Building Social Capital Through Community-Based Service-Learning in Teacher Education

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2

Alan Tinkler and Barri Tinkler Missouri State University

Abstract

In order to build connections with the community, the authors of this study undertook a participatory process for developing a comprehensive service-learning initiative within a teacher education program. This case study examines the impact of the service-learning initiative on building social capital for the community and preservice teachers. The results show that using participatory processes that seek to provide reciprocal benefits for the university and community can build bridging social capital. Keywords: preservice teachers, community partnerships, participatory process, reciprocal learning, pedagogical practices

INTRODUCTION learning experiences for students that develop their capabilities in a manner that magnifies Purpose of the Study post-secondary opportunities. When teacher educators talk about Some teacher education programs community connections, they are typically have used community-based service-learning referring to their relationships with K-12 as a means to connect preservice teachers to schools. This is understandable given the need communities. Research on community-based to build partnerships to support field place- service-learning has shown that expanding ments and student teaching. By focusing on sites of practice into the community can relationships with K-12 schools, however, increase teacher candidates’ awareness of teacher education programs sometimes neg- community needs (Hildenbrand & Schultz, lect the broader community in which schools 2015), support collaborative engagement with are located, which has led some researchers to community stakeholders (Simpson & Pat- conclude that there is a disconnect between the terson, 2018), expand field experiences bey- local public schools and the community (Noel, ond traditional K-12 classrooms to target 2010). This disconnect can adversely impact experiences that can enhance teaching skills the potential for schools and families to work (Barnes, 2016), support improved cultural together to support K-12 youth. Furthermore, understanding and practice (Lund & Lee, this disconnect can exacerbate inequality 2015), and prepare future teachers to work since, as Duncan and Murnane (2011) note, with families (Hampshire, Havercroft, Luy, & “social contexts may in turn affect children’s Call, 2015). skill acquisition and educational attainments” To establish bridges with the (p. 7). By nurturing placements across the community, the teacher education program in community, teacher education programs can this study launched a comprehensive service- augment an understanding of the complex learning initiative through a participatory community in which teachers work to advance process. The goal of the community-based 44

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2 initiative was to integrate service-learning of networks of connections” (p. 251) that the across the teacher education program course individual can draw from. sequence in a way that allowed the program to Some authors writing about social target experiences with specific populations of capital define the term through comparison. learners while at the same time maintaining a As noted by Coleman (1988), “Unlike other commitment to a full complement of school- forms of capital, social capital inheres in the based practica. To examine the impact of this structure of relations between actors and work, the authors developed a comprehensive among actors” (p. 98). In describing social qualitative case study. When examining the capital, Kahne, Chi, and Middaugh (2006) outcomes, the results demonstrated that the made a similar comparison: collaborative experience helped build social Unlike physical capital such as plant capital for all the parties involved. This study and equipment or human capital such explores these outcomes through the lens of as an individual’s knowledge and social capital. skills, social capital is embedded in the structure of relations between actors in THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK a given setting. It exists neither within a given individual nor apart from a set According to Putnam (2000), the first of social relations. (p. 389) known use of the term “social capital” was by Some forms of capital (e.g. economic capital) a West Virginia educator, L. J. Hanifan, in have a fixed amount. The interesting thing 1916. Hanifan used the term when describing about social capital is that everyone can an effective parent engagement strategy. He increase their amount of social capital through wrote, “The more the people do for themselves strengthening their social networks; it does not the larger will community social capital require one group to give over social capital in become, and the greater will be the dividends order for the other to gain (Ferlazzo, 2011). In upon the social investment” (Hanifan, 1916, p. fact, as noted by Pedler and Attwood (2011), 138). Though this is the first noted use of the “unlike financial capital, social capital is term, as Farr (2004) points out, John Dewey’s depleted not by use but by nonuse – the more philosophy on civic education “was the it is used, the more is generated” (p. 315). seedbed for the concept of social capital in this Putnam (2000) popularized the notion era” (p. 14). Dewey’s work emphasized the of social capital in his book Bowling Alone: social interactions inherent in shared expe- The Collapse and Revival of American riences that undergird democracy. Since then, Community, where he described declining others have contributed to defining the social capital because of decreased civic construct, including Bourdieu (1986) and engagement. Putnam (2000) made an im- Coleman (1988). According to Bourdieu portant distinction between bonding and (1986), social capital is the “aggregate of the bridging social capital. As stated by Coleman actual or potential resources which are linked and Danks (2016): “Bonding social capital to possession of a durable network of more or refers to that which forms between members less institutionalized relationships of mutual of a group. Bridging social capital refers to acquaintance and recognition” (p. 251). that which develops between individuals Bourdieu notes that membership in one of inside a group with individuals outside that these networks creates “collectively-owned group” (p. 471). Putnam (2000) identifies capital” (p. 251) and that the amount of social bonding social capital as exclusive while capital an individual has depends on the “size bridging social capital is inclusive. Bridging 45

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2 social capital has the potential to support that Yeh equated with social capital. Other social change; however, as Putnam (2000) research has focused on the impact of service- notes, “for our biggest collective problems we learning for community partners in regard to need precisely the sort of bridging social social capital. Vernon and Foster (2002) con- capital that is the toughest to create” (p. 363). ducted research with community partners and With this in mind, researchers like Randy found that “higher education service-learning Stoecker (2005) remind us that “a lack of and volunteer programs are conduits for social networks [may be] a consequence, not a building social capital in a community” (p. cause” (p. 74) of social inequality, so careful 170). attention needs to be paid to the context and When examining the research on desired outcomes. teacher education and social capital, most studies focused on bonding social capital Service-learning and Social Capital between preservice teachers, such as Man- There is a small body of research that dzuk, Hasinoff, and Seifert’s (2005) study of explores the connection between service- social capital in a cohort, or bonding social learning and social capital in education. Some capital between in-service teachers, such as studies focused on the development of social Penuel, Riel, Krause, and Frank’s (2009) study capital for participants. A study by Koliba of social capital in a professional learning (2003) found that service-learning increased community. Only a few studies examined social capital for students in rural schools by social capital between teacher education and expanding and deepening social networks. In the community. One such study (Reed, 2004) fact, he argued that expanding social capital found that schools of education can build should be an intentional outcome of service- bridging social capital in under-resourced learning programs. Howard (2006) found a communities. similar impact for urban middle school This comprehensive case study seeks students. His study found that service-learning to add to the limited body of research that increased social capital that in turn had a examines how service-learning between teac- positive impact on academic achievement. her education and the community impacts D’Agostino (2010) conducted a quantitative social capital. It is important for teacher study examining the impact of service- education programs to better understand the learning on college students. She found that role they can play in building social capital. service-learning increased social capital, Through experience with and in the com- which was reflected in an increase in civic munity, teacher educators and future teachers engagement. Hoffman (2011) found similar can build bridges between families and impacts for nontraditional college students schools. who participated in interethnic community service activities, specifically that social METHOD capital “can be significantly enhanced through the development of community service work The authors designed this study using opportunities” (p. 6). Finally, Yeh (2010) con- a case study approach because “case study ducted research on the impact of service- offers a means of investigating complex social learning on low-income, first generation units consisting of multiple variables of college students. Yeh’s findings demonstrated potential importance in understanding the phe- that the service-learning experience helped nomenon” (Merriam, 2009, p. 50). Using case build knowledge and skills for the participants study allows researchers to delve deeply into 46

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2 the case in order to unearth the meaning that Committee (CPAC) that brought together var- can be taken away from that particular ious service and advocacy organizations that phenomenon. According to Miles (2015), work with resettled refugees. Each advisory “case study methodology provides an account committee meeting provided the opportunity of practice through which to explore, con- for open dialogue in order to allow community textualise and theorise practice” (p. 309). voice to guide the work. The purpose of this case study is to Through this collaborative work, the illuminate practices that build bridging social authors identified partners who could sustain capital. The next section includes a brief case ongoing service-learning placements and sub- description followed by a delineation of the sequently integrated experiences in three participants, data collection, and data analysis. courses in the secondary education course sequence. In other words, this collaborative CASE DESCRIPTION process allowed the authors to identify, integrate, and value community assets as In seeking to better prepare our pre- integral to the design process, which supported service teachers to be effective teachers of all the activation of student learning in line with students, our teacher education program community resources. Through the dialogues decided to integrate service-learning expe- that were foundational for this collaborative riences across the secondary preparation process, the authors developed networks and program. These experiences were designed to frameworks for thinking about this com- supplement the traditional school-based prac- munity-based work. tical within the program and to provide targeted experiences with English learners. PARTICIPANTS AND DATA Given that the community in which the COLLECTION university is located is a center for refugee resettlement, there is a regular influx of Data were collected to attend to both English learners. Since a goal of the service- community partner and student perspectives. learning initiative was to better prepare The following sections detail the data specific preservice teachers to be effective teachers of to each group. all students, including English learners, the authors developed partnerships that were Community Perspectives community-based or community-focused. When working with the community, While the initial impulse to partner with the authors generated a range of data sources community agencies was based on the limited typically used in case study research, capacity of local schools to support additional including observations, interviews, and docu- classroom-based placements, the authors dis- ments (Merriam, 2009). Observational data covered the benefits of working in par- were collected using a participant observation tnership with community organizations. approach (Patton, 2015) since we engaged in Partnerships were developed through a dialogue while also observing and recording participatory lens (Tinkler, Tinkler, Gerstl- notes. The authors used an observation Pepin, & Mugisha, 2014) with extensive protocol that focused on both “descriptive and dialogue at the outset of the initiative. This reflective notes” (Creswell & Poth, 2018, p. included individual meetings with potential 169) and that sought to capture dialogue, community partners as well as the deve- actions, and the physical environment. lopment of a Community Partner Advisory 47

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2

Data sources included observation In order to understand the experiences notes from nine one-on-one initial meetings of our preservice teachers, during one seme- with community members generated by the ster the authors administered qualitative ques- first author. The meetings included a range of tionnaires (Johnson & Christensen, 2010), potential community partners providing edu- with open-ended questions, in the three cational support to resettled refugee youth courses that included a community-based or within the community, including non-profit community-focused service-learning compo- organizations, advocacy groups, education nent. Students were asked to examine what services organizations, and K-12 school they learned through the experience and affiliates. These initial conversations focused analyze whether the experience supported on organizational capacity and mission to course content. The questionnaires included determine whether the organizations could some common questions for all of the courses support service-learning partnerships. These as well as questions that were specific to the nine participants were invited to contribute to content and service-learning experiences of Community Partner Advisory Committee each particular course. (CPAC) meetings to help guide the work of the In the introduction to education course, initiative, and they identified other community which is the first course in the secondary organizations to include in the meetings. At education course sequence completed during the CPAC meetings, the authors collected freshman year, students partnered with a local meeting minutes and participant observation school district to survey parents (primarily notes. English learners) about a school reform In addition, the authors conducted initiative. Regarding student participants, 57 semi-structured interviews (Patton, 2015) with students in this class (out of 73) chose to four community partners that hosted service- participate in the study. The other two courses, learning placements. The interviews included an adolescent development course, which is questions about organizational strengths and generally a sophomore level course, and a needs as well as identifying placement op- content literacy course, which is generally a tions. These interviews were recorded and junior level course, included a service- transcribed verbatim. The authors also en- learning component where preservice teachers gaged in more intensive dialogues (Con- provided weekly academic support across one stantino, 2008) with two of these community semester for youth (primarily English lear- partners about what makes for effective ners) at three different local community service-learning partnerships (Tinkler, Tink- centers. For the adolescent development ler, Hausman, & Tufo-Strouse, 2014). These course, 18 (out of 19) chose to participate, and interviews were not structured through a 24 (out of 25) chose to participate from the specific protocol, but were instead conver- content literacy course. In total, there was an sations that allowed the community partners to 84% response rate (99 participants). The direct the dialogue as it related to effective participants of the study reflect the student partnerships. Finally, the authors collected a demographics of the program: predominantly range of documents generated during the White (86%), middle-class (only 22% eligible development of the initiative, including email for Pell grants), and female (80%). communication. DATA ANALYSIS Preservice Teachers The authors’ bias as researchers is 48

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2 toward viewing service-learning as a positive Social capital emerged as a theme pedagogy that has benefits for students and during our initial analysis of both sets of data; community partners. During data analysis, we we found that participants across stakeholder sought to bracket our bias (Creswell & Miller, groups (community partners and students) 2000) so that it did not influence our findings. identified gains that aligned with increased We were systematic in exploring both the limi- social capital. We then used a deductive ap- tations as well as the benefits of the service- proach (Gilgun, 2005) to more closely exa- learning experiences. Through a variety of mine the coding categories specific to social procedures—triangulation of data, member- capital. Through an iterative process of coding checking, comparative data analysis—we and recoding, we illuminated the themes established validity for the findings (Creswell presented in the following section. & Miller, 2000). Regarding our partnerships with Data analysis was managed in stages. community agencies, this study articulates the Using an open-coding process (Benaquisto, formative stages of our partnerships as well as 2008), the authors initially coded the data ongoing work. Partnerships have continued to collected in the work with community move forward using the core attributes of our partners. Each author coded all data sources aforementioned participatory process. The (within text documents) including the participatory process, in other words, has been observation notes, interviews, and documents the foundational ethos for our partnerships (including email communication). The authors with community organizations. This atten- then examined the coding from a comparative tiveness to a participatory process has fostered stance to determine points of convergence and the development of bridges across the difference in our analysis. We then sorted community, which is one of the primary codes into categories (Creswell & Poth, 2018) findings presented in the following section. and identified themes that emerged across the data. To confirm or disconfirm our emergent FINDINGS findings (Creswell & Miller, 2000), we shared the findings with two of our community par- The primary finding of this case study tners for input. is that the service-learning initiative built The data from the 99 student question- bridging social capital for all participants. In naires were analyzed separately. Using addition to finding that teacher educators built HyperRESEARCH as a coding tool, the au- bridging social capital with the community thors used descriptive coding to assign “labels and between preservice teachers and the to data to summarize in a word or short phrase community, the findings show that new the basic topic of a passage of qualitative data” connections were made between community (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014, p. 74). partners through the participatory process. The Twenty-six codes emerged across the data following findings represent broad thematic from the three courses. Working together, with representations of the findings along with a focus on interpretive convergence (Harry, specific elements examined under each of Sturges, & Klingner, 2005), codes were those themes. grouped into eight categories. Finally, using a process of axial coding (Charmaz, 2006), TEACHER EDUCATORS BRIDGE WITH broad themes were identified that spanned the THE COMMUNITY data sets. This theme explores how we built 49

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2 bridging social capital between the teacher development course and the content literacy education program and the community th- course. Two of the community partners noted rough 1) focusing on the process, 2) respon- from the outset that they wanted the university ding to community needs, and 3) supporting students to make a weekly commitment for a ongoing partnerships. specific time and day rather than completing hours when convenient. Foundational Process The community partners made this One important outcome of the request for several reasons, including the participatory process we used when initiating concern about college students seeking to the comprehensive service-learning project condense hours at the end of the semester, but was the construction of bridging social capital the primary consideration was around the between our teacher education program and potential to build relationships. If the college community organizations that extended bey- students were available at the same time each ond our partnerships with K-12 schools. By week, the adolescents using the services of the intentionally engaging in dialogue at the outset center would know when that individual tutor of the work, we set up a framework to support was available for support. This structure was reciprocal relationships, a point that was subsequently enacted, and the community explicit in the invitation we sent to community partner’s predictions about relationship buil- partners: “Through dialogue, we hope to ding came to fruition for many of the college develop a better understanding of organ- students. One community partner noted, “we izational needs in order to align community found that when we pair with a class, an needs with course-based service-learning op- education class where they either need the portunities.” By focusing on reciprocity, we hours to fulfill a requirement or they need to were seeking to develop what Enos and teach a certain number of lessons that we get Morton (2003) call transformational rela- more consistency which the kids really come tionships. These relationships, built through to rely on.” Another community partner dialogue and reflection, are ongoing, acknowledged our responsiveness to feedback sustainable partnerships that lead to important and thanked us for “always thinking of us and changes for both parties. The conversations the community perspective.” By recognizing and ongoing dialogue we had with community the community partners and allowing their partners led one community partner to note: imperatives to have voice, community part- “[First author] has shown us that a partnership ners understood that their voices mattered. can be win-win. We have a mutual agreement to help students grow.” Affirming mutual Ongoing Partnerships agreement through enduring conversations is As the partnerships continued, the first central to the participatory process and author met regularly with community partners bridging social capital. to make changes to the structure of programming to meet the shifting needs of the Responding to Needs community organizations. This included pay- Community partners recognized that ing attention to the ebbs and flows of youth the consistent dialogue led to changes in seeking assistance on particular days of the structure and process that led to better out- week or particular times within the window of comes for all involved. An example of this support. Our responsiveness to these shifts led relates to the scheduling structure of the one community partner to note, “We would academic support offered in the adolescent like more partnerships like the one with [first 50

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2 author] where there is an ongoing commitment backyard!” Another participant wrote, “By and a cycle of feedback.” This ongoing cycle doing this service-learning project, I learned of feedback leading to program innovation and more about the [local] community.” This is change has led to strong partnerships where important since research has begun to each side of the partnership consistently seeks demonstrate that understanding community to support the other. The first author consis- context supports teachers in becoming more tently directs university students looking for effective teachers of diverse learners (Gim- volunteer opportunities to the community bert, 2010). One of our community partners partners, and these volunteers support the recognized this need. He stated, “[preservice organizational capacity of the centers. One teachers] will want to be prepared for the community partner wrote: “Thanks for send- future and figure out how to work in a diverse ing those two wonderful students!” He also community.” This awareness and under- publicizes education related job openings at standing of the community is an important the centers to our graduates, and the centers precursor to forming relationships that in- frequently hire our graduates to support their crease social capital. programming. These ongoing relationships have led to programmatic social capital that Reciprocity of Learning extends beyond one person. Through building The participants in the two classes foundational relationships, other faculty with- providing academic support built relationships in the program have stepped forward to work with the students at the centers that allowed for with these community partners. reciprocal learning growth. Many of the participants explicitly referenced the impor- PRESERVICE TEACHERS BRIDGE WITH tance of building relationships as an essential THE COMMUNITY characteristic of supporting student growth and development. For instance, one participant This theme explores the networks that wrote, “I really benefited from this experience were developed between preservice teachers because it reinforced the necessity of building and the community through the service- relationships with students.” Another wrote, “I learning experience. In particular, we examine was able to have 1-on-1 time to work and how the preservice teachers 1) developed create a personal connection.” Participants knowledge and understanding of the recognized the learning they gained through community, 2) recognized the reciprocity of these relationships in regard to understanding learning through the experience, and 3) used language acquisition, learning effective their new knowledge and understanding to strategies for communicating with and teach- support bridging social capital with schools. ing English learners (ELs), and understanding the differences between learners. One par- Understanding the Community ticipant noted, the “service-learning experi- The findings demonstrate that presser- ence showed me that students really do learn vice teachers built bridging social capital with in so many different ways, and what works for the community through an improved under- one student may not work for another.” Some standing of the local community. On the of the participants returned to tutor at the questionnaire, 43 of the participants noted an centers after the requirements of the course increased awareness of the diversity of the were met in order to continue to learn and community. One wrote, “I learned that there grow. One of these university students in was a very diverse community right in my particular became an ongoing resource for the 51

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2 community center, even providing an every day, making new policies. Schools need orientation to incoming tutors in subsequent to get parents’ opinions on these policies.” semesters. As noted by the community Another example of bridging social partner, “[this tutor] is especially great with capital relates to a student who provided aca- the teens and interacts with them a lot, even demic support at one of the community when there is no tutoring to be done.” This centers. When this student entered student ongoing commitment demonstrates a recog- teaching in a subsequent semester, he wrote in nition of the role that community centers play his licensure portfolio about an important in educating community youth. interaction that happened at the beginning of the school year. The student teacher met with Bridging to the Community his mentor teacher who was going through his Through the service-learning exper- roster of high school students for the year. He iences, the preservice teachers built social wrote: capital with community organizations and During in-service [prior to the start of community youth. In addition, some of them school] my mentor teacher and I were also created bridging capital between reviewing our roster of students and I community members or organizations and the heard him mutter to himself, “I do not local schools. For example, the preservice know most of them.” Many of the teachers in the first year introduction to students that I tutored at the [com- education course partnered with a local school munity center] are in the class I am district to survey parents about a school reform working in. Tutoring them at the initiative. Since many of the parents surveyed [community center] has given me an are resettled refugees who are English understanding about who they are as a learners, the school district provided inter- learner, and how they process the preters to assist. Through this process, the material they are given by their university students were able to collect teachers. I instantly communicated to feedback that the school district could use to my mentor that I have worked with better shape the initiative and to consider how these students before and we bounced to better communicate the work to parents. As ideas back and forth about how to noted by a school district employee who accommodate the challenges they may participated in the community partner meet- face. ings, This particular mentor teacher is very invested So a lot of this work is about helping in building relationships with his students. our different communities learn more Through the insight provided from the student about what American education is. teacher, he was better able to support student And so when you enter the pipeline, learning and to form relationships. This what are the rules formally and student teacher acknowledged the value of informally. So parent education is a schools and community centers working in facet of the work, sometimes not seen partnership. He noted, “it is important for as core, but I see as core, in working teachers to be aware of after school programs with refugees and supporting them. like [the community center] because they can In return, the university students learned more reach out and learn more about their students.” about parent engagement and effective stra- If teachers are to become advocates for their tegies for communication. As one participant students, they need to understand the social noted, “I learned that schools are changing 52

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2 networks and resources available to support we have a responsibility to help build those students and families. connections.

NEW BRIDGES ACROSS THE Teacher Educators as Bridge Builders COMMUNITY The data provide evidence that the teacher educators in this study helped build This theme explores how the service- connections that formed bridging social learning initiative built bridging social capital capital. One example relates to the first between community organizations and then author’s work with one of the community examines the role of teacher educators as centers that hosts preservice teachers com- bridge builders. pleting the service-learning for the content literacy course. During initial conversations Bridges Between Agencies with the director of youth programming at the One unexpected finding from the study center, the director noted that he wanted the was that the initiative was a catalyst for programming to be more “teen led” with the building bridging social capital between goal to “empower the teens who attend to take community agencies. The advisory committee more leadership, have more of a sense of meetings brought together organizations from ownership of the teen center.” The first author across the community that work with resettled worked with the center to develop academic refugees. Since these meetings were held at support since this was requested by some of community partner sites, they allowed a view the youth at the site. Prior to the into the work of those organizations. As noted implementation of the experience, the director by one partner: “Thank you for organizing the wrote: “I am excited and appreciative that grant partner advisory committee meeting that tutoring will be a bigger part of the [teen was held here a couple of weeks ago. We are center] program this year. Looking forward to glad to have been able to attend and grateful making it happen.” This new programming led for the opportunity to introduce folks to our to greater gender diversity of student programs.” During these meetings, comm- participation. The director wrote that “there unity partners began to have dialogue about are a handful of girls who show up specifically how they could work together as well as for homework help.” Later that semester, the working with the university. One community director noted, “One of the consequences of partner stated, “we’d like to partner with other our success with the tutoring program is that agencies. If [our center] can’t meet their needs, [local high school] students are now showing where can we send them?” One of the up every day, afternoons and evenings, for community partners noted, “I think the tutoring.” collaboration between [the university] and the As the new programming at the center community provides all of us with an began, the first author was contacted by an opportunity to share experiences, make English Language Learner (ELL) teacher at professional connections, and improve the the local high school who had many students services we offer our students.” For many using the services of the center. The ELL organizations, finding the time and capacity to teacher was happy that students had access to collaborate with other community organ- additional academic support at the community izations is challenging. As teacher educators center. He noted, “Most ELL students find it working to prepare future teachers to work in difficult or impossible to do schoolwork at schools that are situated within communities, home because of the needs of their families 53

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2

(childcare, cooking, cleaning, and shopping). community. As noted by one community Many students have a second job when they go partner, “we would like to form relationships home, which involves babysitting their with professors who will be our voices.” Our siblings or preparing meals for other family goal has been to try to ensure that community members.” The first author helped initiate a partner voice is heard in collaborative conversation between the director of the center planning. and the ELL teacher. In an email to the director The first author also became a bridge of the community center, the first author for other professors seeking to form service- wrote: “I visited with [the high school ELL learning partnerships. As the first author teacher], and he’s excited about what’s continued to meet with community partners, happening, and he’s glad that you’ve got some he became aware of an organization seeking tutoring scheduled for the teen center. He’s help with analyzing a quantitative data set. He also looking for ways to involve more parents, was able to connect the organization with a so we may be trying to coordinate a meeting professor in another department seeking to between the three of us.” By facilitating this find a real data set to use in his statistics communication, a symbiotic relationship course. In addition, the first author has developed where the community center connected organizations seeking assistance updated the ELL teacher on the tutoring work with communications projects to a degree being done with his students. This included program at the university that supports information provided by the university community-based communications projects as students about what they worked on with the part of a service-learning capstone experience. student and areas for continued growth. In As noted by Putnam (2000), “bridging social return, the ELL teacher developed tutoring capital can generate broader identities and materials for the university students to use to reciprocity” (p. 23). As teacher educators, we better support effective tutoring. have stepped beyond our typical identities to Another example of bridging social become community-engaged leaders and capital relates to a school reform effort that scholars. was launched in 2014 when the state passed a law (Act 77) that requires schools to develop DISCUSSION personalized learning plans for students in grades 7-12. As part of these plans, students This study provides evidence that are allowed alternative pathways to meeting teacher education programs can build bridging graduation requirements (that are based on social capital with the community through proficiencies), and these pathways can include service-learning initiatives. Importantly, the community-based work. In order to support participatory process allowed this bridging the possibility of alternative pathways, the first capital to be developed and amplified across author coordinated a meeting between the multiple spheres. In other words, bridging university Upward Bound program and two social capital gains are not limited to the long-term community partners to discuss how service-learning activities when they are they could support schools in expanding supported through a dynamic participatory learning opportunities across the community. process. The gains are across the entire They identified a number of ways that they interconnected system, which has the potential could collaborate across programs to support to improve learning outcomes for community middle and high school youth who were youth. As noted by Bloomgarden, Bom- seeking engaged learning opportunities in the bardier, Breitbart, Nagel, and Smith (2006), 54

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2

“As representatives of academic institutions, power, and privilege” (Tinkler & Tinkler, we must recognize that our fate is intrinsically 2016). Since the strength of the bridges that tied to that of our neighboring communities, are built is dependent on how relationships are and that we share a responsibility for each formed, it is important that our future teachers other” (p. 117). Using service-learning approach their interactions with a culturally partnerships that build social capital can have humble stance. This stance will support the benefits for communities and teacher expansion of social capital for all stakeholders education programs alike that can lead to across the community. stronger, more resilient and connected communities. CONCLUSION For our preservice teachers, we hope that they work to build social capital between This study has implications for teacher their schools and the community in their future educators as they consider pedagogical teaching positions. To support this, we practices that extend learning into the continue to be explicit about the importance of community. As the results demonstrate, using bridging capital and ways to amplify bridging participatory processes that seek to provide capital through meaningful partnerships. We reciprocal benefits for the university and think this approach aligns with what Olson and community can build social capital. Through Brennan (2017) describe as “development in bridging with the community, the local context community” (p. 14) that leads to an became a central part of the curriculum in enhancement of human and social capital. We preparing our future teachers. To examine the also hope that our preservice teachers will long-term impacts of the service-learning engage with the participatory process, either experiences on these future teachers, we are by initiating conversations or being part of exploring opportunities to conduct long- conversations, allowing for even more robust itudinal research because we want to examine connections across the community. This will whether these community-engaged exper- require teachers to think beyond their school’s iences have influenced their thinking about grounds and to put themselves out into the how they engage with their communities in community, a community which may be very their current teaching positions. different from their own lived experiences. As our work continues with the After all, as Putnam (2000) notes, “To build community partners described in this study, bridging social capital requires that we we strive to be responsive to community transcend our social and political and needs. In order to be more responsive, we professional identities to connect with people intend to systematically revisit the foundations unlike ourselves” (p. 411). of our partnerships to further explore how we In order to better prepare our can continue to create social capital because preservice teachers to connect with others and our partnerships illustrate the importance of build relationships, we have begun to concept- context. Our partnerships allow us to more tualize our work through the lens of cultural fully recognize and understand community humility. Cultural humility is a “stance where needs, and our partnerships empower us to critically-minded individuals are persistently amplify social capital to advance the public self-aware and self-reflective when interacting good. with others in order to be attentive to culture,

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2

References mining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-130. Barnes, M. E. (2016). The student as teacher Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Quali- educator in service-learning. Journal tative inquiry and research design: of Experiential Education, 39(3), 238- Choosing among five approaches (4th 253. ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publi- Benaquisto, L. (2008). Open coding. In L. cations. Given (Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of D’Agostino, M. J. (2010). Measuring social qualitative research methods, Vol. 2 capital as an outcome of service- (pp. 582-583). Thousand Oaks, CA: learning. Innovative Higher Educa- Sage Publications. tion, 35(5), 313-328. Bloomgarden, A., Bombardier, M., Breitbart, Duncan, G., & Murnane, J. (2011). Introduc- M. M., Nagel, K., & Smith, P. H. tion: The American dream, then and (2006). Building sustainable commu- now. In G. Duncan & J. Murnane nity/university partnerships in a (Eds.), Whither opportunity? (pp. 4- metropolitan setting. In R. Forrant & 23). New York, NY: Russell Sage L. Silka (Eds.), Inside and out: Foundation. Universities and education for sustain- Enos, S., & Morton, K. (2003). Developing a able development (pp. 105-118). New theory and practice of campus com- York, NY: Baywood Publishing Com- munity partnerships. In B. Jacoby & pany. Associates (Eds.), Building par- Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In tnerships for service-learning (pp. 20- J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of 41). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. theory and research for the sociology Farr, J. (2004). Social capital a conceptual of education (pp. 241-258). New York, history. Political Theory, 32(1), 6-33. NY: Greenwood Press. Ferlazzo, L. (2011). Involvement or Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded engagement. Educational Leadership, theory: A practical guide through 68(8), 10-14. qualitative analysis. London, UK: Gilgun, J. F. (2005). Qualitative research and Sage Publications. family psychology. Journal of Family Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the Psychology, 19(1), 40-50. creation of human capital. American Gimbert, B. (2010). Partnerships, community Journal of Sociology, 94, 95-120. engagement, and teacher education: Coleman, K., & Danks, C. (2016). Service- Preparing the community teacher. learning: A tool to create social capital Teacher Education and Practice, for collaborative natural resource 23(3), 355-358. management. Journal of Environ- Hampshire, P. K., Havercroft, K., Luy, M., & mental Studies and Sciences, 6(3), Call, J. (2015). Confronting assump- 470-478. tions: Service-learning as a medium Constantino, T. E. (2008). Dialogue. In L. for preparing early childhood special Given (Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of education preservice teachers to work qualitative research methods, Vol. 2 with families. Teacher Education (pp. 212-213). Thousand Oaks, CA: Quarterly, 42(1), 83-96. Sage Publications. Hanifan, L. J. (1916). The rural school Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Deter- community center. Annals of the 56

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2

American Academy of Political and (2005). Inside a student cohort: Teac- Social Science, 67, 130-138. her education from a social capital Harry, B., Sturges, K., & Klingner, J. (2005). perspective. Canadian Journal of Edu- Mapping the process: An exemplar of cation/Revue canadienne de l'edu- process and challenge in grounded cation, 28(1/2), 168-184. theory analysis. Educational Researc- Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: her, 34(2), 3-13. A guide to design and implementation. Hildenbrand, S. M., & Schultz, S. M. (2015). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Implementing service-learning in pre- Miles, M., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. service teacher coursework. Journal of (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A Experiential Education, 38(3), 262- methods sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, 279. CA: Sage Publications. Hoffman, A. J. (2011). Community-based Miles, R. (2015). Complexity, representation learning and social capital: Exploring and practice: Case study as method and student attitudes and perceptions of methodology. Issues in Educational connectedness to campus and diverse Research, 25(3), 309-318. communities. Journal of Community Noel, J. (2010). Weaving teacher education Engagement & Higher Educa- into the fabric of urban schools and tion, 3(1), 1-10. communities. Teacher Education Howard, R. W. (2006). Bending towards Quarterly, 37(3), 9-25. justice: Service‐learning and social Olson, B., & Brennan, M. (2017). From capital as means to the tipping point. community engagement to community Mentoring & Tutoring, 14(1), 5-15. emergence: The holistic program Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2010). design approach. The International Educational research: Quantitative, Journal of Research on Service- qualitative, and mixed approaches (4th Learning and Community Engage- ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Pub- ment, 5(1), 5-19. lications. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research Kahne, J., Chi, B., & Middaugh, E. (2006). and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Building social capital for civic and Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publica- political engagement: The potential of tions. high-school civics courses. Canadian Pedler, M., & Attwood, M. (2011). Action Journal of Education/Revue canad- learning and social capital. In M. ienne de l'éducation, 29(2), 387-409. Pedler (Ed.), Action learning in Koliba, C. J. (2003). Generating social capital practice (pp. 313-324). Farnum, SRY, in schools through service-learning. UK: Gower Publishing. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 7(2), Penuel, W., Riel, M., Krause, A., & Frank, K. 336-346. (2009). Analyzing teachers’ professio- Lund, D., & Lianne, L. (2015). Fostering nal interactions in a school as social cultural humility among preservice capital: A social network approach. teachers: Connecting with children and The Teachers College Record, 111(1), youth of immigrant families through 124-163. service-learning. Canadian Journal of Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The Education, 38(2), n2, 1-30. collapse and revival of American Mandzuk, D., Hasinoff, S., & Seifert, K. 57

Journal of Community Engagement and Higher Education Volume 12, Number 2

community. New York, NY: Simon & Outreach and Engagement, 18(2), Schuster. 209-232. Reed, W. A. (2004). A tree grows in Brooklyn: Tinkler, A., Tinkler, B., Hausman, E., & Tufo- Schools of education as brokers of Strouse, G. (2014). Key elements of social capital in low-income neigh- effective service-learning partnerships borhoods. In J. L. Kincheloe, A. from the perspective of community Bursztyn, & S. R. Steinberg (Eds.), partners. Partnerships: A Journal of Teaching teachers: Building a quality Service-Learning and Civic Engage- school of urban education (pp. 65-90). ment, 5(2), 137-152. New York, NY: Peter Lang. Vernon, A., & Foster, L. (2002). Community Simpson, C. G., & Patterson, G. C. (2018). agency perspectives in higher educa- Connecting pedagogy, preparation, tion service-learning and volun- and passion: An engaging approach to teerism. In S. Billig & A. Furco (Eds.), preparing leadership and advocacy Service-learning through a multi- skills in preservice teacher education. disciplinary lens: Advances in service- In J. Keengwe (Ed.), Handbook of learning research (pp. 53-175). research on pedagogical models for Charlotte, NC: Information Age Pub- next-generation teaching and learn- lishing. ing (pp. 233-248). Hershey, PA: IGI Yeh, T. L. (2010). Service-learning and Global. persistence of low-income, first-gener- Stoecker, R. (2005). Research methods for ation college students: An exploratory community change: A project-based study. Michigan Journal of Comm- approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage unity Service-learning, 16(2), 50-65. Publications. Tinkler, A. S., & Tinkler, B. (2016). Enhanc- Author Note ing cultural humility through critical service-learning in teacher prepar- Alan Tinkler, English Department; ation. Multicultural Barri Tinkler, Education Department, Miss- Perspectives, 18(4), 192-201. ouri State University. Tinkler, A., Tinkler, B., Gerstl-Pepin, C., & Correspondence concerning this article Mugisha, V. M. (2014). The promise should be addressed to Alan Tinkler, Missouri of a community-based, participatory State University, Department of English, 901 approach to service-learning in edu- S. National Avenue, Springfield, MO 65897. cation. Journal of Higher Education Email: [email protected]