DRAFT: Service Learning, Annotated Bibliography 1

DRAFT: Service Learning, Annotated Bibliography

1

DRAFT Service Learning in Technical Communication

Annotated Bibliography

Susan Bolling

Department of English, East Carolina University

ENGL 6702: Research Methods in Technical and Professional Communication, Section 601

Dr. Guiseppe Getto

DRAFT DUE: September 27, 2021


2

References

Blouin, D. D., & Perry, E. M. (2009). Whom Does Service Learning Really Serve? Community- Based Organizations’ Perspectives on Service Learning. Teaching Sociology, 37(2), 120–135. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25593983

Blouin and Perry explore the perspective of the community on the receiving end

of service learning. They identify three common challenges, including poor student

conduct, a poor fit between the curriculum and the organization’s objectives, and a lack

of communication between instructors and organizations. (p. 120)

Their research includes a small sample, and did not limit the scope to well-

organized service-learning courses, however without a broader scope the authors resist

generalizing the impact of specific types of courses. (p. 133) Instead, they argue that,

overall, the experience for both the community organization and the instructors and

students is greatly improved with robust communication and collaborating to design

coursework that is meaningful for everyone involved. (p. 133)

Sixth on the reading list and published in 2009, this article is included because it

confronts challenges of service learning from the perspective of community partners,

who are on the receiving end of the service. While Blouin and Perry did not offer a

concrete solution to the problems submitted, they echoed a sentiment that is popular in

most of the articles on this reading list, and that is that clear and effective

communication on the part of everyone involved in a service learning project is

imperative for its’ success.


3

Chong, F. (2016) Service learning in Tech Communication. Council for Programs in Technical and Scientific Communication. http://cptsc.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Service-Learning-Chong-2016.pdf

In a brief essay on service learning for CPTSC, Chong cites several of the articles

annotated in this bibliography, noting advantages and benefits, approaches to AS-L

curriculum, assignments and models, reflection and assessment and challenges. The

most helpful information in this article is her comprehensive reference to how service

learning meets the four criteria provided by the National Community Service Act (1990):

• Students must learn as they participate in service that meets an actual community

need.

• Service and academics must be integrated by reflection.

• Students must have the opportunity to use new skills in real situations in their own

communities.

• The class must cultivate in students a sense of caring for others.

Eleventh on the reading list and published in 2016, this article in included because it

is a relatively recent and comprehensive review of service learning, as well as for the

author’s reference to the National Community Service Act of 1990, which was a first in

the sequential review of the literature. Coincidently, Chong cites several of the articles

included in this reading list, however this particular document was discovered via

Google Scholar toward the end of the literature search.


4

Brizee, A., Pascual-Ferrá, P., and Caranante, G. (2020). High-Impact Civic Engagement: Outcomes of Community-Based Research in Technical Writing Courses. Journal of Technical Writing & Communication, 50(3), 224-251.

Brizee et al. presents research from a collaboration between a socioeconomically

challenged neighborhood and Layola University Maryland. While results show no real

differences in educational experiences of service learning and non-service learning

students, they did show considerable difference in transformational experiences. (p.

224)

Student and community work included “direct service,” like cleaning up the

neighborhood, followed by technical communication service, which included training to

address the “digital divide” and unemployment. (p. 225)

Research questions are: “when following high-impact civic engagement practices, what

are the effects on TPC students” and “when following high-impact civic engagement

practices, what are the effects on local community members’ educational and

transformational experiences?” (p. 225)

High-impact civic engagement is defined as an assignment that is “thoughtfully

and collaboratively designed,” supported by the institution, and critically evaluated and

edited based on those evaluations. (p. 226)

Transformational experiences for students include making a significant

difference in the community, working with community members to assess needs and

goals, and establishing long-term relationships. (p. 230) Educational experiences for

students include understanding the local community, course concepts and general

principles of justice and social injustice. (p. 230)


5

Transformational and educational experiences for community members include

all of the above from the perspective of the partner, with their understanding of social

injustice and justice being instead an awareness of stakeholders like other community

organizations and colleges. (p. 231)

The authors conclude by conceding that unsuccessful service learning can risk

the health and well-being of a community, but that successful “high-impact” service

learning can prepare students for civic leadership and encourage positive outcomes for

everyone involved. (p. 248)

Thirteenth on the reading list and published first in 2019 before being published

in this volume of JTWC, this article is included as a recent review of service learning in

the technical communication classroom. It addresses the challenges addressed in

previous literature essentially by raising the standards of applied service learning

practices, defining them as “high-impact.” Brizee et al. do not offer a blanket solultion

for challenges, nor do they suggest service learning will ever be without them, but

instead they assert that elevated expectations and meaningful performance will

increase its record of success. Although that is arguably the case for any type of

assignment or curriculum in any field, the authors do offer examples in their

methodology, which is at the very least helpful in considering future research problems

and questions.


6

Bush-Bacelis, JL. (1998) Innovative Pedagogy: Academic Service-Learning for Business Communication. Business Communication Quarterly. 61(3), 20-34. doi:10.1177/108056999806100303

The purpose of this article is to encourage business communication faculty to

incorporate academic service learning into their teaching. Bush-Bacelis explains that

Academic Service Learning (AS-L) is a method by which students learn the principles of

business communication by applying them to a real-world project that is coordinated

with the academic and local communities. (p. 20) The author describes the method as

“an infusion of classroom content into the community service experience.” (p. 20)

There are three components of a successful AS-L assignment; its results should have

meaningful impact on the organization and or community; it should align with the

course curriculum; and there should be a period of time after the assignment is

completed to reflect on the outcome, challenges and lessons learned by seeing theories

put into practice. Bush-Bacelis asserts that meeting the above requirements contributes

to conceptual growth and critical thinking.

Additionally, this article provides details of what executing an AS-L assignment

may look like, including student resistance to the perception of an inordinate amount of

time needed to complete the assignment. The author dutifully notes a nonprofits’

tendency to be limited in volunteers and, as a result, take advantage of people who

have committed their time to the cause. Including a written proposal as part of the

assignment details the students’ involvement and therefore protects their time. (p. 22)

Students are personally invested in their work when they select organizations close to

where they live and work, and they give oral reports to the class to provide updates on


7

their progress and maintain discussion of how the assignment aligns with the course

curriculum. (p. 24) Also included are revelations that it is the AS-L assignment that they

will remember most after leaving school.

Benefits include student empowerment, improved student engagement, which

leads to better quality work, which leads to a more enjoyable review experience for

faculty and therefore boosts morale, and positive PR for the university. (p. 32)

Published in 1998, this is the oldest article in this bibliography and therefore

first on the reading list. It is a comprehensive introduction to and defense of service

learning that provides one method of incorporating the pedagogy into technical

communication curriculum. A mostly positive review, it does mention one common

challenge in working with nonprofits, and that is of the risk of students being asked to

commit beyond the boundaries of the assignment. The author provides a written

proposal and contract as a solution.

Dush, L. (2014). Building the Capacity of Organizations for Rhetorical Action with New Media:

An Approach to Service Learning. Computers and Composition, 34, 11-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2014.09.001.

Dush presents an alternative model for the service learning, in which the

students provide instruction in creating new media to the organizations they serve, as

opposed to completing one project on behalf of the organization. (p. 11) This reversal

of the service learning model essentially provides the organization with long-term

benefit while also providing students and instructors with a different perspective in the

requirements of new media production for nonprofits. (p. 11) Students are designing

instruction based on the needs of the organization, as opposed to a specific project with


8

a shelf-life. Dush further argues that “working in this way with nonprofit and

community-based organizations can further develop our students – and our field’s –

understanding of the rhetorical dynamics of new media composition and use in

organizational settings.” (p. 12)

Dush uses digital storytelling as a methodology for exploring this model. She

notes that it was a massive undertaking on both the part of first training the students

and then shifting to train members of the community, and that a two-course curriculum

is necessary to efficiently address both components of the model. (p. 21) That said, she

also argues that the model provides a robust experience for both the organizations, who

benefit from learning continuously changing digital media platforms, and the students

and instructors who are having to not only maintain their own digital acumen but to also

align that with the needs of the organizations they serve. (p. 21)

Her concluding statement is particularly great – “In a world where digital

composition tools and online distribution platforms are proliferating at a pace that’s

near impossible to keep up with, helping build others’ capacity to ask questions – like

what technologies will help our organization to say what we want to say? or what

technologies will help us to reach audiences we want to reach? or how can we

responsibly deploy and evaluate new technologies? – is timely and meaningful work.” (p.

21)

Eighth on the reading list and published in 2014, this article is a favorite and

included for its innovative approach to service learning. Dush proposes that students

offer to teach applicable skills to community partners and volunteers, as opposed to a


9

specific project or deliverable. This is a considerable and noble stretch of the service

learning pedagogy that, to her point, in 2021 is still incredibly timely and relevant.

Hea, A. C. K., & Shah, R. W. (2016) Silent Partners: Developing a Critical Understanding of

Community Partners in Technical Communication Service-Learning Pedagogies, Technical Communication Quarterly, 25(1), 48-66. DOI: 10.1080/10572252.2016.1113727

Hea and Shah address the lack of technical communication research on

community partners in service learning projects. In a handful of articles reviewed, the

authors noted that one third of nonprofit staff in a particular study were dissatisfied

with the service learning collaboration, suggesting that the issues that needed to be

addressed were beyond that of a comprehensive survey. (p. 48)

Questioned asked in this article include “what are some of the ways community

partners themselves construct their roles in service-learning projects; what motivates

community partners to participate in these projects; and what do community partners

expect from such collaborations?” (p. 49)

Hea and Shah identify four areas of tension for community partners: (1) receiving

help means giving help (2) community partners are required to both teach and be

clients (3) both community organizations and students require extensive planning and

flexibility and (4) meeting the needs of community partners means that they must also

meet the needs of the students. (p. 49)

The authors argue that not reflecting on the community partner perspective puts

service learning instructors at risk of hyperpragmatism, which “avoids analysis of ethical

and cultural tensions in favor of efficiency and professional gain.” (p. 49)


10

Hea and Shah present this set of tensions or paradoxes as is, suggesting that they

must be managed on a case by case basis and that there is not one blanket solution for

addressing these issues in service learning. They do, however, encourage ongoing

partnerships and collaborations with faculty and community partners as a way to

develop a richer understanding of each group’s needs, thereby supporting more

successful service learning projects and providing a greater depth of information for

future and much needed research.

Tenth on the reading list and published in 2016, this article, similar to Blouin et

al. and McEachern, addresses challenges in service learning from the perspective of

community partners. Of particular interest here are four specific tensions in community

partnerships, as well Hea and Sha delivering a bit of accountability to the academy

regarding its tendency to be too idealistic in its expectations of real world applications.

Henson L, Sutliff K. A (1998) Service Learning Approach to Business and Technical Writing

Instruction. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication. 28(2),189-205. doi:10.2190/0BT3-FVCX-3T9N-FVMR

Second on the reading list and published in 1998, this article explains the origins

of academic service learning, as well as an argument for the relevance of it in the field of

TPC. It then provides examples of assignments and teaching methods that may reduce

complications that arise during collaborating with nonprofits. Finally it provides

resources for curriculum related to writing proposals and grants, which is arguably the

most important service a technical writer can offer to a nonprofit.

Henson and Sutliff note that as of 1997, few TPC programs and institutions were

taking advantage of AS-L, and that a review of literature written between 1989 and 1995


11

included no titles related to service learning. (p. 189) They assert that understanding

the origins of AS-L is necessary for instructors to determine whether or not it’s

appropriate for their students, and understanding the problems that may occur in

collaborations between institutions and organizations is a critical component for

creating an AS-L pedagogy. (p. 190) Further, instructors have to address the issue of

aligning AS-L curriculum with institutional guidelines and appropriate course levels. (p.

190)

Authors attribute the growth of AS-L to “the attempt of some institutions of

higher education to revitalize their moral and intellectual leadership in a democratic

society.” (p. 191) They include a notable quote from a Newsweek article by Jonathan

Alter: “the battle plan is to get the public, the private and the nonprofit sectors all

marching in the same direction at the same time on the same fundamental needs of

young people.” (p. 191)

In addressing appropriate course level, Henson and Sutliff note that solid

comprehension of the challenges of ethical writing require workplace experience, the

likes of which require a certain level of maturity, which carries most of the weight when

determining at what point a student is ready to do the work. They recommend AS-L

course work for juniors and seniors. (p. 194)

The authors conclude that faculty should accept AS-L for “intellectual merit as

well as moral and social value.” (p. 201) Additionally, building community relationships

will build trust and secure future projects that increase in impact and relevance.


12

Henson and Sutliff further conclude that the researching missing from this particular

area includes “scope of audiences, document types, rhetorical purposes, contents,

styles and outcomes,” which is information that administrators and faculty need to

understand WHY AS-L supports superior student professional development. (p. 202)

Second on the reading list and also published in 1998, this article dives a little

deeper into the challenges of service learning, in particular appropriate course level. It’s

included for their concluding call for more research to examine a technical writer’s

scope of work in community organizations.

Catherine Matthews & Beverly B. Zimmerman (1999) Integrating Service Learning and Technical Communication: Benefits and challenges, Technical Communication Quarterly, 8:4, 383-404, DOI: 10.1080/10572259909364676

This article addresses two groups of students – those who embrace AS-L

assignments, civic engagement and responsibility for their own education and those

who struggled to see the benefit in these types of assignments and become frustrated

with work outside of the classroom. Matthews and Zimmerman point out that AS-L is

promoted with a list of benefits, but that there is little research proving that the

benefits are actually happening. Their questions include asking how implementing AS-L

for technical writing students, who are traditionally trained for the workforce but not

asked to consider civic issues, will affect their outcome; what prevents students from

experience the benefits of AS-L; and what other problems occur when integrating

service learning and technical communication? (p. 384)


13

Matthews and Zimmerman explore three specific benefits: development of civic

values, improved academic learning, and motivated students. (p. 385)

Development of civic values implies that “students develop a sense of ethical behavior

as they narrow the distance between themselves and others through interaction,

observation and discussion…enabling them to realize their ability to change the social

and political systems in which they live.” (p. 385) The authors provide two examples of

student outcomes, including one student who clearly gained a “critical social

conscience,” (p.389) and another who, alternatively, “set a boundary around the

experiences he thought were involved in technical communication, and service learning

fell outside that boundary…impeding the goals he had set for himself.” (p. 392)

Advocates of AS-L argue that it “improves [student] problem solving skills and

creativity.” (p. 386) The authors present one case of students who found tremendous

freedom and inspiration in working with their nonprofit, learning how to design their

project based on the organization’s brand. (p. 390)

The final benefit is that students become more motivated and take responsibility

for their education because, through the AS-L assignment, they discover that their

writing matters and can make a difference. (p. 386) Of the students for whom this is

true, one commented, “we had to put a little more effort into [the web page] because

we knew it was a professional document many people would look at, not just a paper

for a teacher to grade.” (p. 391)

Challenges to these benefits covered in this article include students who simply

didn’t have the capacity (due to work, family obligations, etc.) for learning outside of a


14

narrow academic scope (p. 392;) students who felt as those they were providing only

charity and not working within the community (p. 393;) and students who struggled

with their role as a volunteer and didn’t feel valued by the organization. (p. 393-394)

Other noted challenges include typical collaboration obstacles with personalities and

work ethics, a lack of trust from organizations who had agreed in the past to work with

students who never followed through, and questioning whether or not it should be the

organization, with no training in rhetorical analysis, that should be evaluating the

students’ work. (p. 397)

Matthews and Zimmerman conclude that most challenges with AS-L can be

avoided by redefining it as “learning to negotiate projects within a nonacademic

community,” preparing students for the transition to nonacademic writing, educating

community organizations about rhetorical analysis and how technical communicators

assist with the mission, and providing support for faculty. (p. 398, 402)

Third on the reading list, this article is published in 1999 and included because

Matthews and Zimmerman present relatively balanced research on the promoted

benefits on service learning. Their new definition of service learning is progressive,

although not a panacea, and moves the field closer to a better understanding of the

purpose of the curriculum.

McEachern, Robert W. 2011 Problems in service learning and technical/professional writing:

Incorporating the perspective of nonprofit management. Technical Communication Quarterly. 10(2), 211-224.

McEachern asserts that confronting the challenges in service learning that arise

from working with nonprofit organizations requires understanding nonprofit


15

management theory. (p. 211) He offers several personal examples of problems that

have occurred on the side of the organization and beyond the control of the student and

teacher, including a theater organization dissolving prior to the completion of his own

dissertation, and students who accepted an internships with supervisors who resigned

only a few weeks later.

The author offers two sources of information regarding characteristics of

nonprofits that he believes directly affect service learners. Those characteristics are the

passion for the mission, which, if not aligned with the student’s own values could cause

friction or a lack of motivation; a leader who doesn’t delegate or have enough

manpower to execute the mission, which obviously leaves little room for leading a

service learner; the atmosphere of scarcity, which strains resources for both the

organization and the learner; mixed skill levels and a lack of expertise, which leaves the

student without seasoned guidance; and volunteer participation, which is arguably the

most common weakness for nonprofits and can be especially frustrating for a student

who, while also a volunteer, is also vested financially and professionally in the class for

which they are completing the assignment. (p. 216-220)

McEachern offers that there should be a balance of the student and instructor

selecting an organization together – one that both aligns with the student’s values but

also that the instructor in familiar with the leadership and can mostly assure that the

experience will be worthwhile. Otherwise, with the exception of offering an

understanding of characteristics of nonprofits and how being able to decipher these

helps select a reliable organization, the author offers little else in the way of specific


16

solutions for problems that arise outside the scope of academics. He concludes with

asserting that future research should explore the types of technical writing in the

nonprofit sector in order to strengthen both service learning and the preparation of

students for the workforce in general.

Fourth on the reading list and published in 2001, this article is included because

McEachern offers an alternative perspective, that of the community partners, for

viewing service learning. The noted characteristics of nonprofits and personal

anecdotes of actual challenges offers valuable insight needed to consider practical

logistics of service learning pedagogy.

Nielsen, Danielle. (2016). Facilitating Service Learning in the Online Technical Communication Classroom. Journal of Technical Writing & Communication, 46,(2), 236-256.

Nielsen addresses service learning in the online classroom, specifically related to

students being charged with finding their own opportunities. She argues that students

who make their own connections within the community take charge of their own

academic responsibilities and civic responsibilities and are more motivated to do good

work for organizations for whom they feel personally connected.

Challenges noted for online service learning include finding service opportunities in

remote areas and meeting the needs of non-traditional students and students with

disabilities. (p. 6-7)

Nielsen suggests that consistent and effective communication with students is

key to successful service learning, and she encourages instructors to be available in

multiple ways for questions and feedback. She also insists that informing the student of


17

the service learning component of the class as early as possible will allow the student to

prepare emotionally and logistically, so she posts as much information as possible in the

course registration information. (p. 8) Additionally, in her own online service learning

classroom, she requires weekly progress reports, which contributes to the reflective

component of successful projects. (p. 10) She addresses the issue of remote areas by

encouraging students to find e-service opportunities that they can complete entirely

online, noting that this also helps prepare the student professionally for future

telecommuting options. (p. 10) Allowing students to work with organizations with

whom they are already familiar saves the down time usually devoted to waiting for

returned calls or emails or ground zero research for grants and other documents.

Students may elect to work alone or in pairs, and they may choose whether or not to

use the service learning assignment to complete course requirements at all.

Ninth on the reading list and published in 2016, this article is included because

the author addresses service learning in the online (as opposed to the traditional, face-

to-face) classroom. Nielsen makes a strong case for students selecting their own

community partners, and dutifully outlines her own online service learning classroom

policies, to include an all-encompassing solution for challenges, which is that she makes

using a service learning project to complete course requirements optional.


18

David Alan Sapp & Robbin D. Crabtree (2002). A Laboratory in Citizenship: Service Learning in the Technical Communication Classroom, Technical Communication Quarterly, 11:4, 411-432, DOI: 10.1207/s15427625tcq1104_3

Crabtree and Sapp assert that service learning “creates a spiraling process of

knowledge acquisition…in a repeated cycle, students and teachers share disciplinary

content in the classroom, apply it in the community, and systematically reflect upon the

process and its deeper social implications.” (p. 411)

They also note that, in addition to providing real work experience, service

learning also supports the university’s mission to prepare students to be engaged civic

leaders within the community. (p. 412) While an internship is a professional lab for

students, service learning is similarly a citizenship lab. (p. 12)

Crabtree and Sapp acknowledge that some scholars are suspicious of service

learning, worrying that it “is a way to propagandize and radicalize students in service of

a particular political agenda,” although they follow with assurance that they do not

support this type of instruction. (p. 415) Instead they argue for service learning as a way

to teach genuine democratic citizenship within the classroom. (p. 415)

They conclude with the importance of balancing “social conscience with technical

learning,” and that because technical writers and their instructors have so much to offer

missions of the greater good, more research is required to understand the full breadth

of those offerings. (p. 428)

Fifth on the list and published in 2002, this article is included because it presents

service learning as a laboratory for civic learning, much in the same way that an

internship is a laboratory for professionalism and business. Sapp and Crabtree conclude


19

with a call for research that is similar to the ones echoed in previous articles, and that is

a more thorough examination of what technical writers are able to offer to a nonprofit

organization.

Swacha, K. Y. (2018) Bridging the Gap between Food Pantries and the Kitchen Table: Teaching

Embodied Literacy in the Technical Communication Classroom. Technical Communication Quarterly, 27(3), 261-282, DOI: 10.1080/10572252.2018.1476589

In this article, Swacha argues for a seventh literacy – embodied literacy – in

Cargile Cook’s “layered literacies” of technical communication, which include basic

literacy, rhetorical literacy, social literacy, technological literacy, ethical literacy and

critical literacy. (P. 261-262)

She insists that effective technical communicators must understand the cause

and effect relationship of bodies and the experiences of those bodies with technology

and media in multiple ways. (p. 262)

She then briefly defines each of the six literacies and how embodied literacy

might I intersect.

Of interest to the topic of this bibliography, Swacha notes that some instructors

teach embodied literacy via service learning projects, which give students the

opportunity to solve real world problems and connect with end users. (p. 264)

Twelfth on the reading list and published in 2018, this article is included

because it references service learning as a pedagogy for teaching embodied literacy.

Applying Swacha’s embodied literacy to a service learning project takes Sapp and

Crabtree’s laboratory in citizenship to a higher level of human understanding and

experience.


20

Susan A. Youngblood & Jo Mackiewicz (2013). Lessons in Service Learning: Developing the

Service Learning Opportunities in Technical Communication (SLOT-C) Database. Technical Communication Quarterly, 22(3), 260-283, DOI: 10.1080/10572252.2013.775542

Mackiewicz and Youngblood address the problem of connecting service learning

instructors and students with worthwhile organizations by creating a Service Learning

Opportunities in Technical Communication Database. (SLOT-C) They assert that making

opportunities available in a database relieves faculty who are new to an area of the

burden of community emersion while also adapting to a new academic environment. (p.

260) Additionally, a data base would encourage students to explore opportunities

beyond their immediate communities, which leads to legitimate telecommuting

experience and is professionally beneficial. (p. 261)

The authors outline their methodology for creating the database, but they

concede that future research is required to understand how instructors, students and

organizations will interact with it. (p. 281) Nothing is included with regard to the human

elements involved in creating a database, most prominently the manpower needed to

populate the database with data.

Seventh on the reading list and published in 2013, this article was selected

because it presents a collective database of service learning projects that are available

nationwide. A novel idea, in theory it would work well to address the issue of faculty

time constraints and unfamiliarity with local organizations, downtime for locating willing

partners, etc. Its functionality, however, like any database, is entirely dependent on the


21

input of its users, which Mackiewicz and Youngblood failed to mention here but will

likely cover in subsequent articles.

DRAFT: Service Learning, Annotated Bibliography 1

Documents

Transcript of DRAFT: Service Learning, Annotated Bibliography 1