructed
youngsters who were poor and disenfranchised that histories themselves for ways that the inclusion/
they could act as citizens and take some control of exclusion of certain philosophies, events, people,
their lives” (pp. 54-55). Thus, she positions these organizations, and understandings of “service” fur-
“youngsters” as the recipients of service even as she ther contribute to or challenge this White normativity.
implies that the purpose of that service was to
The Construction of
empower them as social actors.
The fourth explicit reference to race within Service-Learning’s History
Stanton et al.’s (1999) narrative text does challenge
In their constructions of service-learning’s history,
the positioning of people of color as needy recipients
the authors’ timelines and discussions can be broken
of service because it involves the recollections of two
down into two main threads: the history of the ser-
of the pioneers of color. Jack Hasegawa and Greg
vice-learning’s philosophy and the history of the
Ricks speak about feeling stereotyped as Asian and
practice itself. Within this second thread, the narra-
African American service-learning practitioners,
tives follow two sub-threads: the history of service in
respectively. Hasegawa asserts that “when I emerge
education and the history of service (often conflated
differently from [those stereotypes], it creates barri-
with volunteerism) in general. Each thread reflects
ers” (p. 204). Ricks similarly states that he feels
the overall Whiteness of representation as I have pre-
“forced into playing a role,” and that often he is “the
viously described, but more than a demographic
only one at the table, the only one to represent” which
issue, the authors’ choices of which events, people,
is “difficult but also an advantage” because he feels
and organizations to include and exclude contribute
“an incredible sense of responsibility to black peo-
to the White normativity that Butin (2006), Mitchell
ple” (p. 204). In this instance, people of color enter
et al. (2012) and Reardon (in Stanton et al., 1999)
the narrative as active contributors to the history of
warn against. In other words, by promoting certain
service-learning critically examining the role that
historical origins and excluding others, the histories
their race has played in “creating barriers and chal-
may reinforce the perception that service-learning is
lenges not encountered by the white pioneers”
designed and practiced by White people on or on
(Stanton et al., 1999, p. 203). Despite the low ratio of
behalf of people of color.
people of color to White pioneers, the authors clearly
positon those represented as empowered and impor-
The History of Service-Learning’s Philosophy
tant participants in the history of service-learning.
In sum, then, in terms of numeric representation of Sheffield (2011) states that most scholars trace ser-
people of color in service-learning histories, vice-learning’s philosophical origins to John Dewey
Whiteness prevails. When people of color are men- and progressive education. Indeed, Rocheleau (2004)
tioned they are often referred to as a collective or also spends the majority of his exploration of service-
through allusions, which may indicate that the learning’s philosophical roots with a description of
authors do not consider people of color or non-Anglo progressive education vis-à-vis Dewey, though he
individuals’ contributions as worthy of attention as also traces the idea that education and civic responsi-
10
Service-Learning and White Normativity
bility/morality go hand-in-hand back to Plato, matist philosophers and educators of color who could
Aristotle, Jefferson, and Locke’s writings on the pur- also be incorporated into the narrative of service-
pose of education. Both Rocheleau and Sheffield tie learning’s philosophical history.
the progressive movement to the pragmatist philo- Perhaps even more so than the specific philosophy
sophical tradition. LACOE’s (n.d.) summary also of service-learning, philosophy as a discipline has a
mentions Dewey first in its list of educational schol- reputation for being a White academic enclave
ars implicitly promoting service-learning, though it (Mills, 1994), so possibly one could argue that the
proceeds to elaborate on the work of Arthur Dunn, lack of contributions from people of color in these
leaving Dewey and the other philosophers listed as philosophical histories is less due to the White nor-
influential (Taba, Tyler, Goodlad, and Boyer) with mativity in service-learning and more due to the lack
just a name recognition. The Bright Impact Web doc- of diversity within that discipline. However, as
ument (2013) also mentions Dewey, along with prag- Stevens (2003) asserts, “philosophical and pedagog-
matist William James, as the first to philosophically ical precursors to service-learning [can be] found in
merge experiential learning and service with school- African American social thought…observed in most
ing. While their history is not a chronological explo- ‘Negro’ institutions like the church, black colleges,
ration nor does it attempt to find one “root” or and other civic-minded organizations” (p. 26). At a
“founder” for a service-learning philosophy, Stanton minimum, in a discussion of pragmatism and educa-
et al. (1999) and their interviewees also invoke tion, W.E.B. DuBois, Charles Johnson, and Alain
Dewey, among many others, as providing a philo- Locke could be included (Glaude, 2007). In addition
sophical foundation for their practice. to Black Americans’ philosophical contributions, the
Moving chronologically forward, Sheffield (2011), work of indigenous, Chicano and Latino, and other
Rocheleau (2004), and several of Stanton et al.’s non-Anglo scholars should be explored for their par-
(1999) pioneers mention Freire in their discussion of allel and direct contributions to the philosophical and
service-learning’s philosophical history (though theoretical traditions that influence service-learning.
Rocheleau only includes Freire parenthetically, refer- Furthermore, critical pedagogy should be included
encing other White critical pedagogues in his main consistently in the philosophical history of service-
text). Rocheleau and Sheffield both explicitly discuss learning. Doing so provides a more complete image
the impact of critical pedagogues and political theo- of the range of theoretical frameworks at play in the
rist such as Giroux, Bellah (Rocheleau; Sheffield) field currently and also allows a point of entry for
and Esquith (Rocheleau) on service-learning. critically questioning the White normativity-repro-
Because critical pedagogy problematizes hierarchies ducing hierarchies and methods that prevail in much
and oppressive systems in education and society, it service-learning (Butin, 2006; Mitchell et al., 2012;
may be the theoretical lens most likely to challenge Reardon as quoted in Stanton et al., 1999). Freire, as
service-learning’s “pedagogy of whiteness” (Mitchell a non-Anglo and arguably the most influential criti-
et al., 2012). However, none of the online documents cal pedagogue, should feature prominently in discus-
mention these or any other more contemporary influ- sions of this philosophy’s contribution.
ences on service-learning philosophy, ending their
The History of Service-Learning Practice
philosophical history with the pre-1950 progressives.
Readers of these texts may be left with a narrow In addition to the history of service-learning’s
understanding of service-learning’s philosophical philosophical underpinnings, the seven documents
underpinning, lacking the critical framework neces- also trace the history of service-learning in practice.
sary for certain analyses of power, privilege, and They follow two sub-threads: chronicling the devel-
oppression within service-learning constructions. opment of service-learning within institutions of edu-
These sources present an overall image of the cation (P-12, higher education, and popular educa-
philosophical history of service-learning that is quite tion) and the growth of service/volunteerism in gener-
White. The only non-Anglo mentioned is Freire, and al. For each of these two sub-thread sections, I first
he is only discussed in any detail in Sheffield’s outline the chronologies that the documents present,
(2011) chapter, just receiving a parenthetical citation referencing the movements, people, organizations,
in Rocheleau (2004) and a few brief nods from and events that each history includes. I then critique
Stanton et al.’s (1999) interviewees. On the other these historical constructions, noting missed opportu-
hand, the White progressives and pragmatists, partic- nities to include the work of people of color and offer-
ularly Dewey, James, and Hanna, are presented ing alternatives to these prevailing narratives.
across the texts as “community service learning’s The history of service in education.Within the dis-
conceptual founders” (Sheffield, p. 20). Given their cussion of service in education, the documents focus
contributions, these philosophers and educators can- on two schools of thought and practice: education for
not be discounted, but there may be additional prag- democracy/civic participation and experiential edu-
11
Bocci
cation (which some authors conflate with vocational Stanton et al. (1999) then all discuss Dewey’s model
education). Addressing the relationship between and philosophy for experiential education as provid-
democracy/civic participation and education, the ing, in Rocheleau’s words, “a clear basis” for “the
Bright Impact (2013) Web document begins with the pedagogical goals and methods of service-learning”
Morrill Act’s land grant colleges, stating that they (p. 7). Rocheleau, Sheffield, and Stanton et al. also
were meant to “create citizens who will be ‘educated mention Kilpatrick’s Project Method and Hanna’s
for the betterment of society’” (n. p.). Zieren and Youth Serves the Community text as other early
Stoddard (2004) also reference the land grant col- examples of experiential learning’s evolution toward
leges, but begin their chronology with mentions of service-learning. The LACOE document also men-
Harvard, Yale, and the University of Virginia’s pre- tions Arthur Dunn’s 1916 Social Studies Committee
1800 commitments to producing an “informed elec- report as a forerunner to modern service-learning
torate” (p. 23). Similarly, Sheffield (2011) devotes practices.
his first section to describing the link between ser- Continuing into the second half of the twentieth
vice-learning and early American ideals of civic century, the documents begin to center on events
responsibility and education for democracy as pro- relating specifically to service-learning within
moted by Horace Mann and others (pp. 20-21). schools, colleges, and universities and the founda-
Rocheleau (2004) refers to Plato, Aristotle, Jefferson, tions and institutions that begin to form to support
and Locke as proponents of a link between education this more “official” service-learning (with the excep-
and the ability to participate democratically. tion of Zieren and Stoddard’s 2004 discussion of
With the early connections between education and Highlander). Having skipped entirely over the proto-
democracy/civic participation established, the histo- types of service-learning mentioned in the other
ries chronicle experiential learning and vocational texts, the National Service Learning Clearinghouse
education. The Bright Impact (2013) Web document document (2008) begins its historical account in
and Stanton et al.’s (1999) timelines begin again with 1969 with the Atlanta Service Learning Conference
the Morrill Act. Zieren and Stoddard (2004) also which involved multiple civic and government orga-
include the Morrill Act in their list, asserting that the nizations and declared service-learning a “policy
colleges and universities founded through the Act thrust for the future” (quoted in Stanton et al., 1999,
represent forerunners to service-learning because of p. 253). Their timeline then skips ahead to the found-
their incorporation of actual work as well as practical ing of the Campus Outreach Opportunity League in
and vocational learning into the liberal arts curricu- 1984, Campus Compact in 1985, and the 1990
lum. The connection between the experiential/voca- National and Community Service Act which created
tional learning happening within these colleges and the Serve America organization to provide grants for
“service” seems to hinge on the idea that the innova- service-learning. They conclude their history with
tion occurring in the colleges was meant to improve the formation of Learn and Serve America in 1993.
farming, manufacturing, and other production which Stanton et al. include all of these events on their time-
in turn may have improved daily life for others. line and add many others, including the establish-
Zieren and Stoddard also indicate that the colleges ment of folk schools in Appalachia; college work
themselves were a “service” to those excluded from study programs in the 1960s; the 1971 White House
other institutions of higher education, first the “sons Conference of Youth that called for service-learning;
of farmers and mechanics” (p. 26) and later, with the the publication of Experiential Education and
Act’s expansion in 1890, to African Americans, as I Synergist in the 1970s; and the creation of the
previously discussed. National Center for Service Learning in 1979. The
Continuing chronologically from the Morrill Acts, Bright Impact (2013) document skips most of these
the Bright Impact (2013) Web document and Zieren events and picks up with the 1985 creation of
and Stoddard (2004) mention the 1903 Cooperative Campus Compact, the organization formed by col-
Education Movement at the University of Cincinnati. lege and university presidents to support the develop-
Zieren and Stoddard also describe the connection ment of service-learning programs. LACOE (n.d.)
between Rensselaer and West Point’s experiential and also skips the mid-twentieth century and picks up
work-based curricula in the early 1800s and “ser- with the 1993 National and Community Service
vice.” Zieren and Stoddard then turn their attention to Trust Act that formed the aforementioned Learn and
popular and “non-traditional” education, mentioning Serve America program and also provided a defini-
Jane Addams, Mary Richmond, and the Settlement tion for service-learning practice that LACOE quotes
House movement and Harry Hopkins, Aubrey in its entirety. Because of its local focus, the LACOE
Williams, and the National Youth Administration. document goes on to describe the development of
Rocheleau (2004), Zieren and Stoddard, Sheffield service-learning in California’s schools during the
(2013), Bright Impact (2013), LACOE (n.d.) and 1990s and early 2000s.
12
Service-Learning and White Normativity
Across the texts, the post-1950 history of service- development of service-learning. Loose connections
learning mostly includes moments in which service- are natural when attempting to describe disparate ele-
learning was institutionalized in some way (as in the ments that would eventually coalesce and evolve into
formation of Campus Compact) or granted govern- a new concept. Rather, I describe their looseness in
mental support (as in the White House Conference of order to make space for a broader exploration of ser-
Youth or National and Community Service Trust vice-learning’s history. In other words, if we are will-
Act). While not inherently linked to race, the ing to claim a direct connection between the Morrill
increased focus on institutionalized or otherwise Land Grant colleges’ vocational/practical education
“official” service-learning creates a certain narrative and service-learning, why not Booker T.
that may limit who and what events can be included. Washington’s work at the Tuskegee Institute, where
For example, while Zieren and Stoddard (2004) do his emphasis on industrial education alongside acad-
spend several paragraphs describing Highlander and emics sought to provide Black Americans with “a
popular education in the civil rights movement, they generous education of the hand, head, and heart”
are the only ones to do so and their account leaves out (Washington, 1901/1995, p. 41)? If we draw a direct
leaders of color within those movements. Popular line from Jefferson, Mann, the eighteenth century
education, of which Highlander is an example, is not presidents of Harvard and Yale, and John Locke to
part of the mainstream history of public or higher the development of service-learning, why not do the
education in the U.S., and as such, as service-learn- same with Frederick Douglass and W.E.B. DuBois
ing historians narrow their focus to institutionalized who also advocated and embodied civic responsibil-
examples, these “outside” influences on the practice ity and spoke about the link between quality educa-
are lost. Additionally, while many of the pioneers tion and the ability to participate in government?
interviewed by Stanton et al. (1999) come from com- Those connections would be equally conceptually
munity organizing and political activism traditions, strong and were and are sufficiently well-known to
because those fields exist outside of academic insti- be conceivable influences on the eventual pioneers of
tutions, the links between them and the development the service-learning movement in the 1960s and
of service-learning (particularly a more critical, less- 1970s and its current practitioners. In fact, Zieren
White service-learning) may also be lost or at least and Stoddard (2004) do trace the history of service-
de-emphasized. learning through contexts not found in other histo-
While the post-1950 history of service-learning ries, including influences on American service-learn-
may omit certain influences because its focus is nar- ing practice from Germany, Russia, and Sweden and
row, the history of service in education pre-1950 may from the field of social work. If they can revise the
omit them despite casting a wide net in its search for commonly articulated history to include these addi-
service-learning’s forerunners. Because it seeks to tional international influences, perhaps space could
identify possible influences on and prototype ver- be made for the work of non-Anglos and people of
sions of a practice that had yet to be named, histori- color as well. Black and Latino and Chicano activist
ans writing about service-learning pre-1950 must and service traditions as well as Indigenous educa-
make somewhat loose connections between their tion traditions, for example, could contribute addi-
illustrations and current practices. For example, tional and helpful perspectives that have often been
while service-learning often holds educating for civic shut out of the mainstream narrative.
responsibility and democratic participation as a goal, Even if scholars hesitate to expand the histories’
the Morrill Act land grant colleges (Bright Impact, scope, the contributions of people of color could eas-
2013; Stanton et al., 1999; Zieren & Stoddard, 2004), ily be inserted into the existing discourse. In their dis-
barn raisings (Sheffield, 2011), and Jefferson’s edu- cussions of the Morrill Land Grant colleges, particu-
cation plans (Rocheleau, 2004) are all loosely con- larly as they mention the founding of the HBCUs
nected at best to the ultimate development of service- after 1890, service-learning historians could chose
learning. For instance, students in land grant colleges examples from these institutions for elaboration
inventing new farm technologies that improve the instead of or in addition to the White institutions that
productivity of farmers once commercially available most of these documents’ authors highlight. Why not,
is a weak association to actual community service. as Stevens (2003) promotes, include W.E.B.
Furthermore, while underpinned by some of the DuBois’s community-engaged action research-style
same educational philosophy, vocational education work at Atlanta University or George E. Haynes’
and nineteenth and early twentieth century experien- course at Fisk University? When discussing Jane
tial learning methods can only be loosely tied to cur- Addams and Hull House, one could include Anna
rent service-learning practices. Julia Cooper and Ida B. Wells-Barnett whose work in
I do not critique the inclusion of these loose con- settlement house-style programs were “early demon-
nections to imply that they played no part in the strations of experiential learning” and early versions
13
Bocci
of “action research” in which individuals of color The history of volunteerism/service as a social
combined education and service to help other people concept. Because service-learning is not simply an
of color become “proactive participants in communi- institutional or educational practice, these histories
ty and society” (p. 28). In their discussion of also trace the history of service-learning by providing
Highlander specifically and the civil rights move- a linear account of the evolution of service and vol-
ment in general, service-learning historians could unteerism in general. As in the previous section, I
highlight the role that people of color played as both first summarize the organizations that each history
leaders and recipients of popular education move- mentions. I then critique the focus on volunteerism
ments, including, but not limited to, activist/educa- and charitable organizations as forerunners to ser-
tors like Septima Clark, Esau Jenkins, Bernice vice-learning, examining how this conflation of vol-
Robinson, and Mary McLeod Bethune. If looking for unteerism and service-learning may perpetuate the
post-1950 examples of early service-learning practi- White cultural norms and power hierarchies in service-
tioners within institutions of higher education, one learning.
could include Velia Garcia (2007) whose Chicano The LACOE (n.d.) document mentions a series of
Studies students as early as 1972 practiced “activist organizations founded in the spirit of charity, volun-
research in service to the community” which she says teerism, and civil service, including the Salvation
“contained all the critical elements of what is today Army, Red Cross, Community Chest, Junior League,
called critical service-learning” (p. 209). Big Brothers and Big Sisters, Rotary, Kiwanis,
Sheffield’s inclusion of the PNS presents one United Way, Girl and Boy Scouts, the Civilian
example of a lesser-known school run for and partly Conservation Corp, Peace Corp, VISTA, and others.
by people of color that used service-learning-like Bright Impact (2013) mentions several of these and
strategies. In addition to PNS, the work of Virginia includes the YMCA and YWCA. The National
Estelle Randolph could be considered an early exam- Service Learning Clearinghouse document (2008)
ple of service-learning-like pedagogy. In the early also lists the Peace Corps and VISTA in their chron-
twentieth century, Randolph instituted experiential icling of the history of service in America. Stanton et
learning programs that blended academics with al.’s (1999) timeline and first-person narratives
industrial and home economics work. Moreover, the include the YMCA, YWCA, Civilian Conservation
programs she founded were designed to meet com- Corps, Peace Corps, and VISTA.
munity and school needs and promote self-help These organizations, particularly the ones men-
(African American Register, 2008). tioned across documents like the Peace Corps and
Overall, the authors of these histories of service in VISTA, have been foundational to how we understand
education miss multiple opportunities to include peo- the value of service, its purpose, and what we can
ple of color. These omissions not only discount legit- learn from it. As Stanton et al. (1999) make clear
imate historical influences on the development of through their interviews, many of the post-1950 pio-
service-learning and valuable examples of early prac- neers of service-learning began their work in and
tice that current practitioners could learn from, but around these programs, particularly the Peace Corps.
they also reinforce the prevailing notions of service- But as they point out in their work, and as Sheffield
learning as a pedagogy created by White people. (2013) relates in a later chapter, service conceived of
When we ignore the significant contributions of peo- as noble obligation, charity, and even volunteerism
ple of color to the philosophies that underpin service- often reinforces dominant social norms and power
learning and examples of its early practice, we deny hierarchies. As Sheffield notes, “like philanthropy,
the agency that people of color have had and continue charity, and noblesse oblige, volunteerism lacks an
to have in education and community service, and risk understanding of democratic community building and
appropriating those practices as exclusively White connecting” and “ignores the ramifications of history
people’s. In the following section, I continue to and its impact on the present/future” (pp. 77-78).
examine how the authors’ inclusion and exclusion of Given this possible absence of respect for and connec-
certain events, people, and organizations reinforces tion to the community served and the positioning of
this White normativity in service-learning. Speci- the servers as unquestionably qualified to “help” or
fically, in examining how the origins of service- “fix” a community’s “problems” without fully delv-
learning were construed in favor of pedagogies/meth- ing into why those problems exist, service framed as
ods that privilege the academy and arise from senses volunteerism or motivated by charity or philanthropy
of charity or noblesse oblige, I find support for is the kind of service that Mitchell et al. (2012) refer
Mitchell et al.’s (2012) concern that service-learning to as the “pedagogy of Whiteness” – its framing of
is often employed in ways that reinforce White cul- “White, middle-class students as automatically and
tural/educational norms and power dynamics that necessarily capable of serving” and of “community
privilege Whiteness. problems…as the result of individual circumstances
14