Running head: SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

Integrating Service Learning in a Research Methods in Psychology Course

Jessica A. Stansbury

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

Integrating Service Learning in a Research Methods in Psychology Course

Research methods in psychology is among one of the most feared courses required of
psychology majors; yet, it is also one of the most important courses in a psychology curriculum
that teaches scientific inquiry, methodological concepts, critical thinking skills, and empirical
writing skills (Brewer et al., 1993). Despite facultys best intentions, students often do not
appreciate the real world and career relevance (Johanson & Fried, 2002; Sizemore &
Lewandowski, 2009), and report high levels of anxiety about these courses (Bos & Schneider,
2009; Papanastasiou & Zembylas, 2008). Awareness of these obstacles is a crucial component for
educators to begin to understand these challenges and create engaging student centered learning
environments (Saville, Zinn, Lawrence, Barron, & Andre, 2008). As a result, numerous
pedagogical techniques to address the obstacles have been developed (e.g., Chapdelaine &
Chapman, 1999; DePrince, Priebe, & Newton, 2011; Saville, Zinn, & Elliott, 2005); one
technique is service learning.
Service learning has become a recent area of focus in higher education that emphasizes
linking course content to community needs and partners (Conway, Amel, & Gerwien, 2009;
Eyler, Giles, Stenson, & Gray, 2001; Jacoby, 1996; Keyton, 2001). Service learning has been
used in teaching research methods in a variety of disciplines to include social work (Shannon,
Kim, & Robinson, 2012), criminal justice (Hirschinger-Blank, Simons, Finley, Clearly, &
Theorig (2013), human services (Fair, 2007), sociology (Potter, Caffrey, & Plante, 2003),
communications (Keyton, 2001), and psychology (Chapdelaine & Chapman, 1999). Service
learning has the potential to address some of the challenges presented in research method courses
such as increasing real-world relevance and applicability, engagement, and creating personal
interest in course material.

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

There have been several calls in higher education over the past decade to include service
learning among college courses to increase civic engagement, social responsibility, and racial
and cultural understanding among undergraduates (Battistoni, 2001; Bringle & Duffy, 1998;
Conway et al., 2009; Jacoby, 1996). Conway et al. (2009) conducted a meta-analysis of the
benefits of service learning on academic, personal, social, and citizenship outcomes; results
revealed that service learning does produce positive changes in academic outcomes and beliefs,
knowledge, and attitudes towards the community. However, research remains limited on
understanding the process of establishing a community partner, designing and implementing a
service learning component that aligns with course learning objectives, and the impact of service
learning in the classroom.
There are several ways to integrate service learning into course curriculum to include, but
not limited to off campus internships (Dreuth & Dreuth-Fewell, 2002), volunteering with the
community (e.g., rehabilitation centers, at-risk youth), and collaborating with external agencies
on a specific need (e.g., program evaluation). It is important to understand the different methods
of service learning integration in higher education, along with the advantages and disadvantages
of the service learning integration process on students and faculty. Conway et al. (2009) metaanalysis reveals three recommendations for service learning integration to include consider using
service learning in courses despite overwhelming obstacles (e.g., time constraints, extra
workloads). Once instructors choose to integrate service learning, it is recommended to search
discipline specific literature for previous examples of service learning, target particular outcomes
(e.g., leadership skills) in designing the experience rather than focusing on all possible outcomes,
and create thoughtful and well-designed assessment techniques (e.g., reflection) to help students
make course connections and get the most from their service learning experience. Moreover, it is

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

important to help other faculty understand the process involved in designing a course integrated
with service-learning, the challenges and positive benefits from the experience, and the impact
on the students learning experience.
Service Learning and Community Based Research
The National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993 and The National ServiceLearning Clearinghouse (2005) defines service learning as a process of teaching and learning
that integrates meaningful interaction between students and community in an organized
experience that enhances the teaching of civic responsibility and ties to the communities.
Research scholars have defined service learning characteristics as the inclusion of reflection
(Cashel, Goodman, & Swanson, 2003), learning via active participation, extension beyond the
classroom, and integration of academic content (Cashel et al., 2003; Kiser, 2007). These
characteristics make service learning distinct from volunteerism, which involves no intentional
connection of experience to knowledge and skills, and community service, which focuses on
service to the community but does not involve a connection to learning in an academic setting.
Though both volunteerism and community service can lead to meaningful personal experiences,
the goal of service learning is to relate academic course content, knowledge, and skills to solve
problems within the community (Jacoby, 1996).
Community based research is a form of service learning that works with a community
agency, with a predefined need or problem that can be evaluated or researched to help the
agency, while providing a learning experience via research for students (Shannon et al. 2012;
Strand, 2000). There are specific characteristics that accompany this pedagogical approach that
are distinct from service learning to include a research oriented approach to learning that
addresses some need of the community partner (e.g., program evaluation), the research is

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

developed between the faculty and community agency prior to student involvement, the focus is
on social action or change within the community (e.g., domestic violence awareness) rather than
increased knowledge gain of specific content, and the final project is usually shared with the
community agency rather than the classroom. Most research courses, regardless of discipline,
tend to integrate community based research as their service learning component within courses,
due to the research component aligning well with teaching research content (Chapdelaine &
Chapman, 1999; Fair, 2007; Keyton, 2001).
Service Learning Integration among Disciplines
Service learning, in various forms, has been integrated into a variety of disciplines.
Conway et als (2009) meta-analysis of service learning focused on quantitative studies with pre
and posttest designs, which comprised a final data set of 103 independent samples. This final
sample included 46 studies in higher education, 15 studies from mixed populations and adult
learners, and 42 studies were from K-12 settings; only 23% of studies combined were from
psychology or related disciplines. A majority of service-learning integration and community
based research is found in human services and social work, criminal justice, sociology, and
communications. These disciplines focus on working within the community upon college
graduation (e.g., social workers, juvenile services, law enforcement, journalists), thus, service
learning as part of course integration allows for these students to gain field experience, enhance
their personal interests, and provide benefits to community partners (Fair, 2007; McClam et al.,
2008).
McClam et al. (2008) integrated service learning into an upper level human services
undergraduate course during the last third of the semester; students were given three assignments
to include conducting initial client interviews, interest and aptitude testing, and creating and

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

organizing case files in a community-based psychiatric treatment facility for youth. Findings
revealed via myriad thematic analysis of pre-experience and post-experience written reflections
that students found value in learning through hands on experience, gaining knowledge,
translating theory into practice, and developing skills (McClam et al., 2008). Shannon et al.
(2012) developed a service learning model to teach graduate students research and evaluation
skills in the field of social work. The service learning model was comprised of three strategies to
include teaching course content in the first half of the semester, then proposing a community
based research evaluation via a collaboration with peers in the course, and third, conducting the
proposed project with outside agencies. Overall, student and course reflections revealed students
could apply course content in a real world setting and demonstrate strength and weaknesses in
practicing evidence based research in an applied setting.
The criminal justice discipline often incorporates service learning approaches.
Hirschinger-Blank et al. (2013) conducted a qualitative case study integrating four different
forms of service learning in an upper level juvenile delinquency and justice course with the goal
of increasing cultural competence among students. Students participated in one of four
opportunities of service learning to include tutoring high school students affiliated with youth
court, tutoring youth and serving as a teachers assistant in an elementary or middle school,
serving as a positive role model for detained youth, and some students were paired with
probation officers and assisted with home visits. Content analysis of the following forms of data,
student journals, quizzes, and final exams, revealed that students were willing to examine their
preconceived ideas regarding stereotypes and personal biases. As a result of this experience,
students developed beliefs of equality and sympathetic attitudes towards youth delinquents;

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

however, students also reported reinforced stereotypes of the inner city (Hirschinger-Blank et al.,
2013).
There are several disciplines that integrate community based research as one approach to
service learning (e.g., sociology, communications). Potter et al. (2013) created a community
based research component within a sociology research methods course as a way to engage
students with course content. Students worked with an organization to help them develop
strategies to increase their services to faculty and campus communities. Students completed a
research project that assessed facultys awareness of the program, and worked with the external
organization throughout the project. Course evaluations revealed that students developed strong
relationships with the faculty and other peers in the course, at times felt overwhelmed with
coursework for an undergraduate level course, and reported learning more about research
methods and real world applicability, as well as more knowledge on the organization (i.e., sexual
assault prevention) (Potter et al., 2013).
Keyton (2001) conducted several case studies with undergraduate communication major
students participating in community based research with three external organizations (e.g.,
Crimestoppers, Women in Community Service) with the primary goal of increasing students
research skills and knowledge about community organizations. Students work in research teams
with the external agency over the course of one semester, develop, conduct, and present the
findings of the project. Findings revealed that students skills in performing research exceed their
initial expectations and students find greater utility in research methods. In addition, Keyton
(2001) posits one way to keep students engaged in research methods it to redirect the focus of the
students preconceived fears and anxiety regarding research towards interest in completing a real
world project.

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

Service learning in psychology. Undergraduate students in psychology often believe

psychology is a field of therapists and clinicians to help those struggling with mental health
disorders, and rarely do students picture psychology as a science grounded in research (Dunn et
al., 2010). In order to expose students to the importance of research, research methods is a core
course required for undergraduate psychology majors and minors. There are many instructional
techniques to teach research including the use of fake data sets, hands on demonstrations,
simulated studies (Saville et al., 2008), and the integration of community based research projects
(Chapdelaine & Chapman, 1999; DePrince et al., 2011).
Chapdelaine and Chapman (1999) co-designed and instructed a research methods course
integrating a community based research project with the local police department. The goal of the
project was to help the police department develop community education and training practices
for the local domestic violence program. Prior to the start of the semester, the instructors and
teaching assistant established the research project and survey measures with the agency. During
the semester, students critiqued the survey and collected data via telephone surveys, and were
required to write an independent empirical report with student generated hypotheses. Students
presented the survey results and summary of findings to the police department at the end of the
semester. Course evaluations and other graded assignments (e.g., final projects) suggest this
experience increased critical thinking, enhanced understanding of research methodology, and
increased their scientific writing skills (Chapdelaine & Chapman, 1999).
DePrince et al. (2011) expanded community based research literature by coining the term
community engaged research (C-E) which includes the integration of service learning by
interacting with a community partner, but the students do not leave the campus in order to
conduct research or work with the community agency. Students in an undergraduate research

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

methods course worked with representatives of state councils regarding domestic violence and
child protection (i.e., external agency). The agency met with students in the course to discuss the
topic of trauma and provided copies of surveys they conducted statewide earlier in the year. The
students service learning assignment included a literature review on trauma, developing research
questions that aligned with the community council, proposed statistical analysis to test
hypotheses, and were required to write up and present a final report to the state council.
However, students were not given access to data; the instructor and teaching assistant conducted
all data analysis and provided output to the students to interpret for their projects (DePrince et
al., 2011). Students were measured on research methods and domestic violence knowledge in
comparison to a traditional research methods course. Results demonstrated significant learning
gains in research methods in both courses, but significant gains in increased self-efficacy to
conduct research in the C-E course, as well as increased knowledge about domestic violence
(DePrince et al., 2011).
Challenges in Service Learning Integration
There are several challenges in integrating service learning in higher education courses to
include the increase workload to students (Potter et al., 2013), the increased workload to faculty
and very time consuming process that begins long in advance of the course (Fair, 2007; Keyton,
2001; Shannon et al., 2012), and the challenge in aligning course learning objectives and
assignments to meet the requirements of service learning in addition to the requirements of the
course (Hirschinger-Blank et al., 2013; McClam et al., 2008). Acknowledging that these
challenges exist, is important to begin to create ways to reduce faculty workload, design a
challenging, yet, balanced workload for undergraduate students, and design course instruction
that aligns course learning objectives with service learning objectives.

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

10

Merging Learning Theory with Service Learning Design

There are many learning theories (e.g., behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism,
sociocultural) that are grounded in psychology and learning principles and provide foundational
support for multiple instructional methods. Recently, scholars have focused on social aspects of
learning, and argue that traditional schools often do not reflect the skills and knowledge that
students learn outside of the classroom, suggesting context is important to the learning
interaction of the individual and their environments (Barab & Duffy, 2012; Dunlap, 1997; Hung
& Tan, 2004; Jarvela, 1996; Lave & Wegner, 1991; Yilmaz, 2011). Jarvela (1996) emphasized
that context is important for learning transfer and by providing pieces of decontextualized
information to students separates them from the world in which they interact. Barab and Duffy
(2012) suggested that learning is situated within our experiences and is more than just a
cognitive process, but an emotional and social process. Resnick (1987) described differences
between school learning (e.g., individual context, emphasizes mental thinking and manipulation
of symbols) and real world learning (e.g., collaborative learning, contextualized reasoning) that
should help build our understanding of designing effective learning environments.
One way to merge service-learning with real world learning is the design of effective
instructional techniques and teaching strategies to include cognitive apprenticeships; a form of
cognitive apprenticeship is reciprocal teaching, which can take many forms to include peer-topeer mentoring (Barab & Duffy, 2012; Palincsar & Brown, 1984; Rosenshine & Meister, 1994;
Tilley & Callison, 2007), social and collaborative learning, and an enhanced learner-teacher
relationship. Ruben (1999) described limitations within the traditional learning environment
paradigm to include classrooms that are often predictable, boring, static, and of little capacity to
influence affective and behavioral domains. Providing an active learning environment using

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

11

reciprocal teaching in combination with service learning, educators, we may have found a viable
medication for those with the ailing malady of taking research methods in psychology.
Reciprocal teaching was initially discussed within the framework of a cognitive strategy
instruction focused on teaching the comprehension of reading and text (Brown & Palinscar,
1989; Palinscar & Brown, 1984). Palinscar and Brown (1984) defined reciprocal teaching as a
technique that took the form of dialogue between teacher and student and included four reading
comprehension strategies, generating questions, summarizing, clarifying, and predicting. Two
necessary conditions of Palinscar and Browns model include teaching comprehension and
learning strategies and teaching via dialogue. Rosenshine and Meisters (1994) reciprocal
teaching model began with the teacher providing modeling, coaching, and feedback first (i.e.,
cognitive apprenticeship strategies); then the student would switch roles and become the teacher
to their peers with guided practice from the teacher when necessary. Recently, Barab and Duffy
(2012) define reciprocal teaching as the teacher modeling and coaching students necessary
skills, students learning from the expert (i.e., instructor) and peer experience, through alternating
roles of teacher and student. Although reciprocal teaching research has been mainly focused on
reading comprehension (Jarvela, 1996), it can be used in other subjects and context to support an
active learning space, and provide students with ownership of inquiry.
Taking reciprocal teaching out of the traditional research context of reading
comprehension and focusing on different components of reciprocal teaching models, students
participating in service learning can become teachers of course content, in addition to becoming
invested learners and critics of research methods. Implementing Palinscar and Brown (1984) two
necessary conditions of reciprocal teaching, students designing and teaching lesson plans allows
them to teach comprehension and learning strategies of course material (i.e., condition one) and

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

12

provides a friendly, non-threatening atmosphere by teaching via dialogue (i.e., condition two).
Using Barab and Duffys (2012) reciprocal teaching model, the instructor models and explains
the premise of teaching course material to learners (e.g., high school students). Reciprocal
teaching includes switching roles from student to teacher; therefore, students can then
collaborate in teams to design simple lesson plans and activities that focus on the student
teaching specific content to the class, with instructional support as needed from the instructor
(Rosenshine & Meister, 1994). As a result, the students become teachers and more importantly,
experts, in their content area.
Another key ingredient in reciprocal teaching is providing a conversational dialogue
between learners (Brown & Palinscar, 1989; Dunlap, 1997; Palinscar & Brown, 1984); therefore,
by providing a social, collaborative atmosphere among learners invites this conversational tone
of teaching between peers (e.g., college and high school students). Through incorporating Barab
and Duffy (2012) design elements of effective learning environments, reciprocal teaching in
combination with service-learning supports the learner by presenting a challenge and giving
ownership over course work (e.g., teaching and creating lesson plans), creating social interaction,
and providing a real world context to conduct mini research projects. Reciprocal teaching
instruction should include illustrative examples of course material and feedback to help create
mental models of learning and understanding (Dunlap, 1997; Yilmaz, 2011). Through the use of
game based paradigm to teach some of the chapter content, aesthetics and visual examples can be
created and linked with course concepts. Reciprocal teaching and games provides the
opportunity for the student and the teacher to make formative assessments (Ma, Williams,
Prejean, & Richard, 2007). These formative assessments can be made in the process of game
play, seeking peer feedback on concepts that still require clarity (e.g., reliability vs. validity).

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

13

More importantly, alerting the instructor to concepts that students may still be struggling with
and, therefore, need more class time spent on the identified topic.
Working in teams to create lesson plans and game based activities allows for a social and
collaborative learning environment; in addition, this encourages students to act as instructional
supports for each other, as each chapter sub-content requires a new set of students (i.e., teachers).
By investing effort in coming up with ways to engage their classmates in learning the required
material, they may be more motivated and willing to create a highly engaging lesson plan or
activity. Lastly, reciprocal teaching models that follow cognitive apprenticeship principles
requires students to have the opportunity for reflection (Barab & Duffy, 2012; Brown &
Palinscar, 1989; Dunlap, 1997; Rosenshine & Meister, 1994). Giving students the opportunity to
reflect on their learning process and receive feedback from the instructor (i.e., expert) will help
in analyzing and refining their learning experience. Reflection can be implemented as a group
process, making cognitions visible, and as an individual process, which may help students reflect
more deeply (Dunlap, 1997; Jarvela, 1996; Yilmaz, 2011). Students can reflect on their
collaborative relationship with their peers regarding creating lesson plans and activities that
demonstrates mastery of concepts, engagement, and fun. In addition, students can reflect on the
learning experience as teachers to their peers. For example, what does it feel like to clarify
concepts to others? Do you believe your teaching generated more learning questions regarding
the topic? Do you believe you summarized the chapter concepts accurately? What would you
improve in the future?
A Reciprocal Teaching Service Learning Design in a Research Methods Course
Learners in a Research Methods in Psychology course consist of junior and senior
undergraduate psychology majors and minors. In order to address students fears, anxiety, and

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

14

preconceived negative perceptions regarding the course, an active learning environment that is
comfortable (e.g., creation of cohesive teams), and non-threatening (e.g., game based learning
activities) can be created via the use of reciprocal teaching and service learning.
Project Development and Goals
Project Selection. Choosing a service learning based project that benefits both
community partners is challenging, and there are many components that are important to
consider in order for the partnership to be successful. These components include finding a
community partner with similar school features such as timeframe (e.g., length of semester),
course topics, and most importantly, willingness to allow college students to teach small sections
of high school course curriculum. This project arose from a relationship developed at a research
conference in regards to innovative teaching methods using technology. The community school
(hereafter, CS) was a public, college preparatory school for at-risk students that focused on 21st
century skills and technology integration into the curriculum. CS structured the classes within a
semester time frame to mimic college curriculum, and taught a psychology course as an elective
to students. Thus, this CS provided the opportunity for college students to mentor high school
students, provided a similar timeframe, and taught a lower level psychology course that would
allow undergraduate research methods in psychology students to cover and teach one chapter
(i.e., research), without focusing on the entire psychology course curriculum. In addition, the CS
had a service learning coordinator that could work with the college service learning coordinator
to help with administrative procedures (e.g., memorandums of understanding, communication).
Project Goals. Once the community partnership is established, it is extremely important
to align learning objectives of the course with service learning objectives in order to create a
meaningful learning experience for the students. Along with the standard curriculum learning

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

15

objectives of the research methods course (e.g., demonstrating mastery of basic research methods
topics), additional learning goals included students teaching and modeling course concepts to
high school students taking a psychology course, to serve as instructional supports to one another
(i.e., reciprocal teaching) and developing and conducting a mini-research project on academic
related topics. Service learning goals and objectives included working with high school students
at an at-risk public boarding school, individual mentoring with students, understanding the
diverse population of at-risk students, and giving back to the community.
Planning and Design of a Service Learning Course
Course Planning
In order to accomplish these learning goals and objectives, the overall design of the
service learning experience included undergraduate students enrolled in a research methods in
psychology course teaching high school students enrolled in an elective psychology course the
importance of research (i.e., research chapter) over the course of two weeks (i.e., four classes).
Due to CS focus on technology integration, a supported, published research paradigm of using
video games to engage and enhance students learning (Stansbury & Munro, 2013) was
implemented to teach correlational design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation during the
second week. The third week included hosting an open panel on questions regarding college life
and experiences, and a visit to the college institution for the students to observe and participate in
a variety of upper level college courses (e.g., abnormal, industrial organizational), followed by a
luncheon and debriefing.
In order for this to be a successful endeavor, the traditional research methods course had
to be redesigned to accommodate the service learning component and many teaching
preparations that had to occur prior to implementing the service learning (e.g., teaching) with the

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

16

CS. Thus, the course was redesigned as a hybrid course that met once a week for one hour and
fifty minutes for lab, and broken into four modules, over the course of one fall semester (15
weeks). The first two modules were comprised of learning basic research topics (e.g., ethics,
measurement, validity, sampling), as well as service learning and civic engagement definitions,
importance, and reflections. The online portion of the course was designed to cover course
content from the textbook, participate in discussion board activities, and design and conduct
small mini research projects using correlational and experimental design. The third module spent
three weeks with the CS and the fourth week debriefing from their experience with the CS, and
working on their mini research studies conducted at the CS. The fourth and final module
consisted of learning factorial and quasi-experimental designs, observational studies, and
generalizations and external validity. In order to make the course more manageable and the
transportation to the CS, students were randomly assigned into two teams of nine on the first day
of the course. The students gave their teams a name in order to increase ownership and personal
investment (e.g., Team Alpha, Team Beta), and worked the entire semester in these teams.
Students as Teachers. In order to prepare the research methods students (hereafter, RM)
to teach high school students via reciprocal teaching, it was essential to frontload the course with
basic knowledge and hands on activities designed to get the RM students interacting with each
other; in turn, creating instructional support. Reciprocal teaching began with the instructor
modeling and explaining the groundwork of creating and teaching a lesson plan (e.g., psychology
as a science) in collaboration with a teaching assistant. Implementing Palinscar and Brown
(1984) conditions of reciprocal teaching, this demonstration included the instructor modeling and
the students participating by requesting clarification on specific topics they may struggle with,
and summarizing the main objectives within the content being taught. The instructor guided the

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

17

students in creating lesson plans, which included the students creating their own learning
activities for the class. Within each team, students were asked to pair up in order to teach the
content together; this increased instructional support and alleviated fears of teaching, as all of the
students were novice teachers. Each team was assigned a week and specific content they were
responsible to cover; for example, team Alpha was responsible for leading the high school
students through designing and conducting a correlational study using Stansbury and Munros
(2013) video game based paradigm, which included creating hypotheses, data collection and
analysis, and team Beta was responsible for teaching the basics of research design including the
meaning of variables, operational definitions, and differences between correlation and
experimental designs. This reciprocal teaching process continues with reversing roles, and the
students modeling and guiding the next set of students until all students have shared the learners
role of teacher and student (Barab & Duffys, 2012). Through this process research methods
students learn and interact with course content in depth, provides the students ownership and
autonomy of their learning.
Students as Researchers. While learning research methods content is vital to
successfully passing the course, being able to conduct research in a real world context is also
essential to understanding the real world relevance and applicability of research. In addition,
understanding and demonstrating how to execute and write an empirical report is a core learning
objective to any research methods in psychology course. Thus, each team of students were to
develop one research question, grounded in research literature, that related to service learning
and at-risk students, create a brief survey, collect data, analyze and interpret results, and write an
empirical report of the mini-study. For example, team Alphas research question investigated if
video game use increased intrinsic motivation of high school students in the classroom, and team

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

18

Beta investigated if at-risk students interaction with college students changed their perceptions
of college. Using a pre-posttest design, each team created five survey questions (e.g., 10 total) to
assess their research question using a Likert scale, and distributed the surveys on the first and last
day of interaction with the CS students. Then, students were required to run reliability analysis
on the survey items, discuss construct validity of the measure, and run a paired sample t-tests on
the data, resulting in a full empirical report. All analysis was conducted as a class and was used
as a teaching opportunity to discuss the limitations and challenges of conducting a study in a
classroom, with actual participants, and a small sample size (n=11 after elimination of missing
and non-mismatched data).
Service Learning Evaluation and Impact
This project was assessed at many levels to include learning outcomes of research
methods content, engagement and intrinsic motivation levels of RM students, attitude changes
related to research methods and real world applicability and perceived self-efficacy, and the
impact of this experience on the RM students. However, for the purpose of this short review in
understanding the integration of learning theory, course design, and service learning integration,
this report focuses on the impact of the experience to the students. Overall, students reported
positive experiences of the course to include a variety of feelings (e.g., joy, frustration,
gratefulness) in working with at-risk students. In order to better understand the reactions of the
students, reflections will be discussed in three categories: Course Reflections, Community
Partner Reflections, and Personal Reflections.
Course Reflections. Overall, students reported that the amount of preparation that was
built into the course was a lot of work, but provided them with the knowledge and skills
necessary to be successful with the students in the classroom. A majority of students reported that

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

19

in order to teach the concepts, they really had to understand the concepts and figure out many
different ways to provide examples. Surprisingly, students reported they read their assigned
content in the textbook several times and practiced with their family and friends at times.
However, students also discussed an inability to stay focused at times due to learning to manage
multiple tasks (e.g., research project, understanding course content, assignments). Despite this
challenge, students reported the course work enhanced their time management skills and felt they
learned something more than just content.
Community Partner Reflections. One of the constant struggles that higher education
faces when working with community partners is the organization and willingness of the external
school. Unfortunately, the CS in this project was not always organized from an administration
standpoint, which trickled into the classroom. For example, the high school students did not have
a full time instructor teaching the course, and classroom management was poor. However, the
high school students were very excited and respectful to the research methods student. The
research methods students took the disorganization as a learning opportunity and reported that
working with at-risk students made the research project and teaching more interesting. Students
did report that the lack of school organization took away from their experience overall, but
surprisingly reported that they would do it again because the high school students appreciated
their presence. From an instructor standpoint, the research methods students became quite
attached to the high school students in a very short three week time span, and reported the school
environment taught them the importance of learning to adapt to varying situations.
Personal Reflections. As an instructor, hearing and discussing the students personal
reflections was the most rewarding out of the entire experience. Students reported feelings of joy
and gratefulness in helping others, with a couple students reporting strong statements such as I

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

20

have impacted a life. Students reported their favorite and most beneficial interaction with the
students were the third week when the high school students visited their campus and were able to
participate in individual mentoring with the high school students and expose them to college life.
The students reported that the high school students really opened up and became more willing to
share their fears, concerns, and curiosities regarding college. In regards to the research method
course, students reported participating in service learning made learning the topics more fun and
engaging. Students reported in their final projects, which included personal reflections of their
service learning experience that they plan to get involved in future service learning opportunities
and give back to their community. Some students even reported giving their contact information
to their individual high school student in case they had any further questions about college or if
they ever wanted to talk. In the end, a majority of students reported that they were grateful for
the experience and also developed a new appreciation for the amount of effort and work that
professors and instructors put forth to engage their students.
Conclusion
There are many components that went into the design and implementation of this service
learning experience to include redesigning the research methods undergraduate course, planning
with the community partner (e.g., transportation, times, curriculum needs), and having a firm
understanding of pedagogy in order to create an effective learning environment that leads to a
meaningful learning experience to all parties involved. As the student reflections emphasize there
were many overall positive experiences, despite initial fear and anxiety regarding the amount of
course work, teaching, and scary aspect of conducting research. The students reflections and
instructor observations suggest that service learning does not have to be a lengthy process, but
rather well developed pedagogy with the integration of willing community partners can create a

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

21

meaningful learning experience with only three weeks of student to student interaction. Though
there will remain several challenges regrading service learning integration into higher education
courses (e.g., cost, time, workload), the end results suggest a rewarding experience for the
students and faculty. As a research methods in psychology instructor, the biggest challenge is not
the cost and time investment necessary to create an engaging course, but creating lifelong
learners who learn beyond the content of research methods and want to give back to others after
the course has ended.

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

22

References
Barab, S. A., & Duffy, T. J. (2012). From practice fields to communities of practice. In D.
Jonassen & S. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (2nd ed.,
pp. 29-65). New York, NY: Routledge.
Bos, A. L., & Schneider, M. C. (2009). Stepping around the brick wall: Overcoming student
obstacles in methods courses. PS: Political Science and Politics, 42(2), 375-383.
Brewer, C.L., Hopkins, J.R., Kimble, G.A., Matlin, M.W., McCann, L.I., McNeil, O.V., Nodine,
B.F., Quinn, V.N., & Saundra. (1993). Curriculum. In T.V. McGovern (Ed.), Handbook
for enhancing undergraduate education in psychology (p. 161-182). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Bringle, R.G., & Duffy, D.K. (1998). With service in mind: Concepts and models for servicelearning in psychology. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education, in
cooperation with the American Psychological Association.
Brown, A. L., & Palincsar, A. S. (1989). Guided, cooperative learning and individual knowledge
acquisition. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor
of Robert Glaser (pp. 393-451). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cashel, M. L., Goodman, C., & Swanson, J. (2003). Mentoring as Service-Learning for
Undergraduates. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 7(2), 106-110.
Chapdelaine, A., & Chapman, B. L. (1999). Using Community-Based Research Projects to Teach
Research Methods. Teaching Of Psychology, 26(2), 101.
Conway, J. M., Amel, E. L., & Gerwien, D. P. (2009). Teaching and Learning in the Social
Context: A Meta-Analysis of Service Learning's Effects on Academic, Personal, Social,
and Citizenship Outcomes. Teaching Of Psychology, 36(4), 233-245.

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

23

Denham, B. (1997). Teaching research methods to undergraduates. Journalism & Mass

Communication Educator, 51(4), 54-62.
DePrince, A. P., Priebe, S. J., & Newton, A. T. (2011). Learning about violence against women in
research methods: A comparison to traditional pedagogy. Psychological Trauma: Theory,
Research, Practice, And Policy, 3(3), 215-222. doi:10.1037/a0024641
Dunn, D. S., Brewer, C. L., Cautin, R. L., Gurung, R. A. R., Keith, K. D., McGregor, L. N., Nida,
S. A., Puccio, P., & Voigt, M. J. (2010). The undergraduate psychology curriculum: Call
for a core. In Halpern, D. F. (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: A blueprint
for the future of the discipline (pp. 47-61). American Psychological Association.
Dunlap, J. C. (1997, February). Preparing students for lifelong learning: A review of
instructional methodologies. Proceedings of selected research and development
presentation at the National Convention of the Association for Educational
Communications and Technology, Alburquerque, NM.
Dreuth, L., & Dreuth-Fewell, M. (2002). A model of student learning in community service field
placements: Voices from the field.Active Learning In Higher Education, 3(3), 251-264.
doi:10.1177/1469787402003003005.
Eyler, J.S., Giles, D.E., Jr., Stenson, C.M., & Gray, C.J. (2001). At a glance: What we know
about the effects of service-learning on college students, faculty, institutions and
communities, 1993-2000: Third edition. Scotts Valley, CA: National Service Learning
Clearinghouse. Retrieved November 30, 2015, from
http://www.compact.org/resources/downloads/aag.pdf.
Fair, C. D. (2007). "I just want to help people, why do I need research methods?": Communitybased Research with Human Service Majors. Mountainrise, 4(2), 2-12.

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

24

Hirschinger-Blank, N., Simons, L., Finley, L., Clearly, J., & Thoerig, M. (2013). A Pilot Study of
a Criminal Justice Service-Learning Course: The Value of a Multicultural
Approach. International Journal Of Teaching And Learning In Higher Education, 25(1),
14-28.
Houshmand, S., Spanierman, L. B., Beer, A. M., Poteat, V. P., & Lawson, L. J. (2014). The
Impact of a Service-Learning Design Course on White Students' Racial
Attitudes. Journal Of Higher Education Outreach And Engagement, 18(2), 19-48.
Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. In N. K.
Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 428-444). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Jacoby, B. (1996). Service-learning in higher education: Concepts and practices. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Jarvela, S. (1996). New models of teacher-student interaction: A critical review. European
Journal Of Psychology Of Education, 11(3), 249-68.
Johanson, J. C., & Fried, C. B. (2002). Job training versus graduate school preparation: Are
separate educational tracks warranted? Teaching of Psychology, 29, 241-243.
Keyton, J. (2001). Integrating Service-Learning in the Research Methods Course. Southern
Communication Journal, 66(3), 201.
Kiser, P. (2007). Getting the most from your human service internship: Learning from
experience. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York,
NY US: Cambridge University Press.

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

25

Papanastasiou, E. C., & Zembylas, M. (2008). Anxiety in undergraduate research methods

courses: its nature and implications. International Journal of Research & Method in
Education, 31(2), 155-167. doi:10.1080/17437270802124616
Palinscar, A., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and
comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition & Instruction, 1(2), 117.
Potter, S. J., Caffrey, E. M., & Plante, E. G. (2003). Integrating service learning into the research
methods course. Teaching Sociology, 31(1), 38-48.
McClam, T., Diambra, J. F., Burton, B., Fuss, A., & Fudge, D. L. (2008). An Analysis of a
Service-Learning Project: Students' Expectations, Concerns, and Reflections. Journal Of
Experiential Education, 30(3), 236-249.
National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993, Pub. L. No. 103-82, 107 Stat. 785 (1993).
National Service-Learning Clearinghouse (2005). Retrieved from November 30, 2015 from
http://www.servicelearning.org/
Resnick, L.B. (1987). Learning in school and out. Educational Researcher, 16, 13-20.
Rosenshine, B. & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review Of
Educational Research, 64(4), 479.
Saville, B. K., Zinn, T. E., & Elliott, M. P. (2005). Interteaching vs. traditional methods of
instruction: A preliminary analysis. Teaching of Psychology, 32, 161-163.
Saville, B. K., Zinn, T. E., Lawrence, N., Barron, K. E., & Andre, J. (2008). Teaching critical
thinking in statistics and research methods. In D. S. Dunn, J. S. Halonen, R. A. Smith, D.
S. Dunn, J. S. Halonen, R. A. Smith (Eds.), Teaching critical thinking in psychology: A
handbook of best practices (pp. 149-160). Wiley-Blackwell.
doi:10.1002/9781444305173.ch13

SERVICE LEARNING & RESEARCH

26

Shannon, P., Kim, W., & Robinson, A. (2012). Implementing a Service Learning Model for
Teaching Research Methods and Program Evaluation. Journal Of Teaching In Social
Work, 32(3), 229-242.
Sizemore, O. J., & Lewandowski, G. W. (2009). Learning might not equal liking: Research
methods course changes knowledge but not attitude. Teaching of Psychology, 36, 90-95.
Strand, K. J. (2000). Community-based Research as Pedagogy. Michigan Journal Of Community
Service Learning, 785-96.