Designing Your Community-Based Learning Project: Five Questions to Ask about Your

Pedagogical and Participatory Goals

Author(s): Marion Carter, Estela Rivero, Wendy Cadge, Sara Curran
Source: Teaching Sociology, Vol. 30, No. 2 (Apr., 2002), pp. 158-173
Published by: American Sociological Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3211380
Accessed: 02/09/2010 14:13

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://links.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you
have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may
use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://links.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asa.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Teaching Sociology.

http://links.jstor.org
 DESIGNINGYOUR COMMUNITY-BASED LEARNINGPROJECI
FIVE QUESTIONSTO ASK ABOUTYOURPEDAGOGICAL
AND PARTICIPATORYGOALS*

Thispaper presents a set of five questions that are importantto consider in the
preliminaryplanning of a community-based learning (CBL)project. The ques-
tions are relevant to most CBLprojects, ranging from internships to research
projects and field trips. The questions include: Among the goals of the project,
are there primaryand secondary goals or are the goals given equal weight? Is
participationin the project mandatoryor voluntary?Should the CBLcomponent
of a course be concentrated in one site or dispersed across many sites? How
similaror different should each student's individualparticipationin the project
be? How central should direct client/community interaction be to students'
activities? Based on a review of the CBLliteraturein Sociology and feedback
from the students and partner organizationin our own CBLproject, we discuss
each question and outline some of the advantages and disadvantages of
various decisions, focusing on the competing interests of students, instructors,
and partner organizations. The aim is not to advocate one kind of project or
design over another but rather to help other project planners anticipate and
avoid pitfalls noted in the literatureand maximize the benefits of CBL.

MARIONCARTER ESTELARIVERO
Princeton University Princeton University

WENDY CADGE SARACURRAN

Princeton University Princeton University

THE INTEGRATION learningwith

OF CLASSROOM courses, and programs(Marullo 1998; May
community-based experiences is increas- et al. 2000; Myers-Lipton 1998).' While
ingly common in U.S. universities, particu- differing in form and emphasis, CBL pro-
larly in sociology departments. Grouped jects share some concerns about their peda-
here under the term "community-based gogical and participatoryaspects. This paper
learning" (CBL), these efforts describe a offers a set of questions intended to help
wide range of projects that involve struc- instructors navigate some of these issues
tured interactionbetween higher educational during the initial stages of project planning.
institutions(primarilycolleges and universi- Following the pedagogical visions articu-
ties) and community organizations. CBL lated by John Dewey and later by C. Wright
projects include field trips, observational Mills and others, CBL is thought to fit well
projects, service learning projects, with both the substance and methodologies
community-based internships, research, of sociology, as well as the policy-oriented
undertone of many sociology departments
"*Warm thanksgo to NidiaFernandezof Lati-
nas Unidasfor her good humorand hardwork all correspondence to the authorsat Wallace
andto PrincetonUniversity'sCommunity-Based Hall, Princeton, NJ 08544; e-mail: mw-
LearingInitiative
and Program in LatinAmeri- carter@princeton.edu, mariar@princeton.edu,
can Studies for supportingthe project on which gacadge@princeton.edu,curran@princeton.edu
this paper is based. We are also very grateful to Editor's note: The reviewers were, in alpha-
three anonymousreviewers from Teaching Soci- betical order, Adalberto Aguirre, Jr., Marlynn
ology for their helpful comments. Please address May, and Peter Parilla.

Teaching Sociology, Vol. 30, 2002 (April:158-173) 158

DESIGNING CBL PROJECTS 159

(Hironimus-Wendt and Lovell-Troy 1999; course and project requirements. The

Ostrow, Hesser and Enos 1999). However, broaderaim is to help makethe processof
the resultsof such pedagogicalprojectsare incorporatingCBL into sociology courses
oftenmixed.Whilemanybenefitshavebeen easierandperhapsmorefruitful.
noted(Everett1998; Marullo1998; Myers-
Lipton1998; Parillaand Hesser 1998), so CURRENTRESOURCESFOR CBL
too has the inabilityfor some projectsto PROJECTPLANNINGIN SOCIOLOGY
achieve their intended aims (Eby 1999;
Hironimus-Wendtand Lovell-Troy 1999; The decision to incorporateCBL into a
Hondagneu-Sotelo and Raskoff 1994; coursein the firstplacehas receivedconsid-
Parker-Gwin and Mabry 1998; Strand erableattentionin workdiscussingthepeda-
1999). Hondagneu-Sotelo and Raskoff gogical advantagesof CBL in sociology
(1994), for example, outline commonpit- classes (Hironimus-Wendt and Lovell-Troy
falls of CBL projects, includingthe diffi- 1999; Marullo 1996; Ender et al. 2000;
culty many studentshave in linking their Parker-Gwin1996a). Similarly,there is a
experiencesin the communitywith those in relativelyvast literatureto help instructors
the classroomandthe tendencyfor students decide among the differentkinds of CBL
to assume a "white-knight" persona, projectsgiven theirparticularcurricula,ob-
wherebythey see themselvesas saviors to jectives, and institutionalresources.Some
the detrimentof social science learning. describeandcategorizethe differentprojects
Perhapsmost discouraging,some research thatfall underCBL(e.g., out-of-classactiv-
documentshow studentsmayuse theirexpe- ities, internships,volunteering)(Mooney
rienceswith communityprojectsto further and Edwards,2001), andothersexplorethe
harden,ratherthanbreak,prevailingstereo- relativeacademicand civic advantagesand
types (Eby 1999; Hondagneu-Soteloand limitationsof some of these projecttypes
Raskoff1994). In short, fulfillingthe civic (Marullo1998;MooneyandEdwards2001;
and academicpotentialof CBLprojectscan Parker-Gwinand Mabry 1998; Wright
be difficult. 2000).
In part, mixed outcomesof CBL experi- Other parts of project implementation
ences may be a functionof projectdesign. have also receivedattentionin existingliter-
The purposeof this paper is to offer five ature. For example, many authors offer
questionsfor thinkingthroughinitialdesign guidelinesandpracticalexamplesof how to
issues not currentlyaddressedin the litera- help studentslinktheirCBLexperiencewith
ture. The questions-based on hindsight course material (Darling 1998; Everett
from our own CBL project,feedbackfrom 1998; Hondagneu-Sotelo and Raskoff1994;
studentsand the partnerorganization,and Lowe and Reisch 1998; Parillaand Hesser
relevantliteraturein sociology--intendto 1998; Silver and Perez 1998) and of how
help clarify pedagogicaland participatory studentscan evaluatetheirCBLexperiences
goals in light of the competinginterestsof (Everett1996;Parker-Gwin 1996b)
instructors,students,andcommunityorgani- Compiledvolumes of syllabi of courses
zations. The points discussedhere do not with CBLcomponentsprovidefurtherideas
representa comprehensiveframeworkfor for integrationand evaluation(Enderet al
totalprojectdesign but ratherframeissues 1996). Severalworks also discuss specific
that underlie initial project development problemsthat can arise duringthe imple-
once the decision to include a CBL compo- mentationof CBL projectsand offer some
nent has been made and the instructor(s) possible solutions. Many of these problems
begin to shape the basic structure of the refer to negative effects in the learning
'Fordefinitions
andtypologies CBL process, such as the reinforcementof stereo-
of various
projectssee Mayet al. underreview;Mayet al. types and the detrimentof systematic analy-
(2000);Mooney andEdwards (2001). sis in favor of personal experience
160 TEACHINGSOCIOLOGY
(Hongdaneu-Soteloand Raskoff 1994; coursesintegratinga CBLexperienceinto a
Marullo 1998; Parrillaand Hesser 1998; more traditionalclassroom setting. They
Strand 1999). Other studies discuss how also may serve as a helpfulstartingpointin
studentandcommunitycharacteristics, such designingprojectsthat are even more fo-
as ethnicdiversity,can affectthe integration cused on communitiesand which may not
of coursecontentand volunteerexperience have centralclassroomcomponents,for ex-
(Parker-Gwin 1996a).Thereare also exam- amplesome internships or community-based
ples of ways to address certain logistical research projects.
problems,includingtransportation and geo- The five questionsare the focus of this
graphicaldifficulties(Porterand Schwartz discussion.We begin,however,by outlining
1993; Scarce 1997), serious budget con- the basic contoursof our own CBLproject.
straints(Corwin1996),andmaintaining con- In additionto providingthe impetusfor this
tinuity long-term programs (Calderon paper,this CBLexperienceis the sourceof
in
1996). manyexamplesemployedin lateranalyses.
Missingamong these varied referencesis
more systematictreatmentof preliminary OURPROJECT
planning once the decision to do a CBL
projecthasbeenmadeandtheprojectbegins Basic CourseProfile
to assumeshape.Specifically,relativelylit- "Sex, Sexuality,andGender"was an intro-
tle discussionhas been focusedon how to ductorygendercourseofferedby Princeton
choosethe formof the CBLprojectandhow University'sSociology Departmentin the
to evaluatethe pedagogicalandparticipatory springsemesterof the 1999-2000academic
tradeoffsassociatedwith different forms. year, involving20 students(twomenand 18
Basedon our experienceand readingof the women). Some studentswere particularly
literature,this paperpresentsa set of five engagedin the coursematerialwhile others
questionsintendedto help fill this gap. We showedonly mild interest,andthe majority
situatethis set of questionsbetween,on the had no exposure to sociology or gender
one hand, well-documentedwork on the studiespriorto the course.In additionto the
decision to incorporateCBL, and on the professorand a graduatestudentassistant
other,resourcesdevotedto aspectsof evalu- leading student discussion sections, two
ation, integrationof course material,and othergraduatestudentswereemployedpart-
overcomingchallenges.The five questions time to help developand managethe CBL
are: project.
"*Among the goals of the project, are Origins of the CBL Componentof the
thereprimaryand secondarygoals, or Course
arethe goalsgivenequalweight? OurCBL projectemergedfrom a desireto
"*Is participation
in the projectmandatory breakfrom conventionalmodesof teaching
or voluntary? and bring sociological ideas-in our case,
"*Shouldthe CBLcomponentof a course gender-"to life." Genderis a topic well-
be concentrated in one site or dispersed suitedfor an experientiallearningapproach
acrossmanysites? in an undergraduate course; studentsoften
"*How similaror differentshould each takegenderdifferencesfor grantedbecause
student'sindividualparticipationin the of their ubiquityand popularperceptions
project be? thatthey arenatural,"cultural,"or predom-
* How central should direct client/com- inantlypsychological. Moreover, the profes-
munity interactionbe to students' activi- sor wanted to bring a cross-culturalperspec-
ties? tive to the course to help emphasize and
illustrate the dynamics of gender in the
All of these questions are germane to Unted States, particularlyas it is socially
DESIGNINGCBL PROJECTS
constructedamong immigrantand native-
bornpeopleand may changein the process
of migration.To combinethesepedagogical
goals, we decidedto pursueworkingwith
organizationsaddressingthe needs of the
Latinoimmigrantpopulationin CentralNew
Jersey.2Issuesrelatedto the socialconstruc-
tion of genderand to Latinoimmigrationto
the UnitedStateswere addressedin course
lectures,readings,anddiscussions.
At Princeton,CBLprojectsbeginwiththe
Community-Based Learning Initiative
(CBLI).CBLIwas createdin 1998 to help
professors incorporate CBL into their
coursesby establishinglinks with potential
partnerorganizationsand matchingcourses
with appropriateorganizations. Notably,
CBLIalso providesfinancialsupportfor a
graduatestudentassistantfor each course
thatincludesa CBLcomponent.3As course
organizers,we met with staff from CBLI
threemonthsbeforethe coursewas to begin.
CBLIalreadyhadcontactwithone organiza-
tion that seemed like a possible match:
LatinasUnidas("LatinoWomenUnited"or
LU), directedby Nidia Fernandez,M.A.,
M.DIV. and basedin the YWCAof neigh-
boringTrenton,New Jersey.LU servesthe
growing Latino immigrantpopulationof
Trentonby offeringsocial supportand life
skills trainingto women(e.g., personaland
family counseling,job interviewtraining,
prenatal care courses) and English-as-a-
Second-Language(ESL) courses to the
Latino community at large (men and
women).
In manywaysLatinasUnidaswas an ideal
partner;in othersit posed challengesto our
project.Practicallya one-womanshow, the
organization was smallandhadonly worked
witha few volunteersat a time. In addition,
by and large its clients did not speak En-
2To this end, the professorsoughtand re-
ceiveda grantfromPrinceton's Programin
LatinAmerican Studiesto integrate
issuesre-
latedto LatinAmericanimmigrants into the
course.Thissubstantivefocusis alsobasedon
the noveltyand high qualityand quantityof
currentsociological on genderand
scholarship
migrationfromLatinAmerica,andon thefact
161
glish, andwe didnot anticipatethatmanyof
our studentswould speak much, if any,
Spanish.However,Ms. Fernandezbelieved
in the pedagogicalphilosophyunderlying
CBLandhad reasonableexpectationsof the
studentsandwhatthe projectcouldproduce.
We decidedto formthepartnership.
ProjectDesign
Our projectbegan to take shape when we
first met with Ms. Fernandezto discussher
organizational goals and needs. She quickly
identified grant-writing,community out-
reach,and publicityas her most immediate
concerns;in addition,she neededsome as-
sistance with LU classes, planning, and
administration. With these needs in mind,
we designed a project that eventuallyin-
cluded five options for students,each of
whichpertainedto the studyof genderin a
differentway. Theoptionswere:
1) Researchpaperson topics that could
be useful to Ms. Fernandezin the
grant-writingprocess. Six of the 20
studentsdecidedto workon this type
of project,workingin threeteamsof
two on the following topics (which
they selected with our guidance):
Latinosin the TrentonLaborMarket;
Welfare,Gender,and the Immigrant
Experience;and ParentingIssuesand
the SecondGeneration Conflict.
2) Publicitydevelopmentthatwouldpro-
moteLU andits programsthroughout
Trentonandto fundingagencies.Four
studentsworkedon this projectand
producedvariousfliers,a promotional
bookmark,anda new pamphlet.
3) Publicitydistributionthatwould plan
and organizethe distributionof the
new publicitymaterials.Fourstudents
chose this projectand contactedover
thattheLatinopopulation inPrinceton,
Trenton,
andotherpartsof NewJerseyhasgrownsignifi-
cantlyinthepastfewyears.
3Additionalinformation abouttheCommunity
BasedLearning Initiative
atPrincetonUniversity
is available
at: http://www.princeton.edu/'cbli/
main.html
162 TEACHING SOCIOLOGY
60 establishments throughout Trenton, ject, eachteamwrotea finalpaperandgave
distributing the new publicitymateri- a presentationabout their experiencesto
als by mailor in person. theirpeers, Ms. Fernandez,andrepresenta-
4) Volunteering in LU's service deliv- tives fromPrinceton'sCBLIprogram.More
ery. Four students chose this compo- detailsaboutthe courseand projectcan be
nent, committingto going to LU on a foundin the appendix.
weeklybasis to assistwith child care Our projectdesign was complex and a
or the developmentand teachingof work-in-progress. It was the culminationof
ESLclasses. manydecisions, made bothbeforeand dur-
a
5) Administering survey to LU clients. ing the project, and in response to new
This part of the project was added challengesand opportunities.The introduc-
later in the semester,in responseto tionof the clientsurveymidwaythroughour
the desire of nearly all studentsand projectis a case in point. In hindsight,our
Ms. Fernandezfor more information projectdesign was navigatedcarefullybut
aboutLU's clients.This decisionwas not systematically,and ultimatelygave rise
also motivatedby the need to offer to manyof the questionsandideaspresented
moreguidanceandan alternativepro- here.
ject to two studentswho were strug-
gling with the researchprojectsthey FIVE QUESTIONSFOR
had proposed.They helped manage YOURCBL PEDAGOGICAL
survey design, implementation,data AND PARTICIPATORY GOALS
entry, and the writing of the final
report. In the remainderof the paper, we outline
and discussfive questionsthatunderliethe
CBLProjectRequirements and Evaluation initialstagesof CBL projectdesigns, in an
At the start of the course, we introduced effortto help instructors be moresystematic
studentsto the projectsand asked them to when designingCBL projects.These ques-
choose one of the project componentsas tionswerederivedinductivelyfromourown
their focus for the durationof the course. experience, but this discussion relies on
Participation was mandatoryandconstituted multiplesources:threeinterviewswith Ms.
fortypercentof eachstudent'scoursegrade. Fernandezduringthe planningstage of the
Studentswere requiredto developa short projectandtwo interviewsonce the project
proposalfor their particularproject. Once had finished,a questionnaire completedby
the projectgot underway,they submitteda 14 studentsgivingtheirgeneralevaluationof
short weekly journaldescribingboth their the project, the individualreflectionsstu-
progressfor the week and reflectionson dents incorporated in theirfinal projectre-
their activitiesin light of course readings ports (N=20), and a systematicreview of
and lectures.Graduateassistantsgave them over 25 articlesand materials(most from
regularfeedbackon the journalentries in TeachingSociology)concerningCBL pro-
orderto respondto administrative issuesand jects andsociology.
help studentslink gender studies to their These questionsdo not speak to every
CBLexperiences. aspectof projectdesignandmanagement but
Each studentalso was requiredto attend ratherrepresenta complementto existing
the weekendESL courseofferedby LU at resourceson CBL. The frameworkis best
least one time during the semester, in order situated at the point after which instructors
to ensure that all students had some direct have chosen to pursue CBL but have not yet
client contact regardless of their project decided on the specific form and content of
type. LU also welcomed having additional their project. Additionally, it is importantto
English-language conversation partners for recognize that each CBL project designer
their ESL students. At the end of the pro- may not face the full range of choices
DESIGNINGCBL PROJECTS 163
outlinedhere. The degree of relevancefor increasingthe likelihoodof meetingthose
each questionwill dependupon an instruc- goals.
tor's individualand institutionalcircum-
stances. Factors such as the institutional Q 1. Amongthe goals of the project,are
capacityof a college or university,the hu- there primaryand secondarygoals or are
man and financialresourcesavailableto an theyall given equalweight?
instructor,the numberand kind of students Every CBL projecthas many goals. Often
in a course, and the geographiclocationof they are divided into academicand civic
the schoolall bearuponthe kindsof choices responsibilitygoals, but other instructors
an instructorfaces (Corwin 1996; Parker- may delineatemore specificobjectives.For
Gwin 1996). example,Calderonand Farrell(1996) note
For each question,we explainits impor- that their project'sobjectivesincludeden-
tanceandthenanalyzeit accordingto some hancing the sense of social responsibility,
of the potentialbenefitsand drawbacksto allowingstudentsto engage in the craft of
particularresponses.In each case we pre- "doing sociology," and linking internships
sent an examplefrom our own experience in public schools with academicstudy. In
and at times use simplehypotheticalexam- our own case, we had threeprimaryobjec-
ples to illustratethe consequencesof various tives:contributemeaningfullyto ourpartner
decision paths. The tables show a list of organization,help the studentsbetterunder-
advantages("+") and disadvantages("-") to standgender,andhelp the studentsappreci-
most of the optionsdiscussed.We evaluate ate and understandsocial contextsdistinct
thesedecisionpointsfromthe perspectiveof fromtheirown (Latinoimmigrant communi-
three interests:the instructor,the students, ties andinner-cityTrenton).
andthepartnerorganization(s). Dividingthe Critical questionsconcern not only the
impacts of CBL design this way makes contentof projectgoals but also the priority
explicit the balancingact involvedin CBL or rank assignedto each goal. A decision
projects. Most are designedto benefit all about goal rankingprovides a consistent
interestsin someway andto not burdenany guidepostfor the decisionsthat inevitably
one of themunduly.Yet each interestmay arise during planningand throughoutthe
representdifferentmotivationsfor carrying course.Moreover,whenthe goal rankingis
out a CBL projectand often face different made explicit to the differentinterestsin-
constraints on their participation (Cox volved-students and partner organiza-
2000). Forexample,instructors mayempha- tion(s)-their expectationsmay be clearer
size the academiclinks and benefitsto the andin turnbettermetby the experience.
exercise, while partnerorganization(s) may To illustratethis point,considera stylized
emphasizethe contributionsand assistance exampleof a CBLprojectin an introductory
to the organizationor community;students urban sociology course. The stated goals
may careprimarilyabouttheirgradeand/or may be twofold:to help studentsunderstand
other courses.4 All interests undoubtedly the coursematerialandto makea contribu-
face theirown time limitationsto participa- tion to an urbancommunityorganization.If
tion and/ormanagement.Recognizingthese the instructordecidesto prioritizethe aca-
sortsof differencesandsimilaritiesfromthe demic goal over the contributionto the
outset of project design is importantfor organization,then s/he may decide to in-
setting the goals of the project and for cludemoreactivitiesthatarearguablyeasier
and explicatingthese interests to incorporate into class materials and dis-
4Identifying cuss in an academic fashion. These activities
mayoverstate the differences
amongthemand
simplifythemultiplecompeting interests
within could involve, for example, participantob-
each, but theseare arguablynaturalinterest servation in an urbancommunity (e.g., hav-
groupsor stakeholdersgivenstandardpedagogi- ing students spend time at a street corner or
calstructures. take a specific bus line) or an activity like
164 TEACHINGSOCIOLOGY
participation in an urbanparkclean-upday and partnerorganizations,as well as for
andan assignmentto writefield notesabout otheraspectsof projectdesign.
that experience.A project that reflects a
decisionto prioritizethe practicalcontribu- Q 2. Is participation in the project
tion of the CBLprojectto the organization mandatoryor voluntary?
would take a differentform, such as on- Afterdeterminingboth the contentand pri-
going studentparticipation in a community orityof a project'sgoals, a secondimportant
needs assessmentsurvey, grant-writing,of- decisionconcernswhetherstudentparticipa-
fice work, or web design. These activities tion in the project will be mandatoryor
may also yield importantacademicbenefits, voluntary.Table 1 outlines some of the
but inevitablymore time is spent handling relativemeritsanddemeritsof bothchoices.
administrative,logistical, and political as- This questionhas receivedmore attention
in the literaturethanthe otherquestionswe
pects of intensive studentinvolvementin
discuss in this paper.A centralissue is the
communityaffairs. Devotingtime to these
issuesmaycome at a cost of coursecontent. selection bias that voluntaryparticipation
In short, the implicationsfor students,the often introduces (Enderet al. 2000; Parker-
Gwin and
organization,and the instructorsare differ- ethical concernMabry 1998).' Anotheris the
ent in each of these scenarios.But in each relatedto mandatorypro-
who begins grams and the risk that"unwilling"students
case, the instructor/manager
witha clearernotionof the desiredoutcome may pose to often vulnerablepopulations
(Ender et al. 2000; Marullo1998). Other
can moreefficientlyandperhapseffectively
authorsemphasizethe flexibilityof volun-
designthe project.
tary programsto both instructors'and stu-
Projectmanagersalso can decide to give dents'time and
all or somegoalsequalweight.Whenthis is learningstyles (Enderet al.
2000; Parker-Gwin and Mabry 1998) and
the case, projectdesignrequiresa different
the greater ease with whichmandatorypro-
approachaimedat strikingan even balance can be incorporatedinto the course
betweenor amonggoals. This was the ap- grams
(Everett 1998). Theseworksimplythatthis
proachwe attempted.In an effortto ensure decisioncan
thatourstudents'effortsmaderealcontribu- dependon the humanresources
available to manage theprojectas well.
tionsto LatinasUnidas,we includedprojects
In our case, we madethe projectmanda-
such as publicitydevelopmentand distribu-
as well as centralto the course. This
tion, whichweremorechallengingto linkto tory
arrangement mayhaveintroducedselectivity
gender studies than were other activities, at an earlier
likeresearchpapersor the clientsurvey.We point, amongthe studentswho
tried to help the publicitygroup members
took the course. Eightstudentsdroppedthe
course afterthe firstweek, andit is possible
see the genderedaspectsof the work they
thattheirreasonsrelatedto the requirements
did (e.g., thinkingaboutgendermessagesin
the media),but the coursecontentwas not 'TheEnderet al. (2000)studyconcludes that
focusedon this aspectof genderas muchas women,non-social sciencemajors,students who
it was on the themesrelatedto otherstudent do notcommute to class,andstudents whoare
Ms. found not employed are more likely to in
participate
projects. Fernandez,however, service Parker and
the publicityprojectsthe most useful of all learning projects. Mabry
that self-selectioninto service
of the students'contributions.We wouldnot (1998) argue
learning mightvaryby coursetype,butoverall
haveincludedthis typeof projectamongthe finda higherparticipation of womenandstu-
studentoptions if we had made academic dentswithpriorvolunteer experience.
gains the highest priority. 6WeandtheUniversity lackinformationabout
The intent is not to recommend one type why thesestudentsdropped the course.It is
of priority rankingover another. Rather, we standard procedure at Princeton forstudents to
want to highlight the importance of recog- "shop" for classes during the firstweek of the
semester,so it is hardto knowhowthisearly
nizing thatdifferent goal-rankings have var- turnover related totheCBLproject.
ied implications for instructors,students,
DESIGNINGCBL PROJECTS 165

00
ONC

-
ON0 =1C
"a .= 4S-w
N cd 110 .-
u --
. "-
+0)0
o
Lo o-
oo

.."(ONbO >

.-) .-
"a 2 =
--0 0"
-4-A

0 ~ 00

00C

"C)
.. .. "
0 00- '"
Eo
C ~ ~ 0

0 OC)
0 =01cc)
=1 Cc; l

$o-o
o- C).- ?
I--

E.2t
Lo; CuC
Cu -M- -0,'I
So~

00
CdC
166 TEACHINGSOCIOLOGY
of the CBLproject.6As bothmandatory and and to give all of our goals equal weight.
central,the CBL projecttook a lot of time Makingthe case thatourprojectcouldmake
on the part of instructorsand from the a real differencefor our partnerorganiza-
perspectiveof students.In theirevaluations tion(s)was easierby virtueof the fact that
at the end of the course,some studentssaid we had all studentsdirectingtheirenergies
that they wished it had been voluntaryor towardsone organization.
said they were not interestedin doing an- One clear disadvantageto this approach
othercoursewitha CBLcomponent,though was the riskof overloadingMs. Fernandez,
it was evidentthatthisreactionpartlyhadto alreadyover-burdened with her own work.
do with the amountof work that we re- However,this problemmay be minimized
quired,not with its mandatoryquality.That for otherswho work with largerorganiza-
said, anotherstudentappreciatedthe fact tionsor thosewithstrongervolunteerinfras-
that somethingshe liked to do (volunteer) tructures.
was "institutionalized."Froman instructor's Giventhe focuson a particular population,
perspective,it was easier to draw on the anotheroptionwouldhavebeento findmore
experiencein class discussionand lecture than one organizationthat worked with
becauseall studentswereparticipating in the Latinoimmigrantsin the area. If students
CBLproject.For example,we were able to had beendividedbetweentwo organizations
invite Ms. Fernandezand an immigration and clientbases, for example,studentsmay
scholarto class for guest lecturesand show have learnedmore abouthow community
a film aboutimmigrantexperiences,as well organizationsworkandmayhave been able
as drawon the students'perceptionsof LU to bringin a morecomparativeview on the
and its clientsin discussions.These options local Latinocommunitythantheydid in our
wouldhave been possibleregardlessof the case. Anotherpossibilitymight have been
mandatory natureof the project,butwe feel not to concentrateon one single population
the impactof theseadditionsto the classwas but insteadto seek out many organizations
increasedas a resultof all students'partici- that serve different minority women
pation. throughoutthe area(e.g., programsfor teen
mothers,LU, anda sexualabusecenter).In
Q 3. Should the CBL componentof a both alternativeschemes,for example,stu-
course be concentratedin one site or dis- dentscouldhave self-selectedto the organi-
persedacrossmanysites? zationsthatbest fit their interestsand time
Another key question with little explicit availability(e.g., one organizationis closer
discussionin the existingliteraturepertains to campusthan another).Table 2 outlines
to whether students should be dispersed theseandothermeritsof thesechoices.
acrossorganizationsor concentratedin one
site. While the approachto this question Q 4. How similar or different should
revolves aroundlogistics, this decision is each student's individualparticipationin
also guideddirectlyby the decisionsmade the processbe?
aboutprojectgoalprioritization. A fourthandrelatedquestionis whetherand
We chose to workwith one organization, to what degree students'own participation
anticipatingthat doing so would facilitate should differ from that of their peers.
incorporation of students'experiencesinto Shouldeachstudentbe askedto do the same
course discussionsand lectures. We also kind of projector interactwith the partner
thought that managementof the project organization(s)in the same way? What kinds
would be easier from our perspective than if of advantages and disadvantages are posed
we were handling relationships with many by offering studentsdifferent ways to partic-
organizations. Both of these advantages ap- ipate in the project? Again, the resources
peared to mesh well with our other decisions available to instructorspartly determine this
to make the project mandatory and central decision, as does the way that the project
DESIGNINGCBL PROJECTS 167

cisc '0
_ _

wo
00 0
Cu

Cu
ci rA 0
MO
9

. =o -
CC)
? i Y, ,

0 w 60
0ci.

:3 ti
"boe O O
w4
C6 .. . 0 0
ua~a
+ 0
o 0. ., .
'0
o ) '0

ti

C,) , C)~j
-,M
PCC
o r"Q r =:
w~
ea
Cl w=ao C6
0o"o
oCo~oCCI ,
-~~l 0 .'"~
0'
'C 'C '0 '0 0 3 C
-t im-. =o o E *O
iC) _C

0 cis:3en
=-~ o= ONO +.
:

9Cd 64. . E cis~

o w , .
P0= 0 .?
vl a-, :3
dc U , V. u

_ -: CN M -
u N.
0006 C )f C

Cs -. 00 o 0
o cisC) C,, 00
0 00 V)
v cis0
Cu C)
0~
a O0Cu .o
C
cis
a
:3 C).'=
~O
L
o C.) 0

cis 0
Al
V.)
Al c

x00Cu
00
168 TEACHINGSOCIOLOGY
goalsareprioritized. volunteerfor two hours a week at a local
We allowedfor substantial variationin the soup kitchen.If all studentssharethe same
way that studentsparticipatedin the CBL experience,thentheymaymoreeasilyrelate
project.Studentsself-selectedinto the dif- and bring the CBL experienceinto course
ferent components(the survey component discussions,in turn making integrationof
was an exception),each of which involved the experienceintothe coursemorestraight-
both differenttypes of activities(e.g., de- forward for the instructor. All students
signing fliers, doing a literaturereview, could also be evaluatedin the same way,
caring for children) and different issues therebyreducingconfusionaboutdiffering
(publicity,labor force participation,child expectationsamongstudentsand easing the
care). One clearadvantageof this approach managementburdenof the instructorsand
was thatit allowedus to assistLU in various possiblythe partnerorganization.An alter-
ways and, arguably,more effectively.This native design could include one common
decisionalso made sense in light of LU's goal but manydifferentjobs, therebycom-
small size and our decisionto focus all of bining the class cohesion and clarity of
the class' energiesthere;for example,LU purposefosteredin the soupkitchenexample
could not absorb all students as weekly withthebenefitsof havingvariousactivities,
volunteers. as notedin our own case. Designing,carry-
Froman instructor'spointof view, it was ing out, and analyzinga communitysurvey
clear that studentsgaineddifferentinsights mightbe an exampleof this approach.(See
dependingon theirproject.Studentsin the Table3.)
researchcomponentlearned about immi-
grantcommunitiesand gender in general; Q 5. How centralshoulddirectcommu-
studentsworkingwithpublicityanddistribu- nity/clientinteractionbe to students'pro-
tion learnedabout the immigrantcommu- jects?
nity; andthe studentsin the volunteercom- Many CBL projects in sociology aim to
ponentgained"handson" experienceabout expose studentsto communitiesdifferent
non-profitorganizations.These conclusions from theirown andto ensuresome amount
arereflectedin students'finalevaluations.A of direct client interaction.Beyond that,
memberof the distributiongroup wrote, however,thereis relativelylittle discussion
"[my project]had very little to do with abouthow muchstudents'projectsor learn-
gender and was only about immigration," ing experiencesshouldrevolve aroundthis
and a volunteerwrote, "I had a very diffi- interaction.This sectionspeaksto some of
cult time tryingto find gender-relevant ob- the advantagesand disadvantages of having
servationsthru [sic] my volunteerwork." students'experiencerely primarilyon inter-
That said, some students expressed new actionwiththe clients,comparedto students
appreciation for what it takes to managea whose activitiesor projectsdo not. The
communityorganization andfor the flexibil- issue about variationsin client interaction
ity required to work in one. Overall,the amongstudentsparticipating in a CBLcom-
of
implications allowing substantialvariation ponent is distinct and closely tied to the
in studentparticipationare that instructors previousquestion.(See Table4.)
must anticipatedifferentialimpacts (upon In our case, the studentswhose projects
the
students, organization, and course con- primarilyrelied on directclient interaction
tent), give more individual guidance to stu- faced particularproblemsand opportunities
dents, and during class time draw across thatotherstudentsdidnot. Forexample,one
students' experiences to the benefit of all student who volunteered weekly in LU's
students. childcare center noted in her final presenta-
As a counter-example to this project de- tion and evaluationthat her experience made
sign, consider a case in which everyone in a her appreciate how difficult and time-
course about social stratificationis asked to consuming participant-observationresearch
DESIGNINGCBL PROJECTS 169

o -

S 0 4m0
too
d1 S

wo

C". a0

-a a 3
, a0 =
0-
ro ,

6
66
r12Dc~~
6o c -) .f
~ -Q

0 4-
- o o b

e s
'UX r
170 TEACHINGSOCIOLOGY

r =
Oc cis- Cd
= _
+.
_ s..
d..U 6 to 0
c0 Cd cis-O ,. ./ 0
a
0

0 -
--
l bD

" .""0 d
== 0 ..-0
0
0 vl c~ "

S SC
c o,=. .a,

+>

- - _
6 -.
0 O o
w 0

So f
0.
o
E'--
0 ; 0

-~c
= .,...=
N -I~
9:s
CIA ,,~r '0 '3
- se ","-
E o
0, r a, )o o

0 19) 0~ c rz
4 00 -Z o -
a~r ~O -

+ >
~0 o

40, 0.wS

10 r *4 '0 r.

u~ 0VV. 0 ;

s._.
"" -S eo 0-0 . 0- a
0E a

=
==.""

E~ 02

0 o _d
+ 0 cd
DESIGNINGCBL PROJECTS 171
canbe. She felt she neededmuchmoretime merits initial and primaryconsideration.The
at the organization in orderto beginto make otherdecisionsflow fromthe choicesmade
conclusions,notingin her final paper, "We at thatpoint. The set of questionsdiscussed
oftenreadof the thorough,time-consuming, here is intended to complement existing
variable-accounting methods employed by resources that relate to other aspects of
real sociologists for conductingtheir re- course and project design and to help in-
search. But to samplethis experiencefirst structors design CBL projects more effi-
hand,if only slightly,gave me a new respect ciently, given the particularconstraintsand
for the difficultyand obstacle-oriented real- opportunities
theyeachencounter.
ity of field research." While for
frustrating Certaingaps remainamongthe resources
her, thismethodological lesson is important; on CBL designandmanagement. For exam-
yet it was not centralto the experiencesof ple, the pedagogical question about how
studentsworkingon the publicitycampaign, much control studentsshould have in design-
for instance.For them, theirclient interac- ing a course and their projects-a question
tion at the ESLcourses,albeitsuperficialin important to all courses with or without a
one sense, complemented theirotheractivi- CBL-assumes a new twist in the face of a
ties in sensitizingthem to the barrierthat CBL project, given the fact that student
languageposes for the social and economic activities involve and impact a third party,
integrationof immigrants.Accordingto this the partner organization(s). Another impor-
group of students,this lesson made them tant topic regards how to create an effective
more engagedin their own contributionto and fair structure for evaluating student
LU. performancewhen some or all studentswork
The experienceof anotherstudentwhose on a CBL project and/or engage in quite
projectaimedto collect and analyzethe life different CBL activities, as was our case. As
storiesof a few LU clientsrevealedfurther instructorscontinueto carryout CBL pro-
advantagesand disadvantagesof projects jects, issueslike theseandthosediscussedin
thatdependclosely on directclient interac- this paper need to be discussed and shared
tion. We felt ambivalentaboutallowingthis among faculty working on CBL projects.
project,given the student'slack of training While there is no empirical evidence that
in qualitativeresearch.In fact she did not more systematic project planning will pro-
gain substantialinsightsfromthe interviews duce more positive results for CBL, we
she did and turnedto work on the survey believe it could have improved the experi-
project. Additionally,this project caused ences of all who were involved in our own
hardshipon the organizationbecauseit had CBL experience.
to matchclientswiththe student,help nego-
tiatelanguagebarriers,andhelp mediatethe
organization of the interviews. APPENDIX
SUMMARY OF THE CBL PROJECT
FINAL THOUGHTS
Universitycontextandfunding
While by no means comprehensive, the five "*Coursewas one of two Sociologycourses,
out of a total of 10 coursesinvolvedwith
issues presentedhere are central to any CBL
CBLIthatsemester
projectdesignandare importantto consider "*CBLIprogramprovided$1,000foronegrad-
during initial planning, after the decision to uatestudentassistant'stime
incorporate CBL into a course has been * From a grant awardedto the professor,
made. The answers given to these questions Princeton'sProgramin LatinAmericaStud-
help guide decisions about more specific, ies providedan additional$1,000foranother
logistical, or management concerns about graduatestudentassistantand funds,which
CBL. In our estimation, the first question wereusedto helpcoverotheraspectsof the
about the priority assigned to goals of CBL courseandproject
172
Courseoverview
* Introductorygendercourse,witha focuson
U.S. immigration
* 20 students(twomenand18women)
* Asidefromreadings,lectures,andprecepts,
therewerethreemainassignments
"oResearchaboutgenderon campus(20%
of finalgrade)
"oCBLproject(40%)
"oTake-homefinal(25%).
The remainderof the coursegrade(15%)
was based on participationin discussion
sections("precepts").
CBLproject
"*Mandatory
"*Twograduatestudentassistantsworkedex-
clusivelyon CBLcomponent
"*Supplemented by threeguestlecturesabout
genderand immigration; threespecialpre-
ceptsdevotedto discussingthe project,in-
cludinga discussionof a film aboutimmi-
gration;andinclusionof readingsaboutim-
migration in thesyllabus
"*Studentsinitiallychose one of fouraspects
of the projectpresentedto them: research
papers,publicitydevelopment, publicitydis-
tributions,volunteering. surveyof Lati-
The
nas Unidasclients was addedlater in the
course
"*MainRequirements:
Proposals. (3-5 pages) Theseincluded:
1) their motivationsfor their project,2)
specific plans and resourcesneeded/tobe
used, 3) time-line, 4) division of labor
(given thatmost studentswere workingin
teams).
Weeklydiaries. (2-5 pages). Students
wereinstructed to devote50 percentof their
entriesto theirprogressfor the week;or for
volunteers,their"fieldnotes";the other50
percentwas to entail reflectionson their
activitiesin light of course readingsand
lectures.Graduatestudentassistantspro-
vided feedbackon both aspectsof the di-
aries.
ESL attendance.At least once over the
semester,studentshadto assistin a Saturday-
morningESLcourseheldat LU.
Final paper and presentation. Each
team'sfinal papersummarizedtheir work
and lessons learned. Studentsworkingon
researchpaperssubmittedthoseas theirfinal
papers(15 pages),while the studentswork-
ing on publicityor as volunteerswrotepa-
pers abouttheirrespectiveexperiencesand
TEACHINGSOCIOLOGY
lessonslearned(10 pages). Thoseworking
on the clientsurveyturnedin a reportof key
results from the perspectiveof gender as
discussedthroughoutthe course. All stu-
dentsworkingin teamsalso wereinstructed
to includein theirgrouppaperan additional
section(1-2 pages)thatwas writtenindepen-
dently and summarized theirindividualre-
flectionson theirexperience.
* Finalgradeforproject:completionof weekly
diary (40%)and the proposal,final paper,
andpresentation (60%). Gradingwas based
upontimelycompletionof eachrequirement
and clear evidenceof effortsto link their
experienceto coursematerial,in additionto
thequalityof writtenandoralpresentations.
REFERENCES
Calderon,Jose and BettyFarrell.1996. "Doing
Sociology:Connectingthe ClassroomExperi-
ence With a MultiethnicSchool District."
TeachingSociology24:46-53.
Corwin,Patricia.1996. "Usingthe Community
as a Classroomfor LargeIntroductory Sociol-
ogy Classes."TeachingSociology24:310-15.
Cox, David.2000. "Developinga Framework for
Understanding University-CommunityPartner-
ships."Cityscape:A Journalof PolicyDevel-
opmentandResearch15(1):9-26.
Darling, Rosalyn B. 1998. "The Value of a
Pre-Internship Observation Experience."
TeachingSociology26:341-46.
Eby, JohnW. 1999. "WhyServiceLearningis
Bad." [Web Page]. Available at http://
www.messiah.edu/agape/learning.
Ender, Morten G., Brenda Marsteller
Kowalewski,David Cotter,Lee Martin,and
JoAnnDeFiore,eds. 1996. "ServiceLearning
and Undergraduate Sociology:Syllabiand In-
structionalMaterials."Washington,DC: ASA
TeachingResourcesCenter.
Ender, Morten G., Lee Martin, Brenda
MarstellerKowalewski,DavidA. Cotter,and
JoannDefiore.2000. "Givenan Opportunity to
ReachOut:Heterogeneous in Op-
Participation
tional Service-LearningProjects."Teaching
Sociology28:206-19.
Everett,Kevin. 1996. "SocialInequality."Pp.
127-44in ServiceLearningand Undergraduate
Sociology:SyllabiandInstructional
Materials,
editedby MortenG. Ender,BrendaMarsteller
Kowalewski,David Cotter,Lee Martin,and
JoAnnDeFiore.Washington, DC:ASATeach-
ing ResourcesCenter.
. 1998. "UnderstandingSocial Inequality
DESIGNINGCBL PROJECTS 173
ThroughServiceLearning."TeachingSociol- ApplyingPrinciplesof Experiential Learning."
ogy26:299-309. TeachingSociology26:310-29.
Hironimus-Wendt, RobertJ. and Larry Lovell- Parker-Gwin,Rachel. 1996a. "CollectiveAc-
Troy. 1999. "Grounding Service Learningin tion." Pp. 145-52 in ServiceLearningand
Social Theory."TeachingSociology27:360- Undergraduate Sociology:Syllabiand Instruc-
72. tionalMaterials,editedby MortenG. Ender,
Hondagneu-Sotelo, Pierretteand Sally Raskoff. BrendaMarstellerKowalewski,DavidCotter,
1994. "Community Service-Learning: Lee Martin,andJoAnnDeFiore.Washington,
Promisesand Problems."TeachingSociology DC: ASATeachingResourcesCenter.
22:248-54. _ . 1996b. "ConnectingService to Learning:
Lowe, Jane I. and Michael Reisch. 1998. How Students and CommunitiesMatter."
"Bringingthe Communityinto the Classroom: TeachingSociology24:97-101.
ApplyingtheExperiencesof SocialWorkEdu- Parker-Gwin, RachelandJ. Beth Mabry.1998.
cationto ServiceLearningCoursesin Sociol- "ServiceLearningAs Pedagogyand Civic
ogy."TeachingSociology26:292-98. Education:ComparingOutcomesfor Three
Marullo, Sam. 1996. "The Service Learning Models."TeachingSociology26:276-91.
Movementin HigherEducation:An Academic Porter,JudithR. and Lisa B. Schwartz.1993.
Responseto TroubledTimes." Sociological "Experiential Service-Based Learning:An Inte-
Imagination 33(2):117-37. gratedHIV/AIDSEducationModel for Col-
_ . 1998. "BringingHome Diversity: A Ser- lege Campuses."TeachingSociology21:409-
vice LearningApproachto TeachingRaceand 15.
EthnicRelations."TeachingSociology26:259- Rundblad, Georganne.1998. "Addressing Social
75. Problems,Focusingon Solutions:The Com-
May, Marlynn L., Michael Brooks, Wendy munityExploration Project."TeachingSociol-
Cadge, Joan Little, Michael O'Neal, Kerry ogy 26:330-40.
Strand, and Carolyn Vasquez. 2000. Scarce,Rick. 1997. "FieldTripsAs Short-Term
"Community - AcademyPartnerships Working ExperientialEducation."TeachingSociology
Paper." American Sociological Association 25:219-26.
Workshop on the Scholarshipof Teachingand Silver, Ira and Gina Perez. 1998. "Teaching
Learning. Social TheoryThroughStudents'Participant
_ . Unpublished manuscript. "Community- Observation." TeachingSociology26:347-53.
BasedTeachingand Learning:A Conceptual Strand,Kerry. 1999. "Sociologyand Service
Continuum andDistributive Framework." Learning:a CriticalLook."Pp. 29-37in Culti-
Mooney, Lisa and Bob Edwards. 2001. vatingthe SociologicalImagination:Concepts
"Experiential Learningin Sociology:Service and Modelsfor Service-Learning in Sociology,
Learning and Other Community-Based Learn- edited by James Ostrow, GarryHesser, and
ing Initiatives."TeachingSociology29:181-94. SandraEnos. Washington, DC: AmericanAs-
Myers-Lipton, ScottJ. 1998. "Effectof a Com- sociationfor HigherEducation.
prehensiveService-Learning Programon Col- Wright,Mary.2000. "Getting MoreOutof Less:
lege Students' Civic Responsibility."
Teaching The Benefits of Short-Term Experiential
Sociology26:243-58. Learning in Undergraduate Sociology
Ostrow,James,GarryHesser,andSandraEnos. Courses."TeachingSociology28:116-26.
1999.Cultivating theSociologicalImagination:
Conceptsand Modelsfor ServiceLearningin MarionCarterandWendyCadgearebothgraduate
Sociology.Washington, DC: AmericanAssoci- students in theDepartment of Sociologyat Princeton
ationfor HigherEducation. University, whereSaraCurranis anassistant profes-
Parilla,Peter F. and GarryW. Hesser. 1998. sor; Estela Rivero is a graduatestudentin the
"Internships and the SociologicalPerspective: Woodrow WilsonSchoolof PublicAffairs.