CBL Book
CBL Book
CBL Book
Le a r ning
Engaging Students for Success and Citizenship
Atelia Melaville
Amy C. Berg
Martin J. Blank
Coalition for Community Schools
Coalition
for
Community
Schools
MISSION STATEMENT
The Coalition’s mission is to mobilize the assets of schools, families, and communities to create a
united movement for community schools. Community schools strengthen schools, families, and
communities to improve student learning.
STEERING COMMITTEE
Ira Harkavy, Chair Clifford Johnson
Center for Community Partnerships National League of Cities
University of Pennsylvania
Peter Kleinbard
Lisa Villarreal, Vice Chair Fund for the City of New York
The San Francisco Foundation
Beth Lapin
Carlos Azcoitia School of the 21st Century
Chicago Public Schools Yale University
E
ducation is the foundation of democracy. As such it must
work for all young people. Yet far too often young people
disengage from learning and do not reach their full, human
potential. Community schools—places where partners come
together to offer a range of supports and opportunities for
children, youth, families, and communities before, during, and after
school—address this need by using community-based learning to reen-
gage students in education and to create the conditions for their success.
Community schools foster a learning environment that extends far
beyond the classroom walls. Students learn and problem solve in the
context of their lives and communities. Community schools nurture this
natural engagement. Because of the deep and purposeful connections
between schools and communities, the curriculum is influenced and
enhanced, removing the artificial separation between the classroom and
the real world. Our vision for community schools is that they are places
where all students engage in learning, achieve to the best of their ability,
and become productive citizens and participants in our democracy.
Community-Based Learning: Engaging Students for Success and Citi-
zenship underscores the need for a concerted and intentional effort to
engage all students in learning. Numerous approaches to community-
based learning are already in use; this paper highlights six models with a
particular emphasis on community problem solving: academically based
community service, civic education, environment-based education,
place-based learning, service learning, and work-based learning. If all stu-
dents are to succeed, we must pay much more attention to community-
based learning as a strategy for engaging and motivating students and for
strengthening the relationship between schools and communities.
The Coalition for Community Schools is grateful to the support of
An-me Chung at the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation for her continu-
ing encouragement and assistance with this work. The Coalition would
also like to thank the many organizations that have contributed to this
report. Representatives of the following organizations contributed to the
ideas expressed in this document (see Appendix C for more information).
iii
• American Youth Policy Forum
• Antioch New England Institute
• Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
• Blueprint Research & Design, Inc.
• Campaign for the Civic Mission, Council for Excellence in Government
• Center for Community Partnerships, University of Pennsylvania
• The Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and
Engagement
• Chicago High School Redesign Initiative at the Chicago Community
Trust
• Citizen Schools
• Corporation for National and Community Service, Learn and
Serve America
• Earth Force
• Education Alliance at Brown University
• Forum for Youth Investment
• Funders Forum on Education and the Environment
• Gardner Center for Youth and Their Communities, Stanford University
• Institute for Research and Reform in Education
• Lewis and Clark College, Graduate School of Education
• National Academy Foundation
• National Association of Secondary School Principals
• National Center for Learning and Citizenship, Education Commission
of the States
• National Education Association
• National Environment Education and Training Foundation
• National Service Learning Partnership
• National Youth Leadership Council
• RMC Research Corporation
• Rural School and Community Trust
• State Education and Environmental Roundtable
We look forward to working with these groups—and others—to advance
our community-based learning agenda.
Ira Harkavy
iv
CONTENTS
Preface iii
Chapter 1: The Rationale for Community-Based Learning 1
Chapter 2: Overview and Core Characteristics 7
Chapter 3: Outcomes of Community-Based Learning 23
Chapter 4: Moving the Agenda Forward 27
Appendix A: Theoretical Foundations of
Community-Based Learning 33
Appendix B: Community-Based Learning Approaches 39
Appendix C: Resource Organizations and People 47
End Notes 51
v
COMMUNITY-BASED LEARNING: Engaging Students for Success and Citizenship
CHAPTER 1
I
n recent years, national tragedies—both manmade and natural—
have forced Americans to see how much we rely on strong
neighborhoods, communities, and democratic institutions.
We’ve seen how lack of attention to their well being affects us
all. These events lay bare the moral imperative that underlies the
mission of public education—to develop active, engaged citizens who are
able to participate in and contribute fully to a democratic society.
In order to learn how to be citizens, students must act as citizens.
Therefore, education must connect subject matter with the places where
students live and the issues that affect us all. Schools are ideally situated
to connect learning with real life; but typically, they do not. To a large
extent, public education—following the lead of higher education—has
failed to recognize the benefits of student engagement with their com-
munities in acquiring knowledge.
Not surprisingly, by the time they are in high school, as many as 40 to
60 percent of all students—urban, suburban, and rural—are chronically
disengaged from school.1 That disturbing number does not include the
young people who have already dropped out. Moreover, 65 percent say
they are unexcited about their classes.2
The Partnership for 21st Century Skills, a group of major business and
education organizations, believes that making the connection between
learning and the real world is imperative for student success. Accord-
ing to the Partnership, “the education system faces irrelevance unless we
bridge the gap between how students live and how they learn.” The Part-
nership defines literacy to mean not just reading, writing, and computing
skills, but “knowing how to use knowledge and skills in the context of
modern life.”3
A large majority of respondents to several national surveys agreed that
involving students in more real-world learning experiences would greatly
improve student outcomes.
Despite these facts, public schools have not pursued large scale efforts
to bridge the gap between living and learning. While many schools reach
out to community partners for resources, services, and support, far fewer
take advantage of opportunities for students to learn outside the class-
room walls—through participation in community life.
The Coalition for Community Schools believes that the vision set
forth in No Child Left Behind—to educate all students to high stan-
dards—can only be fully realized if students are engaged in learning that
connects them to the larger world.
The whole art of teaching is only the art of awakening the natural
curiosity of young minds for the purpose of satisfying it afterwards.
–Anatole France
C
ommunity-based learning represents a convergence of
multiple theoretical frameworks and supporting research,
all of which suggest that young people are more likely to
be engaged in learning—to invest attention and expend
energy—when the content has personal meaning and
builds on what they already know. Moreover, students are more likely to
retain and transfer knowledge when given opportunities to apply what
they are learning to real world issues and to assess their performance in
ways that suit their personal learning styles.8
If we follow this line of reasoning, the value of community-based
learning is clear. Nevertheless, for too many students—particularly as
they advance through school—learning behavior is characterized by
a reduction in intrinsic interest, an increase in negative feelings about
school, lower achievement, and negative reactions to failure. This decline
is not developmentally inevitable. Instead, it is the result of personal and
environmental factors, organizational features of schools, instructional
methods, and the curriculum.9 Community-based learning offers educa-
tors tools with which to reverse this negative trend.
In 2001, the Rural School and Community Trust, working with the Educational
Testing Service (ETS) and nine design teams from around the country, created a
portfolio-based assessment process. The design defined the essential ingredients
needed for a comprehensive assessment and incorporated them with methods
and tools for implementation. Besides strengthening place-based work, the pur-
pose of this in depth process was to create an alternative to the current, narrow,
and limiting assessment practices typically seen in public education.
For example, a matrix system helps teachers evaluate the depth of student learn-
ing and encourages the progression of student ownership and control from a
project’s beginning through advanced levels. It also focuses on specific assess-
ment practices. Using guided questions, each learning project can be evaluated
in ways that involve multiple assessment efforts across all participants and that
address how well assessment results facilitate learning.
A
growing body of evidence suggests that community-
based learning strategies add up to much more than
another laundry list of “good ideas.” While research on
community-based learning is not yet abundant, findings
show that these strategies help students and schools achieve
academic, civic and moral, social and personal, and work-related goals.
Here are just a few examples:
Academic Outcomes
Ë A comprehensive evaluation conducted of nine school sites in three
New England states, which were participating in the Community-
Based School Environmental Education Project, a place-based strategy,
provides strong evidence of intended outcomes. The most immediate
results showed growth in teacher enthusiasm and skill and observed
increases in student engagement in learning, academic achievement,
and knowledge about the social and natural environment.35
Ë Data collected in forty-eight schools since 1996, using the “environ-
ment as an integrating context for learning” (referred to as the EIC
model), show that EIC students in 92 percent of schools academi-
cally outperformed their peers in traditional programs as measured by
standardized tests. Classroom behavior problems were reduced by as
much as 95 percent in some cases and overall attendance increased.36
Ë Several studies show that inclusion of work-based learning strategies
promotes selection of challenging classes, improves attendance, and
reduces dropout rates. High risk students who enrolled in work-based
learning in career academies were less likely to be chronically absent
from school than students in a randomly assigned control group.37
Among African American and Hispanic youth, participation in a
work-based learning program was linked to increases in future selec-
Work Outcomes
Weathering the Storm
Ë Participation in work-based learning helps
students learn job readiness and job specific At King Middle School in Portland, Maine,
skills. Some evidence also suggests a positive environment-based education was introduced
effect of such participation on future hiring to better meet the learning needs of a school
struggling with academic achievement. A school
and wages.48 For example, a study of partici- wide curriculum was designed around units of
pants in a Maryland Career and Technology study called learning expeditions. Each one was
Education program one year after gradua- designed to pursue environmental themes that
tion found that participants reported higher engaged students while focusing on standards-
based content. One such unit called “Rock the
wages, more hours of work, and greater House Geology,” used skills in science, technol-
connection between their high school courses ogy, social studies, and language arts to explore
and their current work and studies than how physical geography shapes and affects the
did non-participants.49 Employers who hire local community. Another called “Weathering the
Storm” called on the same skills to study climate.
students involved in work-based learning say It culminated in a public exhibit on the effects
that they require less training, work better and history of storms on the New England coast.
in teams, and have better work ethics than This venture into community-based learning
other new hires.50 helped the school and its students weather their
own academic storms—70 percent of students
Ë Evidence also shows that service learning has a qualify for free or reduced lunch. Since imple-
menting community-based learning in 1993,
positive effect on job and career related skills
the school has seen discipline problems cut in
and aspirations, including planning ability, half and attendance increase. Students are more
interviewing skills, and a greater desire for motivated and show marked improvement in
continued education.51 Students who partici- academic performance. State standardized tests
scores improved in all areas, including reading,
pate in service learning are more likely statis-
writing, math, science, health, social studies, and
tically to pursue personally satisfying careers arts and humanities.
and/or careers of benefit to others.52
O
ur communities are rich in the resources and expertise
needed to implement community-based learning strat-
egies. Advocates and practitioners of community-based
learning are already hard at work engaging students by
reconnecting living and learning. At community cen-
ters, in before and after school programs, work-study programs, and dur-
ing the regular school day, their efforts help schools and students achieve
academic, social, work, and civic goals and improve their communities.
By talking about these different models as a single approach under the
rubric of community-based learning, the Coalition believes that the com-
bined benefits can be communicated more broadly and implemented
more systemically in the curriculum, both during and after school.
To really light this fire, the Coalition for Community Schools believes
that advocates and practitioners of these various models must work col-
laboratively and take more intentional and overt steps together. Students
and parents, practitioners and advocates, school districts, teacher educa-
tion and professional development programs, policy makers, higher edu-
cation, community-based organizations, and institutions must take joint
action. Below we suggest next steps for making the connection between
living and learning a necessary component of contemporary education.
Strengthen Policy
Ë School Board Members. School boards should establish policy that
encourages community-based learning across the curriculum as a strat-
egy for improving student learning, both throughout the school day
and in after school programs.
Ë State Level Leaders. States should have policies in place that en-
courage the integration of community-based learning to address the
requirements of No Child Left Behind. Policies should promote mul-
tiple assessments of student performance, enhance teacher and princi-
pal preparation, and develop standards that coordinate the use of state
funds for these purposes.
Conclusion
When students engage in learning, they are more likely to care deeply,
work harder, and achieve their goals. Drawing on the assets of a com-
munity—its history, culture, resources, and challenges—can help schools
build citizens while infusing academic course work with meaning and
relevance. Rather than diluting the school curriculum, community-based
learning strategies increase the intensity of learning and the likelihood
that young people will transfer knowledge and skills to new situations.
By fostering student interest in their own communities, these strategies
sow the seeds of lifelong learning. When students see themselves as citi-
zens, they take responsibility for what happens to their neighborhoods,
communities, and country. The end result? “Learning that lasts” well
beyond the last test and a commitment to service that lasts a lifetime.
Theoretical Foundations of
Community-Based Learning
E
ngagement is “a psychological process, specifically the atten-
tion, interest, investment, and effort students expend in the
work of learning.” Signals of student engagement include
staying on task, intensity of concentration, as well as school
attendance. Emotionally engaged learners show curiosity,
enthusiasm, and optimism about their potential performance. Intellectu-
ally engaged learners understand the importance of what they are learn-
ing. Students who are engaged are more likely to earn higher grades and
test scores. They are less likely to be disruptive, have poor attendance, or
dropout of school.53
If engagement refers to the effort that students expend in learning, what
exactly do we know about the process of learning and the factors that
cause young people to invest their best efforts? In this section we explore
insights from learning theory, neuroscience, and developmental research.
Key Principles
ABCS courses use hands on, real world problem solving to help students
develop as participating citizens in a democratic society. Building on
the insights of twentieth-century educational philosopher, John Dewey,
ABCS students learn by doing and learn from service as they contribute
to their communities. The community school is where the integrated,
K–16, real world, problem solving approach of ABCS begins to address
community needs. Learning, research, and action continue past the regu-
lar school day through well integrated, after school programs.
Civic Learning
Overview
Civic learning refers to a variety of teaching and learning methods that
enable young people to participate in and sustain democracy. A primary
impetus for establishing public schools in the first place, civic learning
may be approached as a “field of practice” or as an interlinking set of
strategies across many subfields. It aims to equip students with the knowl-
edge, skills, and dispositions required for effective civic engagement.
Civic knowledge includes age-appropriate understanding of key prin-
ciples, facts, events, and issues surrounding our democracy and gov-
ernment. Civic skills build the intellectual capacity to understand and
critique various points of view as well as the participatory skills necessary
to take part in the civic process. Civic dispositions foster, among other
things, students’ tolerance and respect for others, sense of social responsi-
bility, personal efficacy, and sense of connection to others.
Key Principles
Civic learning stresses approaches that are engaging, relevant to students’
personal lives, and interactive. The programs, policies, and practices of
civic learning should:
• Explicitly advocate for students’ civic and political engagement
• Reflect a deliberate and intentional focus on civic outcomes
• Provide active learning experiences so that students make
connections between academic learning and civic involvement
• Emphasize ideas and concepts that are essential to constitutional
democracy
• Enable students to see connections between democratic concepts
and their own lives.
Key Principles
• Teach environmentally significant ecological concepts and their
environmental interrelationships
• Promote in depth knowledge of environmental issues
• Provide opportunities for learners to achieve enough environmental
awareness to encourage positive changes in personal behavior
• Teach issue analysis and investigation skills and provide the time to
practice them
• Teach the citizenship skills needed to participate in issue remedia-
tion and build in the time to use them
• Provide instructional settings that increase students’ sense of per-
sonal responsibility and internal locus of control
Key Principles
Place-based learning, as defined by the Rural School and Community
Trust, is based on the following principles:
• The school and community actively collaborate to make the local
place a good one in which to learn, work, and live.
• Students do sustained academic work that draws upon and contrib-
utes to the place in which they live. They practice new skills and
responsibilities, serving as scholars, workers, and citizens in their
community.
• The community supports students and their adult mentors in these
new roles. Enthusiasm for place-based education spreads as the
learning deepens, steadily involving more students, teachers, admin-
istrators, and community participants.
• Schools mirror the democratic values they seek to instill, arranging
their resources so that every child is known well and every child’s
participation is needed and wanted, regardless of ability.
• Decisions about the education of the community’s children are
shared, informed by expertise both in and outside school.
• All participants, including teachers, students, and community
members, expect excellent effort from each other and review their
joint progress regularly and thoughtfully. Multiple measures and
public input enlarge assessments of student performance.
Key Principles
The essential elements of high quality service learning, according to
Youth Service California, include the following:
Integrated Learning
• The service learning project has clearly articulated knowledge, skill,
or value goals that arise from broader classroom or school goals.
• The service informs the academic learning content, and the academ-
ic learning content informs the service.
• Life skills learned outside the classroom are integrated back into
classroom learning.
Collaboration
• The service learning project is a collaboration among as many part-
ners as is feasible: students, parents, community-based organization
staff, school administrators, teachers, and recipients of service.
• All partners benefit from the project and contribute to its planning.
Student Voice
• Students participate actively in choosing and planning the service
project.
• Students participate actively in planning and implementing the
reflection sessions, evaluation, and celebration.
• Students participate actively in taking on roles and tasks that are
appropriate to their age.
Reflection
• Reflection establishes connections between students’ service
experiences and the academic curriculum.
• Reflection occurs before, during, and after the service learning project.
Evaluation
• All the partners, especially students, are involved in evaluating the
service learning project.
• The evaluation seeks to measure progress toward the learning and
service goals of the project.
Work-Based Learning
Overview
Work-based learning, also referred to as “school-to-work” (STW), is a
teaching and learning strategy that helps young people gain important
academic and employability skills; spend time with adults in a mentor-
ing, role model situation; and have substantive exposure to careers. The
most recent iteration of work-based learning began in the late 1980s in re-
sponse to increased international competition. Policy makers and educa-
tors in the United States sought to both help high school students better
understand the high skilled, high-tech, and competitive world of work
and careers and to increase the rigor and relevance of academic work.
Recent educational reform efforts have worked to define standards
across the curriculum and new attention is being given to the importance
of rigor, relevance, and relationships. In today’s conversations about high
schools, work-based learning is viewed as an important strategy for engag-
ing young people and connecting them to important networks of support
and information. Career Academies, Talent Development with Career
Academies, High Schools that Work, Tech Prep, and career clusters are
all models that include some form of work-based learning. Apprentice-
ship is another example, primarily seen at the post-secondary level.
American Youth Policy Forum (AYPF) coordinate, compile, and utilize information
Betsy Brand, Director to strengthen and enlarge the intended impact
Sarah Pearson, Senior Program Associate of their activities. Their work typically involves
program design and strategic planning, evalua-
American Youth Policy Forum actively seeks tion, and philanthropic industry analysis.
to create opportunities for communication, http://blueprintrd.com/
learning, understanding, and trust among
professionals, at all levels, working on issues af-
Campaign for the Civic Mission of
fecting youth. Through these endeavors, more
Schools Council for Excellence in
services and life opportunities can be provided
Government
to youth.
http://www.aypf.org/ David Skaggs, Executive Director
Kenneth Holdsman, Deputy Director
Antioch New England Institute (ANEI) The Council for Excellence in Government
David Sobel, Director works to improve the performance of govern-
Teacher Certification Program ment at all levels, to increase citizen confidence
in the government, and to encourage broader
Antioch New England Institute is the nonprofit civic participation.
consulting and community outreach arm of An- http://excelgov.org/
tioch New England Graduate School. ANEI
provides training programs and resources (U.S.
Center for Community School
and international) in leadership development,
Partnerships
place-based education, nonprofit management,
environmental education and policy, smart Ira Harkavy, Director
growth, and public administration. Cory Bowman, Associate Director
http://www.anei.org/ Joann Weeks, Associate Director
The Center for Community Partnerships fully
Association for Supervision and utilizes the University of Pennsylvania’s assets
Curriculum Development (ASCD) to benefit the city of Philidelphia, the uni-
Diane Berreth, Deputy Executive Director versity, and the community. This is achieved
through programs that directly connect the
ASCD is a community of educators that university to the community, such as academi-
aims to improve learning and teaching for all cally based community service.
students by advocating for sound policies and http://www.upenn.edu/ogcpa/ccp.html
sharing best practices. ASCD addresses a broad
range of learning and teaching issues such as
Chicago High School Redesign Initiative
professional development, educational leader-
at the Chicago Community Trust
ship, and capacity building.
http://www.ascd.org/portal/site/ascd/index.jsp/ Judith Murphy, Deputy Director
The Chicago Community Trust is a communi-
Blueprint Research & Design, Inc. ty foundation focused on making the Chicago
Jack Chin, Senior Analyst metropolitan area a great place to live, work,
and raise a family. The Chicago Trust partners
Blueprint Research & Design, Inc. is a with organizations ranging from neighborhood
consulting firm that helps philanthropic socialservice agencies to nationally acclaimed
institutions stratgeically think about ways to
1. R. Blum, School Connectedness: Improving the Lives of Students (Baltimore, MD: Johns
Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 2005), 4.
2. Indiana University, “What We Can Learn from High School Students” (Bloomington, IN:
High School Survey of Student Engagement, 2005). [Retrieved from www.iub.edu/~nsse/
hssse/pdf/hssse_2005_report.pdf ]
3. Partnership for Twenty-First Century Skills, Learning for the Twenty-First Century:
A Report and Mile Guide for Twenty-First Century Skills. [Retrieved from http://
www.21stcenturyskills.org/images/stories/otherdocs/P21_Report.pdf ]
4. “The State of Our Nation’s Youth 2005–2006” (Alexandria, VA: Horatio Alger Association
of Distinguished Americans, Inc., 2005). [Retrieved from [email protected]]
5. “Ready for The Real World? Americans Speak on High School Reform” (Princeton, NJ:
Educational Testing Service, 2005).
6. Ibid.
7. T. Urdan and S. Klein, “Early Adolescence: A Review of the Literature” (Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Research and Improvement, 1998),
10. [Prepared paper].
8. Ibid.
9. Ibid., 10.
10. G. Leiberman and L. Hoody, Closing the Achievement Gap: Using the Environment as an Inte-
grating Context for Learning (San Diego, CA: State Environment and Education Roundtable,
1998).
11. D. Sobel, Place-Based Education: Connecting Classrooms and Communities (Great Barrington,
MA: The Orion Society, 2004), 9.
12. National Commission on Service Learning, Learning In Deed: The Power of Service Learning
for American Schools (Battle Creek, MI: W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2002), 3.
13. See E. L. Deci and R. M. Ryan (1991); K. Krynock and L. Robb (1999); and R. Larson
(2000) cited in M. J. Blank, A. Melaville, and B. P. Shah, Making the Difference: Research and
Practice in Community Schools (Washington, DC: Coalition for Community Schools, 2003).
14. National Research Council’s Commission on Increasing High School Students’ Engagement
and Motivation to Learn, Engaging Schools: Fostering High School Students Motivation to
Learn (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2003).
15. See Deci and Ryan (1991); Krynock and Robb (1999); and Larson (2000) cited in Blank,
Melaville, and Shah, Making the Difference.
16. E. Medrich, S. Calderon, and G. Hoachlander, “Contextual Teaching and Learning Strate-
gies in High Schools: Developing a Vision for Support and Evaluation” in B. Brand, ed.,
Alternative Assessment and Contextual Teaching and Learning: Essentials of High School Reform
(Washington, DC: American Youth Policy Forum and the Institute for Educational Leader-
ship, September 2003).
17. See Blum, Beuhring, and Rinehart (2000); Deci and Ryan (1991); and Larson (2000) cited
in Blank, Melaville, and Shah, Making the Difference.
19. C. Midgely and H. Feldlaufer, “Students’ and Teachers’ Decision-Making Fit Before and
After the Transition to Junior High School,” Journal of Early Adolescence 7, no. 2 (1987):
225–41. [Cited in Urdan and Klein, Early Adolescence.]
20. H. Feldlaufer, C. Midgley, and J. Eccles, “Student, Teachers, and Observer Perceptions of
the Classroom Environment Before and After the Transition to Junior High School,” Journal
of Early Adolescence 8, no. 2 (1988): 133–56. [Cited in Urdan and Klein, Early Adolescence.]
22. “Poll: Students Don’t Understand First Amendment,” The Annapolis Capital (January 31,
2005): A1. [Poll findings, The Future of the 1st Amendment, reported by the John S. and
James L. Knight Foundation.]
23. See Lake, Snell, Perry and Associates and the Tarrance Group, Inc. (2002) as cited in Grow-
ing to Greatness (St. Paul, Minnesota: National Youth Leadership Council, 2004), 17.
24. B. O. Boston and B. Gomez, “Executive Summary,” Every Student a Citizen: Creating the
Democratic Self (Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States, 2000).
25. R. F. Catalano et al., “The Importance of Bonding to School for Healthy Development:
Findings from the Social Development Research Group,” Journal of School Health 74, no. 7
(2004): 252.
26. S. Sagawa, “Service as a Strategy for Youth Development,” Shaping the Future of American
Youth (Washington, DC: American Youth Policy Forum, 2003), 35.
28. Ibid.
29. M. McLaughlin, Community Counts: How Youth Organizations Matter for Youth Development
(Washington D.C.: Public Education Network, April 2000).
30. Annual Report (Washington, DC: Rural School and Community Trust, 2001), 2.
32. S. Fordham and J. Ogbu, “Black Students’ School Success: Coping with the Burden of ‘Act-
ing White,’” Urban Review 18, no. 1 (1986), 55–84.
33. North Central Educational Research Laboratory, All Students Reaching the Top: Strategies for
Closing Academic Achievement Gaps (Naperville, IL: Learning Point Associates, 2004), 1.
34. B. Brand et al., Looking Forward: School-to-Work Principles and Strategies for Sustainability
(Washington, DC: American Youth Policy Forum and Center for Workforce Development,
Institute for Educational Leadership, 2000).
35. PEER Associates, “An Evaluation of Project Co-Seed: Community-Based School Environ-
mental Project, 2003–2004” (Antioch New England Institute and the Place-Based Educa-
tion Evaluation Collaborative, December 2004). [Prepared paper]
36. The State Education and Environment Roundtable (SEER). [Retrieved from www.seer.org
and cited in materials from the South Carolina EIC School Network.]
37. Katherine L. Hughes, “School-to-Work: Making a Difference in Education,” Phi Delta Kap-
pan (Dec. 2002). [Cited in www.looksmart.com, fn 17.]
41. S. Billig, “Heads, Hearts, and Hands: The Research on K–12 Service Learning,” Growing to
Greatness (National Youth Leadership Council, 2004), 1225.
42. The Civic Mission of Schools (New York: CIRCLE and Carnegie Corporation of New York,
2003), 69.
44. Douglas Kirby, Emerging Answers: Research Findings on Programs to Reduce Teen Pregnancy
(Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, 2001).
51. L. Yamauchi, S. Billig, and L. Hofschire, “Student Outcomes Associated With Service
Learning” in A Culturally Relevant High School Program (in press). [Cited in S. Billig,
“Heads, Hearts, and Hands,” 12–25.]
52. A. Furco, “Is Service Learning Really Better than Community Service?” in A. Furco and S.
Billig, eds., Advances in Service Learning Research, vol. 1. (Greenwich, CT: Information Age
Publishers, 2002). [Cited in S. Billig, “Heads, Hearts and Hands,” 12–25.]
54. C. Brainerd, Piaget’s Theory of Intelligence (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1978); Jean
Piaget, The Mechanisms of Perception (London: Rutledge and Kegan Paul, 1969).
55. L. S. Vygotsky, Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes (Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978); Ibid., Thought and Language (Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press, 1962). [Original work published 1934.]
56. J. Lave, Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics, and Culture in Everyday Life (Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press, 1988); J. S. Brown, A. Collins, and S. Duguid, “Situated
Cognition and the Culture of Learning,” Educational Researcher 18, no. 1 (1989): 32–42.
57. P. Wolfe, Brain Matters: Translating Research into Classroom Practice (Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2001). [Cited in Blank,
Melaville, and Shah, Making the Difference.]
60. P. R. Pintrich and D. H. Schunk, Motivation in Education: Theory, Research, and Applica-
tions (Englewood Cliffs: Merrill/Prentice Hall, 1996). [Cited in Schunk and Pajares, “The
Development of Academic Self-Efficacy,” 7.]
62. Howard Gardner, Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences (New York: Basic
Books, 1983); Ibid., Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the Twenty-First Century
(New York: Basic Books, 2000).
63. T. Armstrong, T. In Their Own Way: Discovering and Encouraging Your Child’s Personal
Learning Style (New York: Tarcher/Putnum, 1987).
64. B. Benard, “Fostering Resiliency in Kids: Protective Factors in the Family, School, and
Community.” (Portland, OR: Western Center for Drug-Free Schools and Communities,
1991). [Retrieved from the ERIC database (ERIC # ED 335 781).]
65. K. J. Pittman and W. P. Fleming, “A New Vision: Promoting Youth Development” (Wash-
ington DC: Center for Youth Development and Policy Research, September 1991). Written
transcript of live testimony by Karen J. Pittman given before The House Select Committee
on Children, Youth, and Families.] Also see K. Pittman, M. Irby, and T. Ferber, “Unfinished
Business: Further Reflections on a Decade of Promoting Youth Development,” Youth De-
velopment: Issues and Challenges (Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventures, 2000). [Retrieved
from http://www.ppv.org/indexfiles/pubsindex.html]
66. For a discussion on origins of the field of positive youth development, see R. Catalano et al.,
Positive Youth Development in The United States: Research Findings on Evaluations of Positive
Youth Development Programs (Washington, DC: US Department Of Health and Human
Services and the National Institute for Child Health and Human Development, November
1998).
67. Abraham Maslow, Motivation and Personality, 2nd ed. (New York: Harper and Row, 1970).
68. Urie Bronfenbrenner, The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979).
About IEL