Illinois Learn and Serve 2009-2010 School Year · 2016-07-28 · In 2009-2010, RMC Research Corporation conducted an evaluation of the Illinois Learn and Serve program to determine

Cluster Evaluation Report Illinois Learn and Serve 2009-2010 School Year

Prepared for: Illinois State Board of Education

Illinois Learn and Serve 100 North First Street Springfield, IL 62777

Prepared by: RMC Research Corporation

633 17th Street, Suite 2100 Denver, CO 80202

August 2010

Illinois Learn and Serve 2009-2010 School Year

Cluster Evaluation Report

Prepared for:

Debbie Huffman

Illinois State Board of Education Illinois Learn and Serve

100 North First Street Springfield, IL 62777

Prepared by:

Judy Northup Stephany Brown

RMC Research Corporation 633 17th Street, Suite 2100

Denver, CO 80202

August 2010

Acknowledgments

This report was prepared for Illinois State Board of Education

Illinois Learn and Serve under Contract No. MY10439.

For questions about this report, please contact Judy Northup at 1-800-922-3636, or e-mail at [email protected].

RMC Research Corporation is an Equal Employment Opportunity and Affirmative Action Employer and a Drug-Free Workplace.

Contents

Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... i Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 Methodology.................................................................................................................... 3 Results

Service-Learning Implementation ............................................................................ 15 Student Outcomes................................................................................................... 23 Impacts on Partner Organizations and Communities............................................... 29

Conclusions and Recommendations............................................................................. 31 Appendix

Participating Student Survey Grades 3-5 Participating Student Survey Grades 6-12 Teacher Survey Community Partner Survey

Exhibits

Exhibit 1. Participating Districts/Subgrantees and Schools .....................................................4 Exhibit 2. Student Survey Respondents..................................................................................5 Exhibit 3. Student Survey Respondent Characteristics (Grades 3-5) .....................................6 Exhibit 4. Student Survey Respondent Characteristics (Grades 6-12)....................................7 Exhibit 5. Student Volunteer and Community Service Activities (Grades 6-12) ......................7 Exhibit 6. Definitions of Survey Measures...............................................................................8 Exhibit 7. Student Survey Reliability Analysis (Grades 3-5) ....................................................9 Exhibit 8. Student Survey Reliability Analysis (Grades 6-12) ..................................................9 Exhibit 9. Teacher Survey Respondent Characteristics ........................................................11 Exhibit 10. Teacher Survey Reliability Analysis: Service-Learning Quality Indicators.............12 Exhibit 11. Community Partner Survey Respondent Characteristics ......................................13 Exhibit 12. Teacher Perceptions of Service-Learning Quality in Their Classrooms ................15 Exhibit 13. Student Perceptions of Service-Learning Quality, Grades 3-5 ..............................16 Exhibit 14. Student Perceptions of Service-Learning Quality, Grades 6-12 ............................16 Exhibit 15. Total Number of Weeks Students Were Engaged in Service-Learning Projects, as Reported by Teachers .......................................................................17 Exhibit 16. Average Number of Hours Per Week Students Were Engaged in Service- Learning Activities, as Reported by Teachers .......................................................17 Exhibit 17 Teacher Reports of When Service-Learning Activities Took Place During the School Year ...........................................................................................................18 Exhibit 18. Extent to Which Service-Learning Projects Were Required, as Reported by

Teachers................................................................................................................18 Exhibit 19. Subject Areas With Which Service-Learning Projects Were Associated...............19 Exhibit 20. Service-Learning Project Focus, as Reported by Students in Grades 3-5 ............20 Exhibit 21. Service-Learning Project Focus, as Reported by Students in Grades 6-12 ..........20 Exhibit 22. Involvement of Community Partners in Service-Learning Activities ......................20 Exhibit 23. Indices of Partnership Quality................................................................................21 Exhibit 24. Differences Over Time on Grades 3-5 Student Outcome Measures.....................23 Exhibit 25. Average Gains Over Time on Grades 3-5 Student Outcome Measures ...............24 Exhibit 26. Differences Over Time on Grades 6-12 Student Outcome Measures...................24 Exhibit 27. Average Gain Over Time on Grades 6-12 Student Outcome Measures ...............25 Exhibit 28. Teacher Perceptions of Impact of Service-Learning on Students .........................26 Exhibit 29. Student Perceptions of Skills Acquired Through Participation in Service-Learning ...................................................................................................27 Exhibit 30. Moderators on Student Outcomes.........................................................................28 Exhibit 31. Perceptions of Impact on Partner Organizations...................................................29 Exhibit 32. Partners’ Perceptions of Impact on Communities .................................................30 Exhibit 33. Teachers’ Perceptions of Impact on Communities ................................................30

RMC Research Corporation, Denver, CO i Illinois Learn and Serve Cluster Evaluation Report 2009-2010 School Year

Executive Summary

The 2009-2012 Illinois Learn and Serve grant program provides funding for service-learning programs to local education agencies, regional offices of education, intermediate service centers, special education cooperatives, regional career and technical education programs, charter schools, and public university laboratory schools approved by the Illinois State Board of Education. The goal of the Illinois Learn and Serve program is to promote student academic engagement as a means to increase student attendance, improve academic performance, and reduce school dropout rates. In 2009-2010, RMC Research Corporation conducted an evaluation of the Illinois Learn and Serve program to determine impact of participation on students’ academic engagement, attachment to school, performance and acquisition of 21st century skills, civic dispositions, and social-emotional learning. During Year 1 of the program, approximately 51 schools representing 17 districts/subgrantees participated in service-learning evaluation activities. This report presents results of the analysis of data collected from participants during the 2009-2010 school year. Retrospective post-only surveys were completed by 1,786 service-learning students in Grades 3-12. Seventy-three service-learning teachers and 49 community partners completed post-only surveys. Analysis of student achievement, attendance, discipline referral, and dropout rate data will be presented as an Addendum to this report when the data becomes available. Results Implementation • Teachers reported that they addressed all eight standards of quality service-learning

programs. Highest ratings were reported for provision of meaningful service activities for students and youth voice. Provision of progress monitoring activities that helped young people evaluate their service-learning experiences was given a somewhat lower rating by teachers.

• Students reported that the quality of their service-learning programs was relatively

high. Students in Grades 3-5 agreed that their activities were important and that they talked about their service-learning activities. Students in Grades 6-12 rated highest the items about showing respect for other people’s opinions. The item pertaining to coming up with ideas for service-learning activities was rated the lowest by students in Grades 6-12.

• There was substantial variation in the duration of projects. According to teachers,

students were engaged in service-learning activities most frequently between 6-10 weeks followed by 11-20 weeks. Students spent on average approximately 11 weeks out of the school year on service-learning activities. Teachers reported that students spent an average of 3.8 hours per week on service-learning activities. Most activities took place throughout the school year and students were required to participate in at least some of the projects.

RMC Research Corporation, Denver, CO ii Illinois Learn and Serve Cluster Evaluation Report 2009-2010 School Year

• Service-learning projects were most frequently associated with social studies, reading/language arts, and science content areas. Students in Grades 3-5 most frequently reported working with senior citizens, helping the environment, or engaging in other types of projects as part of their service-learning experiences. Students in Grades 6-12 most frequently reported being engaged in “other” types of projects and in projects focused on helping the environment.

• Community partners were most frequently involved in providing support for students

as they engaged in service-learning activities. Partners also reported providing information on community needs and helping students plan service-learning projects. They were less likely to help facilitate demonstration and reflection activities.

• Community partners gave strong ratings to all indicators of service-learning

partnership quality. Highest levels of agreement were for sharing a common mission and goals with members of the partnership. Partners noted that service-learning facilitators or teachers provided them with a clear explanation of service-learning. While still high, partners reported less agreement when asked about the extent to which members of their partnerships developed close working relationships.

Impacts • There were statistically significant increases over time on all outcome measures for

students in Grades 3-5. Students reported increases in academic engagement, school attachment, acquisition of 21st century skills, civic dispositions, and social-emotional learning.

• Students in Grades 6-12 had significant increases over time on all outcome measures.

Greatest gains were for social-emotional learning, civic dispositions, and 21st century skills. • Service-learning teachers reported that service-learning impacted students in all

measured outcome areas. Perceived impacts were highest in the area of students’ increased belief that they themselves could make a difference. While still high, fewer impacts were perceived in the areas of improved academic performance and improved student attendance.

• Students in Grades 6-12 most frequently perceived they acquired work experience and

job skills as a result of participating in service-learning. To a lesser extent, students reported acquisition of reading and writing skills. Students were least likely to identify acquisition of math, tutoring, or science skills as a result of their participation.

• Students’ age and ratings of service-learning program quality made a significant

difference in several outcome areas for students in Grades 3-5. It appears that as student ratings of service-learning program quality increased so did student ratings of school attachment. Analyses also suggested that there was a positive relationship between student age and social-emotional learning. Older students in Grades 3-5 were more likely to give higher ratings on indicators of social-emotional learning than younger students.

RMC Research Corporation, Denver, CO iii Illinois Learn and Serve Cluster Evaluation Report 2009-2010 School Year

• Teacher-student relationships had a moderating effect on Grades 6-12 student ratings in several outcome areas. This finding suggests that the more positive students perceived their relationships with teachers to be, the higher their gains on ratings of academic engagement and 21st century skills.

• Teachers’ ratings of link to the curriculum were positively related with Grades 6-12

student ratings of academic engagement and academic competence. The more teachers linked service-learning activities to the curriculum, the higher the student ratings of academic engagement and academic competence were.

• Teacher experience had a moderating effect on Grades 6-12 student ratings of 21st

century skills. The more years teachers had experience teaching overall and in implementing service-learning, the higher were student ratings of 21st century skills.

• Community partners gave high ratings to most impact areas of service-learning

partnerships on their organizations. They were most likely to agree that service-learning partnerships resulted in a sustained or continued relationship with schools followed by helping school personnel understand community needs and resources. Respondents were less likely to agree that partnerships resulted in increased financial and/or material resources for their organizations.

• Partner organizations and teachers agreed that service-learning projects had positive

impacts on communities. Service-learning activities were perceived as benefitting individuals in the community, community organizations, and communities as a whole. Teachers indicated that service-learning activities positively changed the way community members viewed young people.

Recommendations 1. Study the reasons why there was a difference in perceptions between teachers and

students on student voice. 2. Reduce the variation in the duration and intensity of service-learning activities. 3. Study how teachers can make greater links between service-learning activities and

curriculum. 4. Recruit matched comparison classrooms for the study.

RMC Research Corporation, Denver, CO 1 Illinois Learn and Serve Cluster Evaluation Report 2009-2010 School Year

Introduction

The 2009-2012 Illinois Learn and Serve grant program provides funding for service-learning programs to LEAs, regional offices of education, intermediate service centers, special education cooperatives, regional career and technical education programs, charter schools, and public university laboratory schools approved by the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE). The goal of the Illinois Learn and Serve program is to promote student academic engagement as a means of increasing student attendance, improving academic performance, and reducing school dropout rates. In 2009-2010, RMC Research Corporation conducted an evaluation of the Illinois Learn and Serve program to determine impact of participation on students’ academic engagement, attachment to school, performance and acquisition of 21st century skills, civic dispositions, and social-emotional learning. During Year 1 of the program, approximately 51 schools representing 17 districts participated in service-learning evaluation activities. Organization of This Report This report provides an evaluation of Illinois Learn and Serve for the 2009-2010 school year. Information about the methodology of the study including the sample, data collection instruments, and data analysis is provided in the next section. This is followed by results from the analyses of student, teacher, and community partner surveys, which addressed program implementation and impact. Conclusions and recommendations for improvement are presented last.


Methodology

This section outlines the design and methods used in this evaluation. The questions guiding the evaluation are presented first, followed by sample sizes and information about study participants. Information on data collection tools, procedures, and measures is also provided. Evaluation Questions The questions guiding the evaluation are presented below: 1. What was the impact of service-learning participation on students’

a. academic engagement, school attachment, educational aspirations, acquisition of 21st century skills, civic dispositions, and social-emotional learning?

b. academic achievement, dropout rates, attendance, and discipline referral rates? 2. Which demographic and program characteristics are most important for predicting student

outcomes? Design and Sample Selection Procedures The evaluation used a post-only retrospective survey design. Respondents included students in Grades 3-12 who participated in service-learning programs, classroom teachers who implemented service-learning, and representatives of community partner organizations. RMC Research worked with Illinois Learn and Serve staff on procedures for data collection, to coordinate contact with subgrantees, and to deliver online and scannable data collection instruments and protocols. The site coordinator for each Illinois Learn and Serve subgrantee assisted in the recruitment of classrooms for the study and administration of surveys. Exhibit 1 displays the participating districts/subgrantees and schools for those sites from which student surveys were received. Seventeen districts/subgrantees participated in the first year of the evaluation. Approximately 51 schools were represented.


Exhibit 1. Participating Districts/Subgrantees and Schools

District/Subgranteea Schools Bushnell-Prairie City Bushnell-Prairie City Elementary School Chicago Public Schools Corliss High School Curie High School Farragut Career Academy Foreman High School Horace Greeley Elementary School Juarez High School Kelvyn Park High School Morgan Park High School Prosser Career Academy Raby High School Roberto Clemente High School Schurtz High School South Shore High School Steinmetz Academic Center Wendell Phillips Academy High School West Chicago Community High School Community District 300 Harry D. Jacobs High School Community High School District 94 Community High School Community Unit School District 1 Jefferson Elementary School Evanston Township High School Evanston Township High School Mannheim School District 83 Mannheim Middle School Monroe-Randolph ROE 45 Evansville School Morton High School Morton High School

Bertie STEM High School Cobaed #11 Cobaed #15 Colegio de Bachilleres #12

Duplin Early College High School Jacket Integrated Academy Wayne School of Engineering Mount Vernon City Schools, District 80 Casey Middle School North Shore School District 112 Red Oak Elementary School Edgewood Middle School Elm Place Middle School Oswego School District 308 Boulder Hill Elementary School


District/Subgranteea Schools Churchill Elementary School Old Post Elementary School Prairie Point Elementary School Owego High School Pathways LLC Pathways Shelbyville Pathways Pathways School District U-46 Glenbrook Elementary School Elgin High School Larkin High School Special Education District of Lake County Gages Lake School Sally Potter School Cyd Lash Academy Township High School, District 113 Highland Park High School Waukegan Public School District 60 Miguel Juarez Middle School a There were also several additional schools for which district/subgrantee information was not received.

Student Survey The number of student survey respondents is presented in Exhibit 2. Over 1,700 students completed the student survey. About 76% of the participants in the study were in Grades 6-12, with the remaining percentage of students being in Grades 3-5.

Exhibit 2. Student Survey Respondents

Grade Levels Number of

Surveys

PercentageGrades 3-5 431 24.1 Grades 6-12 1,355 75.9 Total 1,786 100.0


Grades 3-5 Respondents Exhibit 3 presents student survey respondent characteristics for students in Grades 3-5. Male and female students were almost equally represented. The distribution of students across grade levels shows that most students were in Grades 4 and 5. Only 5% of students were in Grade 3.

Exhibit 3. Student Survey Respondent Characteristics (Grades 3-5)

N1 Frequency Percentage

Gender 430 Male 219 50.9 Female 211 49.1

Grade 428 3 22 5.1 4 213 49.8 5 193 45.1

Grades 6-12 Respondents Exhibit 4 presents student survey respondent characteristics for students in Grades 6-12. The Exhibit shows that there were more females than males. Respondents were fairly evenly split by grade levels with 51% being in Grades 6-8 and 49% being in Grades 9-12. The majority of students (48%) were Hispanic, followed by White/Caucasian (33%), and spoke English at home.

1 N is the total number in a sample.


Exhibit 4. Student Survey Respondent Characteristics (Grades 6-12)

a Percentages may not sum to 100 because respondents could select more than one category.

Students in Grades 6-12 were asked to provide information about their participation in volunteer and service activities during the 2009-2010 school year. Exhibit 5 shows that students most often participated in volunteer activities in school, followed by with groups or organizations outside of school.

Exhibit 5. Student Volunteer and Community Service Activities (Grades 6-12)

(N = 1,355)

Volunteer and Community Service Activities During 2009-2010 School Year Frequency Percentagea In school 732 54.0 With a group or organization

outside of school 439 32.4

None 423 31.2 a Percentages may not sum to 100 because respondents could select more than one category.

N Frequency Percentage Gender 1,327

Male 596 44.9 Female 731 55.1

Grade 1,340 6 242 18.1 7 244 18.2 8 198 14.8 9 201 15.0 10 129 9.6 11 126 9.4 12 200 14.9

Race/Ethnicitya 1,355 White/Caucasian 449 33.1 Hispanic/Latino 657 48.5 Black/African

American 225 16.6

Asian/Pacific Islander 33 2.4 American Indian/

Alaskan Native 16 1.3

Other 29 2.1 Language Most Often Spoken at Home

1,315

English 895 68.1 Spanish 382 29.1 Other 38 2.8


Survey Measures Retrospective post-only surveys were developed for students in Grades 3-5 and Grades 6-12. The Grades 6-12 survey included measures that were parallel to those on the Grade 3-5 version. Measures included academic engagement, school attachment, acquisition of 21st century skills, civic dispositions, and social-emotional learning. In addition to these common measures, the Grades 6-12 student survey included educational aspirations and teacher and student relationships. Students rated their agreement with each survey item statement twice. They were instructed to think about each survey item as it related to them at the beginning of the school year and then at the end of the school year. All items were measured on a 4-point scale with the following response categories: 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree, and 4 = strongly agree. The measures are defined as shown in Exhibit 6.

Exhibit 6. Definitions of Survey Measures

Measure Definition Academic engagement Affective, behavioral, and cognitive engagement (for

Grades 6-12 divided between engagement and academic competence)

School attachment Value of schooling Acquisition of 21st century skills Problem-solving skills, decision-making skills, ability to

work on teams, communication skills, and leadership skills

Civic dispositions Dispositions toward civic involvement Social-emotional learning Prosocial behaviors Educational aspirations (Grades 6-12) Aspirations for graduation and postsecondary

education/career Teacher and student relationships

(Grades 6-12) The quality of relationships between students and teachers

In addition, the service-learning participant surveys for Grades 3-5 and Grades 6-12 included items that assessed students’ perception of the quality of their service-learning program. These items were also measured on a 4-point scale where 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree, and 4 = strongly agree. Reliability analyses (Cronbach’s alpha)2 were conducted for scaled student outcome measures on both Grades 3-5 and Grades 6-12 student surveys using data from the survey measure: at the beginning of the school year. The reliability analysis conducted on the service-learning program quality subscale was based on the post-only service-learning participant survey. The results of the subscale reliability analysis for Grades 3-5 and Grades 6-12, are presented in Exhibits 7 and 8, respectively. All scaled items for both grade-level student surveys were at an acceptable level of Cronbach’s alpha of .7 or higher.

2 Cronbach’s alpha is a measure of the reliability or internal consistency of a composite measure or scale that is based on multiple survey items. Values range from 0 to 1.


Exhibit 7. Student Survey Reliability Analysis (Grades 3-5)

Subscale Number of

Items Sample Item(s) Cronbach’s

Alpha Academic Engagement 11 I like being at school.

I pay attention in class. .79

School Attachment 5 I contribute to this school. I feel proud of this school.

.76

21st Century Skills 7 I am good at coming up with new ideas.

I am good at figuring out how to make a good decision.

.80

Civic Dispositions 3a I do things to make my neighborhood or community a better place.

.73

I talk with my friends about problems in my neighborhood or community.

Social Emotional Learning

5 I want to do good things for other people.

.82

I try to make new students feel comfortable at school.

Service-Learning Program Quality

4 I think my service-learning activities are important.

I helped to make decisions about my classes’ service-learning activities.

.76

a Adjustments were made in the scoring for the civic dispositions subscale for Grades 3-5 due to slightly two different subscales being used.

Exhibit 8. Student Survey Reliability Analysis (Grades 6-12)

Subscale Number of


Alpha Academic Engagement 9 I feel that the schoolwork I am assigned

is meaningful and important. My classes are interesting to me.

.83

Academic Competence 6 I can get good grades if I try. I can do well in school if I want to.

.79

School Attachment 5 I feel like I belong to this school. I do things to make this school a better

place.

.79

Aspirations 3 I am likely to graduate from high school. I am likely to continue my education

beyond high school.

.81

Relationships 5 My teacher in this class listens carefully to me when I talk.

Teachers in my school help me when I need help.

.90

21st Century Skills 14 I am good at working as part of a team. I am good at taking on different roles and

responsibilities.

.91


Subscale Number of


Alpha Civic Dispositions 6 I can make a difference in my

neighborhood or community. .85

I intend to volunteer throughout my whole life.

Social-Emotional Learning

9 I try to make new students feel comfortable in school.

.88

I stop to think about my options before making a decision.

Service-Learning Program Quality

9 I feel that my service-learning activities were meaningful.

I helped come up with ideas for my service-learning activities.

.91

Teacher Survey Seventy-three service-learning teachers completed an online survey in spring 2010. Exhibit 9 presents the characteristics of teacher survey respondents. Approximately two thirds (67%) of teachers were female. Most of the teachers (42%) taught at the high school level in Grades 9-12, followed by elementary (28%), and middle school (24%). Over 77% of the teachers that completed the survey had 6 years or more teaching experience in K-12 schools, with 30% having more than 21 years experience. The average number of years teaching in K-12 schools was 14. Approximately 59% of the teachers reported implementing service-learning for 5 years or less while 41% have implemented service-learning for 6 years or more. The average number of years teachers implemented service-learning was 7.


Exhibit 9. Teacher Survey Respondent Characteristics

N Frequency PercentageGender 70

Male 23 32.9 Female 47 67.1

Grade Levels Taughta 73 Elementary (Grades 3-5) 21 28.8 Middle (Grades 6-8) 18 24.7 High (Grades 9-12) 31 42.5 Other 8 11.0

Years Teaching in a K-12 School 70 2 years or less 3 4.3 3 to 5 years 13 18.6 6 to 10 years 16 22.8 11 to 20 years 17 24.3 More than 21 years 21 30.0

Years Implemented Service-Learning 68 2 years or less 21 30.9 3 to 5 years 19 27.9 6 to 10 years 18 26.5 More than 10 years 10 14.7

a Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. The survey asked teachers about the nature of their service-learning activities (e.g., connection to curricula, duration, and intensity); the quality of the service-learning program (e.g., the extent to which reflection activities were used); the quality of external partnerships; perceptions of impact on students; and teacher background information. RMC Research developed a 33-item measure of service-learning quality that included measures of link to the curriculum, partnership quality, meaningful service, student voice, diversity, reflection, and progress monitoring. Items were rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = strongly disagree and 4 = strongly agree. Exhibit 10 presents results from reliability analyses of the service-learning quality subscales. Coefficients for all scales indicated high internal consistency.


Exhibit 10. Teacher Survey Reliability Analysis: Service-Learning Quality Indicators

Subscale Number of Items Sample Item(s)

Cronbach’sAlpha

Link to Curriculum 4 Academic learning goals for service-learning activities were clearly articulated.

Service-learning activities helped students learn how to transfer knowledge and skills from one setting to another.

.76

Partnership 5 Service-learning partners collaborated to set common project goals.

Service-learning involved an in-depth partnership with at least one community agency.

.86

Meaningful Service 4 Youth were interested in and engaged with the service-learning activities.

Service-learning activities addressed issues that were personally relevant to the youth.

.78

Youth Voice 6 Service-learning activities helped youth develop their leadership skills.

Service-learning activities were characterized by a climate in which youth were comfortable expressing their ideas.

.89

Respect for Diversity 4 Service-learning activities provided youth with an opportunity to develop their conflict resolution skills.

Service-learning activities provided youth with an opportunity to recognize and overcome cultural stereotypes.

.79

Reflection 5 Reflection occurred before, during, and after the service experience.

Reflection prompted youth to think about alternative solutions to complex community problems.

.86

Progress Monitoring 4 Evidence was discussed in the context of how to improve the service-learning process.

Evidence of the quality of service-learning implementation was collected from multiple sources throughout the service-learning process.

.92

Community Partner Survey Forty-nine community partners completed an online survey in spring 2010. Exhibit 11 presents characteristics of the community partner respondents. The majority of partners were community-based organizations/nonprofits (32%) or educational institutions (28%). The number of years partnerships had been in place with schools was fairly evenly distributed from between 1 year to 5 years or more. Thirty percent of the partners had worked with their schools for 5 years or more.


Exhibit 11. Community Partner Survey Respondent Characteristics (N = 49)

Frequency Percentage Type of Organization Represented

Community-based organization/nonprofit 16 32.7 Federal government agency 1 2.0 State/local government agency 10 20.4 Educational institution/organization 14 28.6 For profit organization 3 6.1 Other 5 10.2

Years Partnership Has Been in Place with School Less than one year 3 6.1 1 to 2 years 16 32.7 3 to 4 years 15 30.6 5 years or more 15 30.6

The community partner survey captured the roles and responsibilities of partners, with a focus on their specific contributions to service-learning activities, the extent to which the partnership was clearly articulated, and the extent to which the partnership was perceived as beneficial for their organization and the community. Finally, the survey measured perceived impact on the community, school, and students. A copy of all survey instruments may be found in the Appendix of this report. Data Analysis Descriptive statistics and analyses of variance (ANOVAs)3 were used to analyze survey data. Repeated measures ANOVA4 was used to examine survey outcomes over time for students. To examine moderating factors associated with student outcomes, additional analyses were conducted using student and teacher surveys. Several student demographic variables, student ratings of service-learning quality, student ratings of their relationship with teachers, teacher experience, and teachers’ perceptions of the quality of their service-learning program were linked with outcome data using repeated measures ANOVAs. Analysis of student achievement, attendance, discipline referral, and dropout rates will be presented as an Addendum to this report when these data become available.

3 Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a statistical procedure that examines differences in outcomes for two or more groups. 4 Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a statistical procedure used to examine differences within and between groups when the same data are available for multiple points in time.


Results Service-Learning Implementation

This section presents information about service-learning implementation, including service-learning quality, instructional time spent engaged in service-learning activities, types of service-learning activities, and connections to academic subjects and standards. Classroom Service-Learning Quality Indicators Exhibit 12 presents teachers’ perceptions of service-learning quality in their classrooms. Teachers generally agreed that they had implemented all of the standards measured. Highest average ratings were for meaningful service and youth voice. Progress monitoring received the lowest average rating from teachers.

Exhibit 12. Teacher Perceptions of Service-Learning Quality in Their Classrooms

Service-Learning Quality N Mean5 SD6 Link to the Curriculum 64 3.45 .47 Partnerships 62 3.27 .63 Meaningful Service 63 3.60 .43 Youth Voice 63 3.47 .48 Respect for Diversity 64 3.32 .52 Reflection 62 3.29 .58 Progress Monitoring 62 3.17 .70 Note. Responses were rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Agree, and 4 = Strongly Agree.

Students also rated the quality of their service-learning activities. As seen in Exhibit 13, students in Grades 3-5 agreed that their activities were important and that they talked about their service-learning activities. There was less agreement with the items about helping to make decisions and writing about their service-learning activities. Students in Grades 6-12 rated highest the items about showing respect for other people’s opinions and meaningful activities and the item about coming up with ideas for service-learning activities as the lowest, as displayed in Exhibit 14. Generally, students and teachers agreed that service-learning activities were meaningful. Student ratings of youth voice appeared to be lower than teachers’ ratings.

5 The mean or average value is a measure of central tendency computed by adding a set of values and dividing the sum by the total number of values. 6 The standard deviation (SD) is a measure of how spread out a set of values is. Higher standard deviations indicate greater variability in data across respondents.


Exhibit 13. Student Perceptions of Service-Learning Quality, Grades 3-5

Service-Learning Quality N Mean SD Overall quality 410 3.13 .62 I think my service-learning activities are important. 394 3.46 .63 I helped to make decisions about my class’s service-learning

activities. 334 3.01 .80

Our class talked about what we learned as a result of our service-learning activities.

352 3.18 .84

Our class wrote about what we learned as a result of our service-learning activities.

318 2.79 .96

Note. Responses were rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Agree, and 4 = Strongly Agree.

Exhibit 14. Student Perceptions of Service-Learning Quality, Grades 6-12

Service-Learning Quality N Mean SD Overall quality 1,130 3.16 .55 I feel that my service-learning activities were meaningful. 1,065 3.33 .66 My teacher made sure we linked service-learning activities to

classroom subjects such as English, math, and/or science. 1,027 3.10 .77

The skills that I learned from my service-learning activities will be useful to me in the future.

1,062 3.27 .70

My service-learning activities were important to me. 1,067 3.27 .68 I helped make decisions about my service-learning activities. 1,023 3.13 .73 I helped come up with ideas for my service-learning activities. 1,018 2.98 .82 During my service-learning activities, we were expected to

show respect for other people’s opinions. 1,066 3.35 .68

My class was asked to identify specific things we had learned during our service-learning activities.

1,055 3.10 .79

My class talked about several different ways to solve neighborhood or community problems.

1,004 3.06 .81


Classroom Service-Learning Implementation: Additional Indicators Teachers were asked to estimate the number of weeks that their students were engaged in service-learning activities during the 2009-2010 school year. Exhibit 15 shows that most frequently, teachers reported service-learning activities lasted between 6-10 weeks followed by 11-20 weeks. The average number of weeks students were engaged in service-learning activities was approximately 11.


Exhibit 15. Total Number of Weeks Students Were Engaged in Service-Learning Projects, as Reported by Teachers (N = 63)

Exhibit 16 shows the average number of hours per week that students were engaged in service-learning activities during the 2009-2010 school year. Most frequently, teachers reported implementing service-learning activities from between 1 and 5 hours per week with an average of about 3.8 hours per week.

Exhibit 16. Average Number of Hours Per Week Students Were Engaged in Service-Learning Activities, as Reported by Teachers (N = 65)

10

15

17

12

9

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

1-2 3-5 6-10 11-20 21-40

Number of Weeks

Num

ber o

f Res

pond

ents

33

22

73

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2 or Less 3-5 6-10 More than 11

Number of Hours

Num

ber o

f Res

pond

ents


As shown in Exhibits 17 and 18, most teachers implemented service-learning activities throughout the school year and required students to participate in at least some of the projects.

Exhibit 17. Teacher Reports of When Service-Learning Activities Took Place During the School Year (N = 64)

Exhibit 18. Extent to Which Service-Learning Projects Were Required, as Reported by Teachers (N = 63)

41

2

21

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Fal l Semester Spring Semester Throughout

Num

ber

of R

espo

nden

ts

22

25

16

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Required Required for Some Not Required

Num

ber o

f Res

pond

ents


Exhibit 19 shows the subject areas with which service-learning projects were associated as reported by teachers. Social studies, reading/language arts, and science were the content areas most frequently mentioned.

Exhibit 19. Subject Areas With Which Service-Learning Projects Were Associated (N = 73)

Note. Respondents could select more than one category. Exhibits 20 and 21 show the focus areas of service-learning projects as reported by students in Grades 3-5 and Grades 6-12. Students in Grades 3-5 most frequently reported working with senior citizens, helping the environment, or engaging in other types of service-learning projects. Nearly 5% said they did not engage in service-learning. Students in Grades 6-12 most frequently reported engaging in “other” types of service-learning projects, followed by projects focused on helping the environment. Over 22% said they did not participate in any service-learning projects in 2009-2010.

32

30

24

21

20

12

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Not Connected

Math

Other

Science

Reading/LA

Social Studies

Number of Respondents


Exhibit 20. Service-Learning Project Focus, as Reported by Students in Grades 3-5 (N = 410)

Focus Areas Frequency Percentage Helping the environment. 83 20.2 Helping younger children. 63 15.4 Working with senior citizens. 92 21.3 Helping animals. 10 2.3 Helping the homeless. 18 4.2 Other. 123 28.5 Did not do a service-learning project. 21 4.9

Exhibit 21. Service-Learning Project Focus, as

Reported by Students in Grades 6-12 (N = 1,143)

Focus Areas Frequency Percentage Helping the environment. 232 20.3 Helping younger children. 211 18.5 Working with senior citizens. 62 5.4 Helping animals. 16 1.4 Helping the homeless. 63 5.5 Other. 298 26.1 Did not do a service-learning project. 261 22.8

Community partners were asked about their responsibilities in the implementation of service-learning projects. Exhibit 22 shows the types of activities they performed. Most frequently, partners were engaged in providing support for students followed by providing information on community needs and helping students plan their service-learning projects. They were less likely to help facilitate demonstration and reflection activities.

Exhibit 22. Involvement of Community Partners in Service-Learning Activities (N = 49)

Activities Frequency Percentagea Provided information on community needs. 21 42.9 Helped student to identify the service project to implement. 17 34.7 Helped students plan the service project. 21 42.9 Provided support for students as they engaged in service. 38 77.6 Facilitated reflection activities. 13 26.5 Facilitated demonstration activities. 20 40.8 Facilitated celebration activities. 8 16.3

a Percentages may not sum to 100 because respondents could select more than one category.


Exhibit 23 reveals the quality of the partnerships between service-learning facilitators and community organizations and shows that partners agreed with all seven statements. Most frequently, community partners agreed that they shared a common mission and goals with project facilitators followed by agreement that they had received a clear explanation of service-learning from facilitators or teachers. While still high, partners reported less agreement when asked about the extent to which members of their partnerships developed close working relationships.

Exhibit 23. Indices of Partnership Quality

Partnership Quality N Mean SD The roles and responsibilities of each member in our

partnership were clearly identified. 43 3.49 .74

Members of our partnership shared a common mission and goals.

46 3.59 .71

As partners, we developed a clear plan of action with goals, objectives, and strategies.

42 3.33 .74

Members of our partnership developed close working relationships.

44 3.27 .73

The service-learning facilitator or teacher provided us with a clear explanation of service-learning.

43 3.51 .74

The service-learning facilitator or teacher provided us with examples of effective practice for community agencies involved in service-learning.

40 3.33 .80

We worked together with the service-learning facilitator or teacher to recognize and work through any implementation challenges that arose.

41 3.44 .74



Results Student Outcomes

This section presents student outcomes based on the data from student and teacher surveys. Student survey results are presented that summarize change in outcomes over time for service-learning students. Next, descriptive data are presented that encapsulate teacher and student perceptions of impact, followed by an analysis of the moderating effect of several variables on student outcomes. Student Survey Outcomes (Grades 3-5) Pre- and post-measures of academic engagement, school attachment, acquisition of 21st century skills, civic dispositions, and social-emotional learning were compared over time for students in Grades 3-5. Students showed statistically significant increases over time for all five outcome measures, as seen in Exhibit 24. When comparing differences in means from pre- to post-measure, the greatest gains were for acquisition of 21st century skills followed by school attachment and social-emotional learning, which are revealed in Exhibit 25. Though still statistically significant, the smallest gains were found in civic dispositions and academic engagement.

Exhibit 24. Differences Over Time on Grades 3-5 Student Outcome Measures

Pre-

Measure Post-

Measure N Mean SD Mean SD

Significance Academic Engagement 423 3.01 .49 3.16 .51 .000** School Attachment 417 3.09 .61 3.25 .65 .000** 21st Century Skills 422 2.93 .60 3.19 .58 .000** Civic Dispositions 412 2.52 .99 2.63 1.10 .009** Social-Emotional

Learning 417 3.34 .56 3.50 .51 .000**

Note. Reponses were rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Agree, and 4 = Strongly Agree. ** p < .01.7

7 The p-value is an indicator that represents the likelihood that observed results occurred by chance. In education research, values of p < .05 (i.e., values indicating that observed results had a less than 5% chance of occurring by chance) are typically used to identify results that are statistically significant. Lower p-values indicate a smaller likelihood that observed results occurred by chance and are therefore associated with statistically significant findings.


Exhibit 25. Average Gains Over Time on Grades 3-5 Student Outcome Measures

Student Survey Outcomes (Grades 6-12) Pre- and post-measures of academic engagement, academic competence, school attachment, acquisition of 21st century skills, civic dispositions, and social-emotional learning were also compared over time for students in Grades 6-12. Exhibit 26 shows that there were statistically significant increases on all outcome measures. Greatest gains were for social-emotional learning, civic dispositions, and 21st century skills as shown in Exhibit 27. While still statistically significant, the smallest gains were found in academic competence and aspirations.

Exhibit 26. Differences Over Time on Grades 6-12 Student Outcome Measures

Pre-

Measure Post-

Measure N Mean SD Mean SD

Significance Academic Engagement 1,316 2.83 .53 2.94 .55 .000** Academic Competence 1,309 3.37 .48 3.42 .47 .000** School Attachment 1,269 2.89 .61 3.02 .62 .000** Aspirations 1,263 3.52 .62 3.61 .54 .000** 21st Century Skills 1,278 3.00 .52 3.17 .50 .000** Civic Dispositions 1,248 2.95 .59 3.13 .59 .000** Social-Emotional Learning 1,230 3.04 .54 3.23 .52 .000**

Note. Reponses were rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Agree, and 4 = Strongly Agree. ** p < .01.

0.11

0.15

0.16

0.16

0.26

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3

Civic Dispositions

Academic Engagement

School Attachement

Social-EmotionalLearning

21st Century Skills

Average Gain


Exhibit 27. Average Gain Over Time on Grades 6-12 Student Outcome Measures

Teacher Perceptions of Impact of Service-Learning Participation on Students Exhibit 28 displays service-learning teacher perceptions of the impact of service-learning programs on various student outcomes. Average teacher ratings show that they tended to agree or strongly agree that service-learning had a positive impact across all areas. Teachers viewed students’ increased belief that they themselves could make a difference as the area of greatest impact. This was followed by increased respect for others and increased awareness of community issues. Fewer perceived impacts were seen in the areas of improved academic performance and improved student attendance.

0.05

0.09

0.11

0.13

0.17

0.18

0.19

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2

Academic Competence

Aspi rations

Academic Engagement

School Attachement

21st Century Skills

Civic Dispositions

Social-EmotionalLearning

Average Gain


Exhibit 28. Teacher Perceptions of Impact of Service-Learning on Students

Impact area: N Mean SD Improvement in academic performance. 51 3.31 .65 Increased engagement in school. 62 3.50 .59 Improved school attendance. 52 3.33 .83 Improved social skills. 62 3.56 .56 Increased awareness of community issues. 62 3.58 .50 Increased sense of belonging to the community. 64 3.56 .56 Increased commitment to working on social or community problems. 60 3.50 .57 Increased belief that they can make a difference. 64 3.63 .52 Increased ability to work with others with diverse backgrounds. 62 3.53 .59 Increased respect for others. 62 3.58 .53 Increased empathy and desire to help. 64 3.55 .53 Increased problem solving skills. 63 3.41 .61 Increased leadership skills. 63 3.51 .56 Increased ability to collaborate with others. 61 3.54 .56 Improved ability to express ideas. 62 3.55 .59 Improved career skills. 54 3.41 .66 Note. Responses were rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Agree, and 4 = Strongly Agree.

Student Perceptions of Skills Acquired (Grades 6-12) Students in Grades 6-12 were asked to indicate which of several areas of skill and experience they acquired as a result of participating in service-learning. Exhibit 29 shows that students were most likely to identify work experience (39.3%) and job skills (32.8%) as the primary areas of impact. These were followed by reading and writing skills. Students were least likely to report acquisition of math, tutoring, or science skills as a result of their participation.


Exhibit 29. Student Perceptions of Skills Acquired Through Participation in Service-Learning (N = 1,355)

Note. Percentages do not sum to 100 since respondents could select more than one category. Factors That Influenced Outcomes A series of additional analyses was conducted to assess the impact of the following factors on service-learning student outcomes for Grades 3-5 and Grades 6-12: • Student gender, age, and ethnicity (Grades 6-12 only); • Student perceptions of the quality of their service-learning experience; • Teacher perceptions of service-learning program quality; • Teachers’ overall teaching experience in K-12 schools; and • Teachers’ experience implementing service-learning. Student perceptions of the quality of relationships between service-learning teachers and students were also examined in relation to student outcomes for Grades 6-12. Exhibit 30 presents the moderator variables that were identified as statistically significant and the student outcomes that they moderated. For students in Grades 3-5 there was a statistically significant moderating effect of student ratings of service-learning program quality with school attachment. It appears that as student ratings of quality increased so did student gains on ratings of school attachment. Analyses also suggested that there was a positive relationship between

15.6

17.3

20.4

23.0

25.0

28.0

30.3

32.8

39.3

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Science

Tutoring

Math

Computer

Career Awareness

Writing

Reading

Job

Work Experience

Percentage of Respondents


student age and social-emotional learning. Older students in Grades 3-5 were more likely to give higher ratings on indicators of social-emotional learning than younger students. No other statistically significant moderating effects were found for students in Grades 3-5. A statistically significant positive relationship was found for teacher-student relationships and several outcome areas for students in Grades 6-12. As student ratings of teacher-student relationships increased so did student gains on ratings of academic engagement and acquisition of 21st century skills. Statistically significant moderating effects were also found for teacher ratings of link to the curriculum and student ratings of academic engagement and academic competence. This suggests that the more teachers linked service-learning activities to the curriculum, the more student ratings of academic engagement and academic competence increased. Additionally, Grades 6-12 student ratings of 21st century skills appeared to increase the more years their teachers had in implementing service-learning and experience teaching overall.

Exhibit 30. Moderators on Student Outcomes Moderator Outcomes Moderated df 8 F 9 Significance Grades 3-5

Student Ratings of Program Quality School Attachment 1, 390

4.425 .036*

Age Social-Emotional Learning

1, 390

5.752 .017*

Grades 6-12 Teacher-Student Relationships Academic Engagement 1,

343 .187 .011*

21st Century Skills 1, 342

5.684 .018*

Teacher Ratings of Program Quality: Link to Curriculum

Academic Engagement

1, 357

4.604

.033*

Academic Competence 1, 356

11.019 .001**

Teacher Experience: Number of Years Teaching Number of Years Implementing Service-Learning

21st Century Skills 21st Century Skills

1, 346 1, 346

4.379

5.254

.037* .022*

Note. *p < .05, ** p < .01

8 Degrees of freedom (df) indicates the number of responses used in the final calculation of a statistic. This number is usually just slightly smaller than the overall sample size. 9 The F statistic provides a basis to test for statistical significance when used in analysis of variance (ANOVA).


Results Impacts on Partner Organizations and Communities

This section presents outcomes-based data regarding impacts of service-learning on both partner organizations and communities from teacher and community partner surveys. Impacts on Partner Organizations Community partners were asked whether there were impacts on their organizations as a result of working with schools that implemented service-learning projects. Most frequently partners thought that the partnerships resulted in a sustained or continued relationship with schools followed by helping school personnel better understand community needs and resources, as seen in Exhibit 31. Respondents were less likely to agree that partnerships resulted in increased financial and/or material resources for their organizations.

Exhibit 31. Perceptions of Impact on Partner Organizations

Our partnership has: N Mean SD Resulted in increased financial and/or material resources for our

agency. 31 2.58 .76

Improved our agency’s capacity to carry out its work. 40 3.05 .75 Raised our public profile within the community. 44 3.09 .71 Resulted in a continued or sustained relationship with the

school/after-school program with which we partnered. 45 3.36 .71

Helped school/after-school personnel better understand community needs and resources.

39 3.26 .71

Helped mobilize the community to act on community issues. 32 3.22 .79 Note. Responses were rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Agree, and 4 = Strongly Agree.

Impacts on the Community Partner organizations and teachers agreed that service-learning projects had positive impacts on communities. Almost two thirds of the partner respondents reported that service-learning projects had a high level of impact on the community. As shown in Exhibit 32, partners agreed that service-learning activities benefited individuals in the community, community organizations, and the community as a whole. As shown in Exhibit 33, teachers agreed that service-learning activities had positively changed the way community members viewed young people. They also felt that service-learning had a strong impact on communities and community organizations.


Exhibit 32. Partners’ Perceptions of Impact on Communities

N Mean SD Service-learning activities have been beneficial for individuals in the

community. 45 3.51 .73

Service learning activities have been beneficial for organizations in the community.

42 3.52 .74

Service-learning activities have been beneficial for the community as a whole.

45 3.49 .73


Exhibit 33. Teachers’ Perceptions of Impact on Communities

N Mean SD Service-learning activities have had a strong impact on the

community. 63 3.35 .65

Service-learning activities have had a strong impact on organizations in the community.

63 3.32 .69

Service-learning activities have positively changed the way community members view young people.

60 3.45 .65


RMC Research Corporation, Denver, CO 31 Illinois Learn and Serve Cluster Evaluation Report

2009-2010 School Year

Conclusions and Recommendations

In this section, conclusions from the data analysis are presented followed by a set of recommendations for program improvement. RMC Research analyzed data from student, teacher, and community partner surveys to determine quality and impact of the Illinois Learn and Serve program during the 2009-2010 school year. In general, results showed that participants were very satisfied with their experiences and the quality of service-learning programs. Results from survey analysis showed several areas of positive impacts on student service-learning participants. Implementation • Teachers reported that they addressed all eight standards of quality service-learning

programs. Highest ratings were reported for provision of meaningful service activities for students and youth voice. Provision of progress monitoring activities that helped young people evaluate their service-learning experiences was given a somewhat lower rating by teachers.

• Students reported that the quality of their service-learning programs was relatively

high. Students in Grades 3-5 agreed that their activities were important and that they talked about their service-learning activities. Students in Grades 6-12 rated highest the items about showing respect for other people’s opinions. The item pertaining to coming up with ideas for service-learning activities was rated the lowest by students in Grades 6-12.

• There was substantial variation in the duration of projects. According to teachers,

students were engaged in service-learning activities most frequently between 6-10 weeks followed by 11-20 weeks. Students spent on average approximately 11 weeks out of the school year on service-learning activities. Teachers reported that students spent an average of 3.8 hours per week on service-learning activities. Most activities took place throughout the school year and students were required to participate in at least some of the projects.

• Service-learning projects were most frequently associated with social studies,

reading/language arts, and science content areas. Students in Grades 3-5 most frequently reported working with senior citizens, helping the environment, or engaging in other types of projects as part of their service-learning experiences. Students in Grades 6-12 most frequently reported being engaged in “other” types of projects and in projects focused on helping the environment.

• Community partners were most frequently involved in providing support for students

as they engaged in service-learning activities. Partners also reported providing information on community needs and helping students plan service-learning projects. They were less likely to help facilitate demonstration and reflection activities.



• Community partners gave strong ratings to all indicators of service-learning partnership quality. Highest levels of agreement were for sharing a common mission and goals with members of the partnership. Partners noted that service-learning facilitators or teachers provided them with a clear explanation of service-learning. While still high, partners reported less agreement when asked about the extent to which members of their partnerships developed close working relationships.

Impacts • There were statistically significant increases over time on all outcome measures for

students in Grades 3-5. Students reported increases in academic engagement, school attachment, acquisition of 21st century skills, civic dispositions, and social-emotional learning.

• Students in Grades 6-12 had significant increases over time on all outcome measures.

Greatest gains were for social-emotional learning, civic dispositions, and 21st century skills. • Service-learning teachers reported that service-learning impacted students in all

measured outcome areas. Perceived impacts were highest in the area of students’ increased belief that they themselves could make a difference. While still high, fewer impacts were perceived in the areas of improved academic performance and improved student attendance.

• Students in Grades 6-12 most frequently perceived they acquired work experience and

job skills as a result of participating in service-learning. To a lesser extent, students reported acquisition of reading and writing skills. Students were least likely to identify acquisition of math, tutoring, or science skills as a result of their participation.

• Students’ age and ratings of service-learning program quality made a significant

difference in several outcome areas for students in Grades 3-5. It appears that as student ratings of service-learning program quality increased so did student ratings of school attachment. Analyses also suggested that there was a positive relationship between student age and social-emotional learning. Older students in Grades 3-5 were more likely to give higher ratings on indicators of social-emotional learning than younger students.

• Teacher-student relationships had a moderating effect on Grades 6-12 student ratings

in several outcome areas. This finding suggests that the more positive students perceived their relationships with teachers to be, the higher their gains on ratings of academic engagement and 21st century skills.

• Teachers’ ratings of link to the curriculum were positively related with Grades 6-12

student ratings of academic engagement and academic competence. The more teachers linked service-learning activities to the curriculum, the higher the student ratings of academic engagement and academic competence were.



• Teacher experience had a moderating effect on Grades 6-12 student ratings of 21st century skills. The more years teachers had experience teaching overall and in implementing service-learning, the higher were student ratings of 21st century skills.

• Community partners gave high ratings to most impact areas of service-learning

partnerships on their organizations. They were most likely to agree that service-learning partnerships resulted in a sustained or continued relationship with schools followed by helping school personnel understand community needs and resources. Respondents were less likely to agree that partnerships resulted in increased financial and/or material resources for their organizations.

• Partner organizations and teachers agreed that service-learning projects had positive

impacts on communities. Service-learning activities were perceived as benefitting individuals in the community, community organizations, and communities as a whole. Teachers indicated that service-learning activities positively changed the way community members viewed young people.

Study Limitations The primary limitation during the first year of the Learn and Serve Illinois evaluation was the lack of a comparison group. Without a matched comparison group, the gains in student outcomes cannot be equated to the service-learning programs implemented since it is unknown what differences overtime might have been realized by students who were in similar classrooms but did not participate in service-learning activities. Recommendations 1. Study the reasons why there was a difference in perceptions between teachers and

students on student voice. Teachers perceived that students’ had higher levels of involvement in decision making and planning than did students. Consider holding discussions between teachers and students that address how students can be more involved in planning and decision making.

2. Reduce the variation in the duration and intensity of service-learning activities.

Findings showed a great variation in the number of weeks and the hours per week in which teachers implemented their service-learning activities. Some teachers spent several weeks on activities while others spent up 40 weeks on activities. The variation in hours per week ranged from 2 or less up to more than 11 hours per week. The research shows that both duration and intensity are needed for greater outcomes.

3. Study how teachers can make greater links between service-learning activities and

curriculum. Analyses suggest that as the link between service-learning activities and curriculum was strengthened, greater gains were perceived by students in academic engagement and academic competence in the higher grades.



4. Recruit matched comparison classrooms for the study. The lack of comparison group students made it difficult to draw accurate conclusions about participation in service-learning. Inclusion of matched comparison groups in the study will increase the confidence in study results.

Appendix

Participating Student Survey Grades 3-5

Participating Student Survey Grades 6-12 Teacher Survey

Community Partner Survey

10.04.0007

RMC Research Corporation, Denver, CO 1 Learn and Serve America Cluster Evaluation Scannable Participating Students – Grades 3-5 Liberty IRB Approved 4/8/10

Learn and Serve America Cluster Evaluation - Illinois

RMC Research Corporation

Student Survey (Grades 3-5) – Spring Post-Only

Directions: We are conducting a research study of students’ opinions about themselves, their school, and their community. The following pages have statements about each of these things. This is a survey, not a test, but it is important that you answer each question to the best of your ability. The survey will take about 20 minutes to complete. You do not have to be in the study, and you can stop taking the survey at any time. You can skip a question if you do not want to answer it. It is okay if you decide not to take the survey. Your responses on this survey or choice not to take the survey will not affect your grades in any way. If you have any questions about the survey, please raise your hand and the person giving the survey will help you.

By writing your name below, you agree to complete the survey. The survey is voluntary. This means you decide if you want to take part. We will make every effort to keep the information we collect private, and your answers will not be reported to anyone.

Name (please print): _____________________________________________________ (First Name) (Last Name)

Name (sign): _______________________________________________________ (First Name) (Last Name)

Date: _____________________________

10.04.0007


THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK ON PURPOSE

10.04.0007


School: ___________________________________ Teacher:___________________________________

Today’s Date:_______________________________

Are you a boy or a girl?

Boy Girl

What Grade are you in?

3rd

4th

5th How old are you?

7

8

9

10

11

12

Learn and Serve America Cluster Evaluation - Illinois


10.04.0007


Academic Engagement

1. For the next set of sentences, please select the response that shows how much you agree or disagree with each item at the beginning of the school year and how much you agree or disagree with each item now.

At the beginning of the school year... Now I think or feel...

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree

Strongly Agree

Don’t Know


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know

a. I like being at school )

b. I am interested in the work at school

)

c. I do well in school. )

d. I pay attention in class. )

e. I think school is important. )

f. I can do well in school if I want to.

)

g. Time seems to pass quickly when I am doing schoolwork.

)

h. I like schoolwork best when it is hard.

)

i. I am pretty smart in school. )

j. What I learn in school is useful to me.

)

k. I am a good student. )

10.04.0007


Drop-Out Prevention/School Attachment




Strongly Agree

Don’t Know


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know

a I feel like I belong to this school.

)

b I contribute to this school. )

c I am viewed by teachers as a valued part of this school.

)

d I feel proud of this school. )

e I do things to make this school a better place.

)

10.04.0007


21st Century Skills




Strongly Agree

Don’t Know


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know

a. I am good at talking in front of a group of people.

)

b. I am good at writing about my ideas.

)

c. I am good at working as part of a group.

)

d. I am good at finding ways to solve problems

)

e. I am good at figuring out how to make a good decision.

)

f. I am good at coming up with new ideas.

)

g. I am good at being the leader of a group.

)

10.04.0007


Civic Dispositions/Social Responsibility




Strongly Agree

Don’t Know


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know

a. I care what happens in my neighborhood or community.

)

b. I do things to make my neighborhood or community a better place.

)

c. I talk with my friends about problems in my neighborhood or community.

)

10.04.0007






Strongly Agree

Don’t Know


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know

a. I like to help other people. )

b. I want to do good things for other people.

)

c. I try to make new students feel comfortable in school.

)

d. If a student I do not know drops a bunch of books, I will help pick up the books.

)

e. When I see someone being bullied by other students, I either do something or get help.

)

10.04.0007


Service-Learning

6. My service-learning project this school year was about: (CHOOSE ONE)

Helping the environment Helping the homeless

Helping younger children Other

Working with senior citizens I did not do a service-learning project this year.

Helping animals

7. Thinking about your service-learning activities during the past year, please check the box that best describes how you think

or feel about each of these items.


Strongly Agree Don’t Know

a. I think my service-learning activities are important.

b. I helped to make decisions about my class’ service-learning activities.

c. Our class talked about what we learned as a result of our service-learning activities.

d. Our class wrote about what we learned as a result of our service-learning activities.

☺ THANK YOU FOR TAKING OUR SURVEY!!

10.04.0007

RMC Research Corporation, Denver, CO 1 Learn and Serve America Cluster Evaluation Scannable Participating Students - Grades 6 -12 Liberty IRB Approved 4/8/10

Learn and Serve America Cluster Evaluation - Illinois RMC Research Corporation


Directions: We are conducting a research study of students’ opinions about themselves, their school, and their community. The following pages have statements about each of these things. This is a survey, not a test, but it is important that you answer each question to the best of your ability. The survey will take about 20 minutes to complete. You do not have to be in the study, and you can stop taking the survey at any time. You can skip a question if you do not want to answer it. It is okay if you decide not to take the survey. Your responses on this survey or choice not to take the survey will not affect your grades in any way. If you have any questions about the survey, please raise your hand and the person giving the survey will help you.

By writing your name below, you agree to complete the survey. The survey is voluntary. We will make every effort to keep the information we collect confidential, and your individual answers will not be reported to anyone.

Name (please print): _____________________________________________________ (First Name) (Last Name)

Name (sign): _______________________________________________________ (First Name) (Last Name)

Date: _____________________________

10.04.0007


THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK ON PURPOSE

10.04.0007


School: ___________________________________ Teacher:___________________________________

Today’s Date:_______________________________

Are you male or female?

Male Female

Age: What grade are you in?

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

) Over 18

Learn and Serve America Cluster Evaluation - Illinois Student Survey (Grades 6-12) – Spring Post-Only

6th

7th

8th

9th

10th

11th

12th

10.04.0007


What language do you mostly speak at home? If you speak two languages at home, please check only the one that you speak most often.

English

Spanish

Other: (Please Specify) ____________________________________

How would you describe your ethnic background? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)

White/Caucasian

Asian/Pacific Islander

Black/African American

American Indian/Alaskan Native

Hispanic/Latino

Other: (please specify) ________________________________ During the past school year, did you volunteer or provide community service? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)

Yes, in school

Yes, with a group or organization outside of school

No

10.04.0007


Academic Engagement


At the beginning of the school year I thought or felt... Now I think or feel...


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know

a. I like being at school )

b. I can get good grades when I try.

)

c. I am interested in the work at school.

)

d. I pay attention in class. )

e. I am pretty smart in school )

f. Time seems to pass quickly when I am doing schoolwork.

)

g. I like schoolwork best when it is challenging.

)

h. I can do well in school if I want to.

)

i. I feel that the schoolwork I am assigned is meaningful and important.

)

j. If I work hard, I can be successful in school.

)

k. My classes are interesting to me.

)

10.04.0007




Strongly Agree

Don’t Know


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know

l. I can work very hard in school.

)

m. I think that the things I am learning in school will be important for my future.

)

n. I feel that school is worthwhile.

)

o. I am a good student. )

Drop-Out Prevention/School Attachment/Aspirations/Relationships




Strongly Agree

Don’t Know


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know

a I feel like I belong to this school.

)

b I contribute to this school. )

c I am viewed by teachers as a valued part of this school.

)

d I feel proud of this school. )

e I do things to make this school a better place. )

10.04.0007




Strongly Agree

Don’t Know


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know

f I am likely to graduate from high school.

)

g I am likely to continue my education beyond high school.

)

h I am likely to graduate from a 2 year college, community college, or technical school.

)

i I am likely to graduate from a 4 year college or university.

)

10.04.0007


3. For the this set of sentences, please note that we are asking about your teacher in this class and teachers in your school.

Please select the response that shows how much you agree or disagree with each item for your teacher in this class and teachers in your school.

My teacher in this class... Teachers in my school...


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know

a Listens carefully to me when I talk.

)

b Helps me when I need help. )

c Respects me. )

d Believes that I am an important member of their class.

)

e Are fair to me. )

10.04.0007


21st Century Skills




Strongly Agree

Don’t Know


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know

a. I am good at talking about my ideas in front of a group of people.

)

b. I am good at writing about my ideas.

)

c. I am good at working as part of a team.

)

d. I am good at finding ways to solve problems

)

e. I am good at figuring out how to make a good decision.

)

f. I am good at coming up with new ideas.

)

g. I am good at being the leader of a group.

)

h. I am good at listening to other people’s ideas even if they are different than mine.

)

i. I am good at asking others to explain their ideas or points of view.

)

10.04.0007




Strongly Agree

Don’t Know


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know

j. I am good at compromising with other people to reach a common goal.

)

k. I am good at researching an idea or issue.

)

l. I am good at summarizing information that I have researched.

)

m. I am good at taking on different roles and responsibilities.

)

n. I am good at using technology to gather information on an idea or issue.

)

10.04.0007


Civic Dispositions/Social Responsibility


At the beginning of the school year I thought of felt... Now I think or feel...


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know

a. I can make a difference in my neighborhood or community.

)

b. I feel responsible for helping others in my neighborhood or community.

)

c. Students my age can do things to make the world better.

)

d. I often think about the needs of others.

)

e. Helping to solve community problems is something everyone should do.

)

f. I intend to volunteer throughout my whole life.

)

10.04.0007






Strongly Agree

Don’t Know


Strongly Agree

Don’t Know

a. I want to help other people. )

b. I want to do good things for other people.

)

c. I try to make new students feel comfortable in school.

)

d. If a student I do not know drops a bunch of books, I will help pick up the books.

)

e. When I see someone being bullied by other students, I either do something or get help.

)

f. I stop to think about my options before making a decision.

)

g. I stop to think about how my decisions affect others’ feelings.

)

h. I stop and think about all of the things that may happen as a result of my decisions.

)

i. I make good decisions. )

10.04.0007


Previous Service-Learning Service-Learning is working in the community as a way of learning course content.

7. Did you participate in service-learning activities at your school during this school year?

Yes

No

8. Did you participate in service-learning activities before this school year (in past school years)?

Yes

No

10.04.0007


Service-Learning

9. My service-learning project this school year was about: (CHOOSE ONE) Helping the environment Helping the homeless

Helping younger children Other

Working with senior citizens I did not do a service-learning project this year.

Helping animals

10. During the past school year, what skills or experiences did you get out of working on your service-learning activities?

(CHOOSE ALL THAT APPLY)

Reading skills Tutoring skills

Writing skills Career awareness

Math skills Job skills

Science skills Work experience

Computer skills

10.04.0007


11. Thinking about your service-learning activities during the past year, please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements.


Strongly Agree Don’t Know

a. I feel that my service-learning activities were meaningful.

b. My teacher made sure we linked service-learning activities to classroom subjects such as English, math, and/or science.

c. The skills that I learned from my service-learning activities will be useful to me in the future.

d. My service-learning activities were important to me.

e. I helped make decisions about my service-learning activities.

f. I helped come up with ideas for my service-learning activities.

g. During my service-learning activities, we were expected to show respect for each other.

h. My class was asked to identify things we learned during our service-learning activities.

i. My class talked about several different ways to solve neighborhood or community problems.

☺ THANK YOU FOR TAKING OUR SURVEY!!

10.04.0007

RMC Research Corporation 1 Learn and Serve America Cluster Evaluation Version-1 Liberty IRB Approved 4/8/10 Classroom Teacher Survey

Learn and Serve America Cluster Evaluation RMC Research Corporation

Classroom Teacher Survey – Spring 2010

Dear Classroom Teacher: RMC Research Corporation is conducting an evaluation of the Illinois Learn and Serve grant. The purpose of this study is to measure the impacts of the program on participating students, teachers, and community partners. The results of this study are expected to provide valuable information to Illinois Learn and Serve about the impacts of this program, and to ensure that the program is effective and that it has a positive influence on students. The following survey contains questions about the implementation of service-learning activities in your classroom, and the impacts you believe participation had on your students. There are no right or wrong answers to the questions on this survey. It is expected that the survey will take approximately 30 minutes to complete. Participation is voluntary. You may decide not to take part in this survey, or if you begin, you may still decide to stop and may withdraw at any time. Your decision will be respected and will not result in loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. There are no foreseeable risks to you for participating in this survey. We will make every effort to keep the information we collect confidential. Data analysts do not see participant names and all identification lists are destroyed at the end of the project. Your individual answers will not be reported to anyone. If you have any questions about this study, please contact Shelley H. Billig, Principal Investigator, or Judy Northup, Study Coordinator, at RMC Research Corporation, 633 17th Street, Suite 2100, Denver, CO 80202, (800) 922-3636. If you have questions about your rights as a research participant, you may contact Liberty IRB at (386) 740-9278. Liberty IRB, an independent institutional review board, is a committee that has reviewed this research study to help ensure that your rights and welfare as a research participant are protected and that the research study is carried out in an ethical manner. Sincerely,

Shelley H. Billig Principal Investigator

10.04.0007


Classroom Teacher Survey Consent I choose to participate in this survey. I have read all of the information on the previous page or it has been read to me. I have had the chance to ask questions about this study and my questions have been answered. I do not give up any of my legal rights by signing this consent form. I may request that a copy of this form be provided to me. By filling in your name below, you indicate that you understand the conditions of this study and voluntarily consent to participate.

First Name: ________________________________________________________ Last Name: ________________________________________________________ Date:

10.04.0007


Learn & Serve America Cluster Evaluation RMC Research Corporation

Teacher Survey 1. Today’s Date: _____/_______/_______ MM DD YYYY 2. Your Gender: Male Female 3. School name: 4. What grade levels do you teach? (Check all that apply)

Elementary (Grades 3-5) Middle (Grades 6-8) High (Grades 9-12) Other (please specify) ___________________

5. For how many years have you been a teacher in a K-12 school? ____ years 6. For how many years have you implemented service-learning? ____ years For the following questions, please think about all of the service-learning projects you conducted during the past academic year. 7. When did your service-learning activities take place?

Fall semester Spring semester Throughout the school year 8. With which academic subject areas were your service-learning project(s)

associated? (Check all that apply)

Math Science Reading/Language Arts

Social Studies Other Content Area Not connected with content areas

9. Were students required to participate in your service-learning project(s)?

No Yes - in some, but not all projects Yes - in all projects

10. Approximately how many weeks during the past school year did your students engage in service-learning activities? (please estimate time spent on investigation, preparation, action, reflection, and demonstration/celebration)

____ weeks

10.04.0007


11. During these weeks, how many hours per week did your

students engage in service-learning activities? (please estimate time spent on investigation, preparation, action, reflection, and demonstration/celebration)

____ hours per week

12. Thinking about the service-learning activities you did during the past school

year, please indicate your disagreement or agreement with the following statements:

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly

Agree Don’t Know/

NA a. There was enough time devoted for

service-learning activities to achieve the intended project outcomes.

b. Academic learning goals for service-learning activities were clearly articulated.

c. Service-learning activities were explicitly aligned with State content standards.

d. Service-learning activities helped students learn how to transfer knowledge and skills from one setting to another.

e. Service-learning activities helped youth to understand their service experiences in the context of the underlying societal issues being addressed.

f. Service-learning involved an indepth partnership with at least one community agency.

g. There was frequent and regular communication among the service-learning partners to keep everyone well-informed about activities and progress.

h. Service-learning partners collaborated to set common project goals.

i. Service-learning partners collaborated to implement project plans.

j. The service-learning partnerships were valued by all participants.

k. Service-learning activities were appropriate for the youths’ ages and developmental abilities.

l. Service-learning activities addressed issues that were personally relevant to the youth.

m. Youth were interested in and engaged with the service-learning activities.

10.04.0007



Agree Don’t Know/

NA n. Service-learning activities led to visible

outcomes that were valued by those being served.

o. Youth generated ideas throughout the service-learning process (i.e., planning, implementation, and evaluation).

p. Youth were actively involved in decision-making throughout the service-learning process (i.e., planning, implementation, and evaluation).

q. Service-learning activities were characterized by a climate in which youth were comfortable expressing their ideas.

r. Service-learning activities helped youth develop their leadership skills.

s. Service-learning activities helped youth develop their decision-making skills.

t. Youth were involved in evaluating the quality and effectiveness of their service-learning activities.

u. Service-learning activities helped youth analyze different points of view to gain an understanding of the issues they were addressing.

v. Service-learning activities provided youth with an opportunity to develop their conflict resolution skills.

w. Service-learning activities provided youth with an opportunity to understand the backgrounds and perspectives of those receiving service.

x. Service-learning activities provided youth with an opportunity to recognize and overcome cultural stereotypes.

y. Service-learning activities included multiple methods of reflection (e.g., verbal, written, artistic, nonverbal).

z. Reflection occurred before, during, and after the service experience.

aa. Reflection prompted youth to think about alternative solutions to complex community problems.

bb. Reflection encouraged youth to examine their preconceptions in order to explore and understand their roles and responsibilities as citizens.

10.04.0007



Agree Don’t Know/

NA cc. Reflection encouraged youth to make

connections between their service-learning experiences and a variety of social and civic issues.

dd. Evidence of progress toward meeting specific service goals and learning outcomes was collected from multiple sources throughout the service-learning process.

ee. Evidence of the quality of service-learning implementation was collected from multiple sources throughout the service-learning process.

ff. Evidence was discussed in the context of how to improve the service-learning process.

gg. Evidence of progress toward achieving service-learning goals was communicated to the broader community.

13. To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following statements about the

impact of service-learning?


Agree Don’t

Know/NA a. Service-learning activities have had a strong

impact on the community. b. Service-learning activities have had a strong

impact on organizations in the community. c. Service-learning activities have positively

changed the way community members view young people.

10.04.0007


14. For each item listed below, please indicate your disagreement or agreement with the following statements about the impact of service-learning on students:

In my opinion, service-learning activities during the past school year led to the following changes among students:


Agree

Don’t Know/NA

a. Improvement in academic performance. b. Increased engagement in school. c. Improved school attendance. d. Improved social skills. e. Increased awareness of community issues. f. Increased sense of belonging to the community. g. Increased commitment to working on social or

community problems.

h. Increased belief that they can make a difference. i. Increased ability to work with others with diverse

backgrounds.

j. Increased respect for others. k. Increased empathy and desire to help. l. Increased problem-solving skills. m. Increased leadership skills. n. Increased ability to collaborate with others. o. Improved ability to express their ideas. p. Improved career skills.

Thanks for completing this survey!!

10.04.0007

RMC Research Corporation 1 Learn and Serve America Cluster Evaluation Version-1 Liberty IRB Approved 4/8/10 Community Partner Survey

Learn and Serve America Cluster Evaluation RMC Research Corporation

Community Partner Survey – Spring 2010

Dear Community Partner: RMC Research Corporation is conducting an evaluation of the Illinois Learn and Serve grant. The purpose of this study is to measure the impacts of the program on participating students, teachers, and community partners. The results of this study are expected to provide valuable information to Illinois Learn and Serve about the impacts of this program, and to ensure that the program is effective and that it has a positive influence on students. The following survey contains questions about the quality of collaboration between your organization and your partner school, and the impacts you believe participation had on your organization. There are no right or wrong answers to the questions on this survey. It is expected that the survey will take approximately 15 minutes to complete. Participation is voluntary. You may decide not to take part in this survey, or if you begin, you may still decide to stop and may withdraw at any time. Your decision will be respected and will not result in loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. There are no foreseeable risks to you for participating in this survey. We will make every effort to keep the information we collect confidential. Data analysts do not see participant names and all identification lists are destroyed at the end of the project. Your individual answers will not be reported to anyone. If you have any questions about this study, please contact Shelley H. Billig, Principal Investigator, or Judy Northup, Study Coordinator, at RMC Research Corporation, 633 17th Street, Suite 2100, Denver, CO 80202, (800) 922-3636. If you have questions about your rights as a research participant, you may contact Liberty IRB at (386) 740-9278. Liberty IRB, an independent institutional review board, is a committee that has reviewed this research study to help ensure that your rights and welfare as a research participant are protected and that the research study is carried out in an ethical manner.

Sincerely,

Shelley H. Billig Principal Investigator

10.04.0007


Community Partner Survey Consent I choose to participate in this survey. I have read all of the information on the previous page or it has been read to me. I have had the chance to ask questions about this study and my questions have been answered. I do not give up any of my legal rights by signing this consent form. I may request that a copy of this form be provided to me. By filling in your name below, you indicate that you understand the conditions of this study and voluntarily consent to participate.

First Name: ___________________________________________________________ Last Name: ____________________________________________________________ Date:

10.04.0007


Learn and Serve America Cluster Evaluation

RMC Research Corporation Community Partner Organization Survey

When responding to questions about “the partnership” or “your K-12 partner,” please think about the activities in which your organization engages that involve K-12 schools, school staff/afterschool, and students in service-learning projects. The partnership may also include activities and individuals representing other organizations. 1. Today’s Date: _________________ 2. Organization Name: ______________ 3. Name of School(s) or after-school group that your organization partnered with:

_____________________________________________________ 4. Please check the box that best represents the type of organization you

represent (CHECK ONE).

Community-based organization/nonprofit Federal government agency State/local government agency Educational institution/organization Foundation Religious organization For profit organization Other

5. How long has your partnership been in place with the school/after school

group? Less than one year 1-2 years 3-4 years 5 years or more

6. What types of activities did you perform as a service-learning partner? (Please

check all that apply.) Provided information on community needs Helped students identify the service project to implement Helped students plan the service project Provided support for students as they engaged in service Facilitated reflection activities Facilitated demonstration activities Facilitated celebration activities

10.04.0007


7. To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following statements?


Agree Don’t

Know/Not Applicable

a. The roles and responsibilities of each member in our partnership were clearly identified.

b. Members of our partnership shared a common mission and goals.

c. As partners, we developed a clear plan of action with goals, objectives, and strategies.

d. Members of our partnership developed close working relationships.

e. The service-learning facilitator or teacher provided us with a clear explanation of service-learning.

f. The service-learning facilitator or teacher provided us with examples of effective practice for community agencies involved in service-learning.

g. We worked together with the service-learning facilitator or teacher to recognize and work through any implementation challenges that arose.

8. To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following statements?

Our partnership has:


Agree Don’t

Know/Not Applicable

a. Resulted in increased financial and/or material resources for our agency.

b. Improved our agency’s capacity to carry out its work.

c. Raised our public profile within the community.

d. Resulted in a continued or sustained relationship with the school/afterschool program with whom we partnered.

e. Helped school/afterschool personnel better understand community needs and resources.

f. Helped mobilize the community to act on community issues.

10.04.0007


9. To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following statements about the impact of service-learning?


Agree Don’t

Know/Not Applicable

a. Service-learning activities have been beneficial for individuals in the community.

b. Service-learning activities have been beneficial for organizations in the community.

c. Service-learning activities have been beneficial for the community as a whole.

10. Overall, would you say the impact on the community was: High Moderate Low Don’t Know

Thanks for completing this survey!!

Documents

Illinois Learn and Serve 2009-2010 School Year · 2016-07-28 · In 2009-2010, RMC Research Corporation conducted an evaluation of the Illinois Learn and Serve program to determine