Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning Spring 2016, pp.5-15

Pragmatism, Pedagogy, and Community Service Learning

Scot D. Yoder Michigan State University

In this paper I explore Goodwin Liu’s proposal to ground the pedagogy of service-learning in the epistemol - ogy of pragmatism from the perspective of a reflective practitioner. I review Liu’s epistemology and his claim that from within it three features common to service-learning – community, diversity, and engagement – become pedagogical virtues. I then describe an international community service learning program and use it to illustrate the role that these virtues might play. I then argue that Liu’s proposal needs to be amended in two ways: he needs to use his pragmatism to rethink the connection between epistemology and pedagogy, and he needs to acknowledge the normative implications of his approach by aligning pragmatism with crit - ical approaches to community service learning.

In “Knowledge, Foundations, and Discourse: virtues might manifest themselves in practice. In the Philosophical Support for Service-Learning,” final two sections I critique Liu’s framework in light Goodwin Liu (1995) proposes that we ground the of both philosophical reflection and my experience pedagogy of service-learning in the epistemology of with the international community service learning pragmatism. His article is largely theoretical, howev - program. The goal is to better understand both the er, developing pragmatism as an alternative to the tra - benefits and limitations of adopting pragmatism as a ditional representational model of epistemology and pedagogical framework for community service learn - only briefly exploring the implications for communi - ing. While I am sympathetic to his proposal to adopt ty service learning. Noting this limitation, he claims pragmatism, I argue that his proposal needs to be that he had “gone only halfway starting from one amended in at least two respects. In the third section end” (p. 16), and invites others with more practical I argue that Liu needs to use his pragmatism to recon - experience to assess the relevance of his alternative ceptualize the relationship between epistemology epistemology. In this paper I accept Liu’s invitation, and pedagogy. More specifically, because he presents exploring his proposal from the standpoint of a pragmatism as an alternative epistemology and reflective practitioner, a philosopher, and pragmatist makes pedagogy dependent upon epistemology, he who has developed and taught international commu - unnecessarily limits the way in which community, nity service learning programs. Over the past decade diversity, and engagement might be realized as peda - I have led or co-led eight educational programs in gogical virtues. In the fourth section I argue that Liu Costa Rica ranging from 1-week alternative spring needs to more fully develop the normative implica - break experiences to 8-week study abroad programs tions of pragmatism and explicitly align his pragmat - involving intensive language instruction and immer - ic epistemology with a “critical” approach to com - sion, ethics coursework, and community service munity service learning (Mitchell, 2008) that entails learning. 1 These programs have provided a signifi - a social justice goal. cant base of practical experience with which to explore the implications of Liu’s pragmatic frame - Theory: Liu’s Pragmatic Epistemology work for community service learning. and the Pedagogy of Community Because I view this as an exercise in reflective Service Learning practice, I will tack back and forth between theory and practice. In the first section I review Liu’s episte - A number of other authors in this and other journals mological framework of pragmatism and its implica - have noted the connections between pragmatism and tions for the pedagogy of community service learn - community service learning (Crabtree, 2008; Deans, ing, paying particular attention to his proposal that 1999; Esquith, 2000; Green, 2000; Hatcher, 1997; we adopt community, engagement, and diversity as Hatcher & Erasmus, 2008; Lisman, 2000; Saltmarsh, pedagogical virtues. In the second section I describe 1996; Tucker, 1999), and others have argued that the a study abroad program that incorporates community increased attention being given to values, service, service learning, using it to illustrate how these community, and citizenship in American liberal edu -

5 Yoder cation is evidence of the influence of a shift toward foundation, but revisable standards based on shared pragmatism in higher education (Kimball & Orrill, norms internal to the conversation itself. Third, 1995). What makes Liu’s work unique is the combi - because knowledge is the product of a conversation nation of two important claims: (a) that pedagogy with internal standards, knowledge itself is always must depend on epistemology, and (b) that we need a contextual and provisional. Finally, when knowledge paradigm shift in the epistemological frame of refer - is understood as the product of conversation, the goals ence away from the representationalism that currently of inquiry themselves change. As an epistemological undergirds higher education toward pragmatism. framework, Liu claims, “pragmatism shifts our epis - Liu argues that traditional academia operates with - temological aspiration from finding objective truth to in a representational epistemological framework sustaining a meaningful conversation” (p. 12). 2 inherited from Western post-Enlightenment philoso - According to Liu, adopting the epistemological phy, but largely traceable back to René Descartes. framework of pragmatism has important pedagogical This framework is based on the twin pillars of foun - implications for teaching and learning. In particular, dationalism and dualism. Foundationalism is seen in three features associated with service learning – the various attempts to find and articulate “the epis - community, diversity, and engagement – become temological bedrock from which we can make a pedagogical virtues. Though he does not explain pre - claim to knowledge with absolute certitude” (p. 6). cisely what he means by pedagogical virtues, it is The aspiration is to construct a system of certain clear in this context that Liu is referring to desirable knowledge from these foundations using established attributes of educational programs or institutions rules of inference to justify new claims to knowledge. rather than attributes or excellences of individual Dualism is seen in the separation of the knower from teachers. In other words, his pedagogical virtues are the objects of knowledge. Liu traces this back to institutional, rather than individual virtues. In this he Descartes’ separation of mind and body, which priv - seems to be referring to community, diversity, and ileges the mind – the “I” that thinks or knows – over engagement as virtues in much the same way Rawls the body – the external world that is to be known. (1971) referred to justice as “the first virtue of social This dualism generates the problem of skepticism. institutions” (Rawls, 1971, p. 3). 3 Within this representational framework the problem Community becomes an important virtue because of knowledge becomes the problem of knowing it serves as a bulwark against a free-fall toward rela - whether our inner representations accurately repre - tivism that is often imagined to be the inevitable result sent, mirror, or correspond to objects in the external of abandoning the certitude of foundationalism. world. “How,” Liu asks, “is knowledge of the outer, Relativism is constrained because conversation does external world possible when our only certain knowl - not happen alone but in community. “Individuals in edge is of our inner ideas and sensations?” (p. 6). isolation are not entitled to legitimize knowledge; that In contrast, the epistemological framework of prag - function is reserved for communities in which truth matism rejects representationalism and its pillars of claims are continually tested and contested in the con - foundationalism and dualism. Drawing on the work of text of discourse” (p. 14, emphasis in the original). pragmatists Richard Rorty and Cornell West, Liu Referencing a personal correspondence with argues that ideas are not representations of reality, but Benjamin Barber, Liu uses the metaphor of a valley to tools for coping with it. “[P]ragmatism,” he writes, suggest how the virtue of community addresses the “centers our epistemic concerns not on how well slippery slope of relativism. Rather than thinking of knowledge claims can circumvent skepticism but on the slope as a mountain with absolutism at the top and how well they ‘work’ in particular contexts for partic - rampant relativism at the bottom, the metaphor ular people with particular purposes” (p. 12). Within encourages us to see the slope as the sides of a valley. this framework the problem of knowledge becomes Epistemologically the valley represents not so much not one of accurately representing reality , but of justi - the bottom of the slope, but the middle ground fying claims to know something in a particular context. between the surrounding peaks of absolutism and rel - Understanding the problem of knowledge as one of ativism. “Philosophically, we locate this middle by justification rather than representation has several understanding knowledge in the context of conversa - implications. First, it means that knowledge is under - tion, and pedagogically, we find it by putting teaching stood as a product of discourse. It is not “discovered,” and learning in the context of community” (p. 14). but rather “created” through a conversation in which While community is essential for discourse, the persons make and justify claims. “What counts as composition of the community and the way the inter - knowledge” Liu writes, “is understood as a function action is managed determines the quality of the dis - of conversation and its standards of justification” (p. course. More specifically, diversity among the partic - 9). Second, the standards to which participants appeal ipants strengthens the legitimacy of truth claims by are not external standards grounded on an ultimate increasing the probability that a range of voices and

6 Pragmatism, Pedagogy, and Community Service Learning interpretations will be heard. Moreover, it leads to into one of Costa Rica’s leading economic sectors. “creative conflict” that generates new discourse, and While the country is famous for ecotourism, several thus new knowledge. In this way, diversity becomes forms of alternative tourism – including volunteer a “bulwark against dogmatism” (p. 14). However, tourism, educational tourism, and community rural while it is a precondition of learning, diversity alone tourism – also have rapidly developed. is insufficient. The diversity must be effectively man - The 8-week program is divided into two 4-week aged so that participants in the conversation do not segments. During the first segment the students live merely talk past one another. This means that they with families in the community of Santa Ana and must attempt to listen and understand the alternative take intensive Spanish classes taught by Costa Rican views and perspectives that the voices express. instructors at a local language school 4, as well as two Finally, engagement becomes a virtue because it courses taught by RCAH faculty. One is an ethics provides a “counterweight” to dualism. According to course focused on tourism and sustainable develop - Liu, the dualism of representational epistemology ment. The other is a course exploring the principles, engenders a spectator theory of knowledge that sep - methods, and meaning of community engagement, arates perception from reality. This separation is, in and prepares students to work collaboratively in com - part, an attempt to remove elements of subjectivity munities. Together the courses are designed to pre - from the production of knowledge. However, from pare students to engage with communities on pro - this separation, he argues, “it is a short stretch to sep - jects related to sustainability and tourism. aration of student and subject, campus and commu - At the end of the first 4-week period, we divide the nity, education and the real world” (p. 15). In con - group into smaller groups of 2-4 students and dis - trast, pragmatism replaces the notion of knowers as perse them to small communities throughout the disinterested spectators of the world with the notion country to live with families and work with commu - of knowers as agents acting in the world. As a result, nity partners on a variety of community rural tourism knowledge is understood as “concrete, purposive, projects for the next 4 weeks. To date we have worked and contextual” (p. 15). Ideas are not representations with 8 different communities at various stages in the of the world, but tools for coping or making our way development of tourism. 5 During this second 4-week in it. This calls for a pedagogy “that is distinctively period, my colleague and I visit each community to relational – a way of teaching and learning that nar - work with students and maintain relationships with rows the gap between abstraction and circumstance, community partners. Finally, at some point during between theory and practice, between knowing and this segment of the course, the students reunite at a doing, between the knower and the known” (p. 15). single location for a few days to debrief and work on their final projects, 6 which consist of three overlap - ping essays: (a) describing the community and the Practice: Ethics in Tourism and Sustainable project on which the student worked, (b) analyzing the projects using the core concepts of sustainable Development in Costa Rica development, and (c) defining a question related to Ethics in Tourism and Sustainable Development is tourism or community engagement that might serve sponsored by the Residential College in the Arts and as the basis for further research. Humanities (RCAH) at Michigan State University While we did not develop Ethics in Tourism and and has run five times since 2009, with groups rang - Sustainable Development program with Liu’s episte - ing from 6-16 students. I co-lead this program with mological framework in mind, in fact community, Vincent Delgado. The RCAH is a unique interdisci - diversity, and engagement have emerged as central plinary arts and humanities program that emphasizes features of the program. For this reason reflecting on world languages and cultures, critical thinking, cre - the program provides an excellent opportunity to ativity, ethics, and civic engagement. The goal of this explore Liu’s claim that they become pedagogical program is to help students not only deepen their aca - virtues in the context of community service learning. demic understanding of arts and humanities, but also The decision to design a program that included to learn the skills necessary to put that understanding community service learning as well as language and into practice within communities. The study abroad cultural immersion dictated that community would program focuses on the ethics of development and be a central feature of the program from the outset. It the important role that tourism plays in Costa Rica’s also meant that the features of community and sustainable development strategy. With natural beau - engagement would be tied closely together. We want - ty, incredible biological diversity, a high rate of liter - ed students not only to live in their host communities, acy, and a stable democracy, Costa Rica has become but to be part of those communities as well. While it a popular destination for international tourists. Many would be hard to enumerate all the ways this has large resorts have been built and tourism has grown played out in the design and implementation of the

7 Yoder program, a few of the more prominent are worth bers the opportunity to critically reflect with our stu - mentioning here. First, we insist that students live dents. While the students complete the assignment in with host families throughout their time in Costa English, we provide the communities with a summary Rica and that those host families have only one stu - of the student projects translated into Spanish. dent living with each of them. Second, we place only Diversity arises in many ways, some fully antici - 2-4 students in each community during the second pated and predictable, others unanticipated and half of the program when students are living in and unpredictable. Placing U.S. students in Costa Rican working with communities. The communities in communities almost assures cultural, ethnic, and lin - which our students live during this segment of the guistic diversity. However, there is also socio-eco - program are all small rural communities and most nomic, educational, and age diversity both within and would not have the capacity to accommodate a larger between the communities. The students live in a number of students with a 1-student-per-household largely urban community for the first four weeks and policy. Just as important, placing more than 4 stu - in relatively isolated rural communities for the sec - dents in any given community for this period of time ond four weeks. Other forms of diversity are less would be quite disruptive; accommodating the stu - expected. As they engage with community organiz - dents would, out of necessity, become the temporary ers, their host families, and other members of the focus of the community. The smaller number allows community, students often encounter multiple and the community to continue its normal activity and sometimes conflicting narratives about the commu - integrate students more easily into the daily ebb and nity and the impact of tourism. flow of community life. It also encourages students Diversity is also educationally valuable. It is per - to develop strong relationships with their Costa haps easiest to see the virtue of diversity that results Rican partners 7 rather than with just their classmates. from living and studying in a different culture. In the Student engagement is designed to help communi - context of a completely new culture even an everyday ties move forward with community rural tourism. experience such as a trip to the market, a visit to the Some of the work is consistent across communities. doctor’s office, or a conversation with a host family For instance, in most of the communities students over dinner can raise interesting cultural, ethical, and teach English to improve the capacity of the commu - philosophical questions. Just as important, experi - nity to serve international tourists. While teaching encing a new culture allows students to consider their English was not part of our initial plan for the pro - own culture in fresh ways. Importantly, they often see gram, it quickly became apparent that this was a features that they had previously thought were givens common need and that we could serve our communi - in all cultures as contingent features of their particu - ties better by preparing students to do it. Students lar culture. 8 This “unfreezing” guards against dogma - also work on projects that vary significantly depend - tism and promotes critical thinking. ing on the needs of the individual community. Some While one must be careful not to draw too many students develop websites and promotional materials conclusions from limited data, our experience illus - while others help assess potential tourism projects trates how we might adopt community, diversity, and from the perspective of North American tourists. Still engagement as pedagogical virtues for community others design signage, maintain trails and facilities, service learning. Indeed, much of what we have per - work in schools, and organize activities for youth. ceived as valuable in our program can be understood Sharing information and being as transparent as as the result of emphasizing community, diversity, and possible greatly facilitates engagement. We hold a 1- engagement. However, a closer critical look at Liu’s day summit with students and community partners proposal suggests that it should be amended in two before making placements. This gives students the important ways. First, Liu should reconceptualize the opportunity to learn about the communities, the type relationship between epistemology and pedagogy to of challenges they face, and the projects students realize the full pedagogical value of the virtues he rec - might be involved with if placed there; and it gives ommends. Second, Liu needs to more fully develop community partners an opportunity to get to know the the normative implications of pragmatism and explic - students, understand their skills and interests, and itly align his pragmatic framework with a “critical” assess their level of Spanish language competency. approach to community service learning (Mitchell, This summit not only prepares everyone involved, but 2008) that entails a social justice goal. it actually begins the engagement process. We also translate the instructions for the final assignment and Pragmatism, Epistemology, and Pedagogy share them with our community partners so that they know what type of questions students may be asking, Liu’s choice of pragmatists to invoke in order to why they are asking them, and what information they defend a pedagogy of community service learning is may be asked to provide. This gives community mem - both puzzling and ironic. It is puzzling that he does

8 Pragmatism, Pedagogy, and Community Service Learning not draw on John Dewey, who more than any other mology for community service learning and (b) that pragmatist is known for philosophy of education. It is an epistemology is a prerequisite for a pedagogical ironic in that the two pragmatists he cites to present philosophy. Liu’s most direct critics have challenged pragmatism as an alternative epistemology, Rorty and at least one of these two assumptions (Richman, West, both take pragmatism as a rejection of episte - 1996; Tucker, 1999) and exploring their responses mology-centered philosophy. In his seminal work, sheds light on the limitations of his strategy. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature , Rorty draws on Kenneth Richman (1996) agrees with Liu that an pragmatism to mount a devastating critique not only adequate pedagogy must be supported by an episte - of representationalism but of the whole enterprise of mology, arguing that a method of teaching is a epistemology (1979), and a persistent theme through - method of “increasing knowledge” and thus requires out subsequent essays is his claim that philosophers an “account of what knowledge is and how it is should give up doing epistemology altogether (1982, acquired and tested” (p. 5). He also seems willing to 1991). Invoking a similar theme, West titled his histor - accept pragmatism as a legitimate community-based, ical analysis of pragmatism, The American Evasion of non-foundationalist epistemology, but argues that it Philosophy: A Genealogy of Pragmatism , to empha - cannot be used to justify the pedagogy of community size the point that many pragmatists sought to avoid service learning, except in very limited circum - doing epistemology, and that this led them to question stances. The reason for this is that to be plausible and re-envision the profession of philosophy itself. such epistemologies must limit the community of According to West, “the evasion of epistemology-cen - inquiry to the community of experts on the subject tered philosophy – from Emerson to Rorty – results in matter in question, e.g., scholarly or professional a conception of philosophy as a form of cultural crit - communities that share a common body of knowl - icism in which the meaning of America is put forward edge, training, methods, values, and traditions, all of by intellectuals in response to distinct social and cul - which contribute to the rules for discourse that pro - tural crises” (1989, p. 5). duce knowledge. However, he argues that in the con - Nevertheless, while his choice of pragmatists is text of community service learning in which the puzzling, Liu is not alone in suggesting that pragma - community of inquiry includes members of the com - tism may have something more positive to say about munity being served, this requirement is not met. epistemology. 9 Indeed, many pragmatists – for exam - ple, C.F. Pierce, John Dewey, W. V. O. Quine, and Even if the pragmatist’s dialogue-based model Hilary Putnam – have taken up epistemological con - best captures the way claims achieve the status cerns from a distinct perspective (see, for example, of knowledge in communities, the members of Dewey, 1920, 1938; Dewey & Bentley, 1949; Peirce, communities served by service-learning initia - 1955a, 1955b, 1955c; Putnam, 1987, 1990; Quine, tives do not have a place in the dialogue about 1980, 1982), and while it would be a misrepresenta - most subjects. They are simply not the commu - nities whose conversations determine what is tion to say that there is consensus on a precise episte - knowledge in these areas. (p. 9) mology, the contours of a general pragmatic perspec - tive – anti-representationalism, anti-skepticism, As a result, pragmatism can support a pedagogy of instrumentalism, and fallibilism – are relatively well- community service learning only in those cases in defined. Liu’s pragmatic framework fits comfortably which the members of the community being served within these contours. can be considered experts (e.g., on their own experi - Liu is explicit on his reasons for offering pragma - ences, such as the difficulties they face in employ - tism as an epistemological framework for community ment, health care, etc.) or on subjects on which there service learning. are no experts. This severely limits the range of I believe service-learning will continue to be courses that could be offered. There may be value in viewed suspiciously in academia as long as we doing service in the community, but if the practice speak of it as an alternative pedagogy without does not involve knowledge production by a commu - clarifying the nature of its underlying epistemol - nity of experts it is not learning, and thus, not appro - ogy. For the most part, we have been making priately thought of as a pedagogy – i.e., a method of arguments for a change in pedagogy without the teaching – at all. The implication is that service is not support of arguments for a change in epistemol - part of the central mission of higher education. ogy. The premise of this article is that education While Robert Tucker (1999) is also critical of Liu’s takes place within an epistemological frame: If proposal, his critique comes from a very different we wish to rethink the way we teach and learn, direction. While he wants community service learn - then we need to rethink the way we know. (p. 5) ing practitioners to adopt a pragmatic perspective, he His argument, thus, rests on two important assump - rejects the claim made by both Liu and Richman that tions: (a) that pragmatism offers an adequate episte - a pedagogy of community service learning must be

9 Yoder based in an epistemology. The pedagogy of commu - Despite his advocacy of pragmatism, Liu himself nity service learning is not justified by its epistemo - seems held hostage by both epistemology and dual - logical foundation, he argues, but by the impact it has ism, and as a result fails to radically reconceptualize on students and communities. Assuming that a peda - the relationship between epistemology and pedagogy. gogy must be grounded in an epistemology is “a In contrast to representationalism, which depicts the most unpragmatic assumption. Service-learning will knower as an impartial and disinterested spectator of stand or fall on its merits. If our programs are effec - the world, pragmatism sees the knower as a purposeful tive, the fact that we share no systematic and agreed agent engaged in the world. What is known can never upon epistemology will be irrelevant” (p. 9). There be fully separated from the purposes for which it is are multiple goals that we may be trying to achieve known; facts cannot be fully separated from values; through our programs, and most of them are not knowing cannot be fully separated from doing. Thus, knowledge-centered. “Among our varied goals are it is not possible to draw a clear distinction between the the reinvigoration of civic education, the inculcation traditional epistemological goals that Richman identi - of social responsibility, the amelioration of injustice, fies as the proper subjects of pedagogical concern and and the integration of colleges and universities with the broad social and political aims that Tucker identi - the community in which they are located” (p. 12). fies as the goals of community service learning. Each With a nod toward Rorty and West, he argues that implicates the other. Unfortunately, because Liu pre - adopting a pragmatic perspective provides pedagogi - sents pragmatism as an epistemological framework cal support for community service learning not and argues that pedagogy depends on epistemology, he because it provides an epistemological foundation, does not fully acknowledge this or grasp the pedagog - but precisely because it encourages practitioners to ical implications. Shifting the aims of epistemology avoid epistemology and get on with promoting these only slightly from finding objective truth to providing non-epistemological goals. More specifically, prag - justification, and couching justification in terms of matism encourages practitioners to adopt a respect discourse, confines his notion of pedagogy to the for disciplinary diversity, innovative experimental - realm of making and justifying knowledge claims. He ism, and progressive thought and action. either needs to acknowledge that pragmatism calls for Despite Richman and Tucker’s significant differ - an even more radical redefinition of epistemology or ences with Liu and each other, underlying both their that pedagogy must encompass much more than critiques is a shared version of the dualism that Liu addressing knowledge claims. finds objectionable in representational epistemology. An example of how pragmatism might be used to It is a dualism that separates knowing from doing, the expand the notion of pedagogy can be seen in the known from the knower, thought from action, and work Saltmarsh and Hartley have done on what they facts from values. This dualism is implied in call “democratic engagement” (Saltmarsh & Hartley, Richman’s critique of Liu’s proposal and ultimately of 2011). The contrast they draw between “civic community service learning. To the extent that com - engagement” and that of “democratic engagement” munity service learning is about learning – which closely mirrors the distinction Liu makes between Richman understands as acquiring and testing knowl - traditional, representational epistemology and prag - edge – it is very limited; to the extent that it is about matic epistemology. What is important to note is that service, which he sees as doing rather than knowing, it Saltmarsh and Hartley describe these two frame - is not part of the central mission of higher education. works in terms of both contrasting aims and contrast - The effect is to marginalize community service learn - ing epistemologies. Civic engagement, they argue, is ing. In his attempt to defend community service learn - a type of apolitical engagement that aims at ing, Tucker also seems to implicitly accept a version of “[k]nowledge generation and dissemination through this dualism. He finds Liu’s proposal misguided as a community involvement,” whereas democratic defense of community service learning programs engagement “facilitates an inclusive, collaborative, because it depicts such programs as aimed at acquiring and deliberative democracy,” and aims at “[c]ommu - knowledge when they should be understood and val - nity change that results from the cocreation of knowl - ued as a means of accomplishing non-epistemological edge.” The epistemology of civic engagement is goals. In other words, their disagreement regarding the “[p]ositivist, scientific, technocratic,” emphasizes the adequacy of a pragmatic pedagogy is less about epis - primacy of academic knowledge, and makes a dis - temology than it is about the scope of practices to tinction between “knowledge producers and knowl - which the concept of pedagogy should be applied. It is edge consumers.” In contrast, the epistemology of about what we are to achieve in our work with stu - democratic engagement is “[r]elational, localized, dents. Both Richman and Tucker assume that peda - contextual,” and emphasizes the “[s]hared authority gogy is about educational practice, but they disagree for knowledge creation” and the “cocreation of about the scope and nature of education. knowledge” (p. 22). Saltmarsh and Hartley’s democ -

10 Pragmatism, Pedagogy, and Community Service Learning ratic engagement reflects a pragmatic approach that the impetus to focus on community issues related to resists the distinction between knowing and doing, tourism. Our community partners consistently report and promotes the idea that what we know and how that while the actual work that students do is helpful, we know cannot be divorced from why we know – the most important contributions students make that is, the aims of inquiry. This suggests a more result from the questions they ask and the conversa - inclusive or expansive notion of pedagogy. tions they initiate. When students ask, for instance, One advantage of adopting a more expansive about the economic, cultural, and environmental notion of pedagogy is that it would allow us to more impacts of tourism on the community, community fully realize the pedagogical virtues that Liu espouses. members are led to think carefully about the impacts Freed from the traditional understanding of knowl - of their tourism practices and to articulate their goals edge production, the fuller value of the virtues of and concerns. Moreover, we often hear that as they community service learning becomes more evident. engage with students in these conversations, commu - Most of the students in our study abroad program nity members engage with one another and in the clearly value community, engagement, and diversity. process identify shared goals and concerns. Indeed, many choose to participate in this particular While the expected diversity that students program specifically because it affords rich opportu - encounter has the educational benefits mentioned nities for cultural immersion and community engage - previously, the value of the less anticipated and often ment. However, it is not clear that students perceive unpredictable diversity that they encounter while liv - them as pedagogical virtues. It would be more accu - ing and working in their communities is more diffi - rate to say that they understand them more as moral cult to perceive because it is often experienced in the values that express something about what type of trav - context of conflict. Despite our warnings, students eler they want to be, what types of experiences they are often surprised when they encounter conflicting want to have, and their desire to have a positive impact understandings of their host community, goals of its on the world. Because pragmatism blurs the distinc - tourism efforts, accounts of its history, and visions tion between fact and value, it also blurs this distinc - for its future. These differences are often embedded tion between pedagogical and moral virtues. in personal, social, and political conflicts within the Consider the virtue of community. In class, stu - community. Being witness to this conflict creates a dents learn that the academic discourse on sustain - great deal of anxiety for students who frequently per - able development invokes notions such as economic, ceive the conflict as “noise” that prevents them from cultural, and environmental sustainability. They getting to “the real” truth rather than “creative con - explore questions such as, “What does it mean to dis - flict” that helps them construct a fuller truth. tribute the economic benefits of tourism fairly and Nevertheless, despite their discomfort, an awareness how is that related to long-term economic sustain - of conflict engenders a healthy skepticism toward ability?” “What is cultural sustainability, and how first impressions and simple storylines, and helps might tourism either promote or hinder it?” “What them begin to piece together a more complex and environmental challenges do different forms of nuanced narrative that helps them understand the tourism create?” Living and working in their commu - community more deeply. nities, students test these concepts by asking these questions not about communities in the abstract, but Justice as a Pedagogical Virtue about one community in particular. They come to understand these questions as problems encountered The claim that pragmatism refuses to separate nor - by people they know, and learn that potential solu - mative from epistemological aims thus suggests that tions must be viewed in light of both moral and prac - we cannot fully distinguish between moral and epis - tical implications that are difficult, if not impossible, temological virtues, and that a more expansive notion to disentangle. Finally, they also find that while there of pedagogy is required. I have tried to argue that might not be clear answers, within the context of their adopting this more expansive notion of pedagogy particular community there are limits to what will would help us realize the pedagogical value of com - count as acceptable responses. munity, engagement, and diversity in community ser - Engagement is educationally valuable to both our vice learning programs. In this final section I want to students and communities, particularly if it is con - argue that fully acknowledging the normative impli - trasted with observation. For students, the emphasis cations of pragmatism should lead Liu toward adding on engagement can remind them that they are not justice to his list of pedagogical virtues. This is rele - simply to learn about communities, but to learn from vant to the ongoing debates about two contrasting and with them. They also learn that what they can approaches to community service learning. To illus - contribute is not limited to what they know. For com - trate why this is particularly important, I provide an munities, the very presence of students can provide example from the program.

11 Yoder While thus far I have spoken as if each of the com - educational opportunities. The organization has also munities with which we work is a singular entity, in procured funding to relocate several homes that are one location we essentially work with two communi - built right next to the river and pose an environmental ties, what I will call Community A and Community threat to the watershed. However, members of B for the sake of anonymity. The two communities Community B tell a much different story. Their story are located along the same river and connected by a is one of appropriated land, unfulfilled promises of rough unpaved road, with Community A located sev - economic development and employment, and coerced eral kilometers downstream from community B. The displacement from homes in the name of promoting distance between the two, however, is more than tourism. To get to know the communities in which physical. Members of Community A have greater they live and work, students need to sort through these access to financial, educational, and political stories and weave together a fuller narrative. They also resources. There is a large coffee company, both an must carefully negotiate the social environment so as elementary and high school, and a paved road con - not to alienate either group. It is not the most comfort - necting the town to other towns and cities. A bus able of situations for the students. route to the town makes it possible for people to trav - The details of this story are unique, but its general el and work in the capital city of San Jose an hour contours are not uncommon. The frequency with away. Several members of the community are fairly which students encounter and are forced to navigate well connected politically and, as a result, have been conflict suggests that at the very least Liu needs to able to access regional, national, and international expand his proposal by providing a fuller account of resources. In contrast, Community B is accessible how the structures of power and privilege within only by the rough unpaved road and is more socially communities distort the discourse within which jus - isolated. There is a small elementary school, but to tification is supposed to take place. In fairness, he attend high school, students must walk approximate - seems to recognize this as an issue. Drawing on ly 30-45 minutes down the mountain to Community Barber’s work on political knowledge, he states that a A. While some members of the community are tradi - truth claim is legitimate only if it reflects a “consen - tional landowners, many are what might be called sus arising out of an undominated discourse” squatters with more tenuous property rights. (Barber, 1993, pp. 213-214 as cited in Liu, 1995, p. Compared to Community A, members of 15). However, when Liu writes of the need to manage Community B have little political voice at the region - diversity so that it deepens knowledge, he empha - al, much less national or international, levels. sizes only that we must understand discourse as a The community organization with which we offi - “combination of speaking and listening” and omits cially work is comprised primarily of members of any discussion of how we must attend to questions of Community A. With the help of international fund - power in order to understand when discourse is being ing, the organization started a significant community dominated. This is insufficient. I want to argue that rural tourism project several years ago. To protect the grounding community service learning in a pragmat - watershed, they purchased a large parcel of wooded ic pedagogy strongly suggests a “critical” approach land upriver, on the other side of community B, to to community service learning, and that this requires operate as a forest reserve. In addition to the reserve, adding justice as a fourth pedagogical virtue. they built a small eco-lodge and visitor center to host Mitchell (2008) contrasts the “traditional” tourists and provide environmental education for approach to community service learning with the local schools and religious groups. While our stu - “critical” approach. While both approaches empha - dents work under the supervision of this organization size individual change and student development, from Community A, they often live with families in “critical service-learning pedagogy balances the stu - Community B because of the proximity of those fam - dent outcomes with an emphasis on social change” ilies to the eco-lodge and reserve. (p. 53). Whereas the traditional approach is apoliti - One result of this arrangement is that students hear cal, the critical approach to community service learn - quite contrasting narratives about the project. ing has an explicit aim of promoting social justice Members of Community A depict the project as a and is, thus, political in a broad sense. She argues that model example of sustainable development, one that the three primary elements of the critical approach uses income from tourism to support both environ - are (a) working to redistribute power amongst all par - mental protection and local economic development. ticipants, (b) developing authentic relationships, and Moreover, they argue that it has benefited (c) working from a social change perspective. This Community B in tangible ways. The road, while still contrast between traditional and critical approaches rough and unpaved, has been improved, a bridge con - closely parallels Saltmarsh and Hartley’s contrast necting two parts of the community has been con - between civic and democratic engagement discussed structed, and children have been provided with better in the previous section, as well as the contrast Deans

12 Pragmatism, Pedagogy, and Community Service Learning (1999) draws between the educational philosophies 4. that experience is the dynamic interaction of organism of John Dewey and Paulo Freire. and environment, resulting in a close interrelationship I am not arguing that adopting a pragmatic episte - between thought and action; mology logically entails adopting a critical approach 5. that the purpose of resolving doubts or solving prob - to community service learning. This would be too lems is intrinsic to all thought and inquiry; and 6. that all inquiry and thought are evaluative, and judg - strong of a claim. Indeed, many authors have noted ments about fact are no different from judgments about the troubled relationship between conflict, power, and value. knowledge in pragmatism (Collins, 2012; Decker, 3 2012; Esquith, 2000; Garnar, 2006; Hildreth, 2009; For more on the nature of institutional virtues see Fricker, 2010. Johnson, 2001; May, 2011; Ron, 2008). I am arguing 4 that without an account of how power can distort the CONVERSA, see http://www.conversa.com/ for discourse in which justification of truth claims takes more information. place, an account that can be found in Mitchell’s crit - 5 The communities are El Yüe (located in the southeast ical approach to community service learning or near Puerto Viejo); Nacienties Palmichal and Palmichal Saltmarsh and Hartley’s democratic engagement, the (located one hour southwest of the capital of San Jose); value of Liu’s pragmatic approach will not be real - Cedral de Mirimar (in the Montes de Oro in the province of Puntarenas); Santo Rosa/Cartagena (located on the east - ized. Such a move would, I believe, require adding ern coastal plain one hour from Guapiles); Tres Rios (locat - justice to his list of pedagogical virtues. ed on the southwest coast near Ojochal); and Canitas and San Luis (both located in the Monteverde region). Conclusion 6 We have experimented with doing this both at the end In this paper I have tried to respond to Goodwin of the four weeks and at the midpoint. It seems to work best Liu’s invitation to assess the relevance of his pragmatic at the midpoint. epistemology to a pedagogy of community service 7 We have adopted the SOFAR model of community learning from the perspective of a reflective practition - engagement partnerships (see Bringle, Clayton, & Price, er. These reflections are largely supportive of his pro - 2009; Bringle & Hatcher, 2002). posal. However, I also argue that a deeper understand - 8 Philosopher A. C. Grayling captured this phenome - ing of pragmatism should lead him to reconceptualize non well when he wrote, “It is well said that they know the relationship between epistemology and pedagogy nothing of their homelands who know only their home - and to more explicitly consider the normative implica - lands, which implies that to travel is to learn.” (Grayling, tions of a pragmatic framework for the pedagogy of 2011, p. 47). community service learning. In the spirit of communi - 9 William James noted that pragmatism was used to ty, diversity, and engagement, I, as with Liu, invite oth - address a wide range of issues, arguing that it “stands for ers to add their voices to the conversation in hopes of no particular results,” that it “has no dogmas, and no doc - arriving at even better justified conclusions. trines save its method” (James, 1975, p. 32). He goes on to compare it to a corridor in a hotel leading to many different Notes rooms. The occupants of the rooms may have different agendas, but they share the same corridor – i.e., pragma - tism “Innumerable chambers open out of it. In one you may 1 I use the term “community service learning” here find a man writing an atheistic volume; in the next some - inclusively to refer to a range of community-based learning one on his knees praying for faith and strength; in a third a experiences. While we use the terms “community engage - chemist investigating a body’s properties; in a fourth a sys - ment” or “civic engagement” in our programs, these terms tem of idealistic metaphysics is being excogitated; in a fifth are somewhat problematic in that they are also used to the impossibility of metaphysics is being shown. But they denote a certain type of citizenship that is independent of, all own the corridor, and all must pass through it if they but often the goal of, service-learning (Adler & Goggin, want a practical way of getting into or out of their respec - 2005; Prentice & Robinson, 2007). tive rooms” (p. 32). Seen in this light, Rorty and West’s 2 It is hard not to see the parallel between Liu’s call for anti-epistemological pragmatism occupies only a limited a shift toward pragmatic epistemology and Kimball’s number of rooms. Indeed, West admits that his reading of (1995) discussion of the rise of pragmatism in American pragmatism is selective, reflecting his interests in social liberal education. Kimball summaries the basic features of and political matters. It is, he writes, “an explicitly political pragmatism as follows: interpretation without, I hope, being pejoratively ideologi - 1. that belief and meaning, even truth itself, are fallible cal” (West, 1989, p. 6). and revisable; 2. that an experimental method of inquiry obtains in all References science and reflective thought; 3. that belief, meaning, and truth depend on the context Adler, R. P., & Goggin, J. (2005). What do we mean by and the intersubjective judgment of the community in "civic engagement"? Journal of Transformative which they are formed; Education , 3(3), 236-253.

13 Yoder Barber, B. R. (1993). An aristocracy of everyone . New Hildreth, R. W. (2009). Reconstructing dewey on power. York: Ballantine Books. Political Theory: An International Journal of Political Bringle, R. G., Clayton, P. H., & Price, M. F. (2009). Philosophy , 37 (6), 780-807. Partnerships in service learning and civic engagement. James, W. (1975). Pragmatism: A new name for some old Partnerships: A Journal of Service Learning & Civic ways of thinking . Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Engagement , 1(1), 1-20. University Press. Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (2002). Campus-commu - Johnson, C. S. (2001). Cornel West, african american crit - nity partnerships: The terms of engagement. Journal of ical thought, and the quest for social justice. Journal of Social Issues , 58 (3), 503-516. Social Philosophy , 32 (4), 547-572. Collins, P. H. (2012). Social inequality, power, and politics: Kimball, B. A., & Orrill, R. (1995). The condition of amer - Intersectionality and american pragmatism in dialogue. ican liberal education: Pragmatism and a changing tra - Journal of Speculative Philosophy: A Quarterly Journal dition . New York: College Entrance Examination Board. of History, Criticism, and Imagination , 26 (2), 442-457. Lisman, C. D. (2000). Praxis-informed philosophy. In C. D. Crabtree, R. D. (2008). Theoretical foundations for interna - Lisman & I. E. Harvey (Eds.), Beyond the tower: tional service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Concepts and models for service-learning in philosophy Service Learning , 15 (1), 18-36. (pp. 91-100). Washington, DC: American Association Deans, T. (1999). Service-learning in two keys: Paulo for Higher Education. freire's critical pedagogy in relation to john dewey's Liu, G. (1995). Knowledge, foundations and discourse: pragmatism. Michigan Journal of Community Service Philosophical support for service learning. Michigan Learning , 6, 15-29. Journal of Community Service Learning , 2(1), 5-18. Decker, K. S. (2012). Perspectives and ideologies: A prag - May, T. (2011). A new neo-pragmatism: From James and matic use for recognition theory. Philosophy and Social Dewey to Foucault. Foucault Studies , 11 , 54-62. Criticism , 38 (2), 215-226. Mitchell, T. D. (2008). Traditional vs. critical service-learn - Dewey, J. (1920). Reconstruction in philosophy . New York: ing: Engaging the literature to differentiate two models. Henry Holt and Company. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning , Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry . New York: 14 (2), 50-65. Henry Holt and Company. Peirce, C. S. (1955a). The fixation of belief. In J. Buchler Dewey, J., & Bentley, A. F. (1949). Knowing and the (Ed.), Philosophical writings of Peirce (pp. 5-22). New known . Boston: Beacon Press. York: Dover. Esquith, S. L. (2000). Service-learning, citizenship, and the Peirce, C. S. (1955b). How to make our ideas clear. In J. philosophy of law. In C. D. Lisman & I. E. Harvey Buchler (Ed.), Philosophical writings of Peirce (pp. 23- (Eds.), Beyond the tower: Concepts and models for ser - 41). New York: Dover. vice-learning in philosophy (pp. 113-122). Washington, Peirce, C. S. (1955c). Some consequences of four incapac - DC: American Association for Higher Education. ities. In J. Buchler (Ed.), Philosophical writings of peirce Fricker, M. (2010). Can there be institutional virtues? In T. (pp. 228-250). New York: Dover. Szabó Gendler & J. Hawthorne (Eds.), Oxford studies in Prentice, M., & Robinson, G. (2007). Linking service epistemology (Vol. 3, pp. 235-252). Oxford: Oxford learning and civic engagement in community college University Press. students . Retrieved from Washington, DC: Garnar, A. (2006). Power, action, signs: Between peirce http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED503445.pdf and foucault. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Putnam, H. (1987). The many faces of realism . LaSalle, IL: Society: A Quarterly Journal in American Philosophy , Open Court. 42 (3), 347-366. Putnam, H. (1990). Realism with a human face . Grayling, A. C. (2011). The good book: A humanist bible . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. New York: Walker & Company. Quine, W. V. O. (1980). From a logical point of view. Green, J. M. (2000). Deepening democratic participation Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. through deweyan pragmatism. In C. D. Lisman & I. E. Quine, W. V. O. (1982). Theories and things . Cambridge, Harvey (Eds.), Beyond the tower: Concepts and models for MA: Harvard University Press. service-learning in philosophy (pp. 123-138). Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Hatcher, J. A. (1997). The moral dimensions of john dewey's philosophy: Implications for undergraduate Richman, K. A. (1996). Epistemology, communities, and education. Michigan Journal of Community Service experts: A response to goodwin liu. Michigan Journal of Learning , 4(1), 22-29. Community Service Learning , 3, 5-12. Hatcher, J. A., & Erasmus, M. A. (2008). Service-learning Ron, A. (2008). Power: A pragmatist, deliberative (and radi - in the united states and africa: A comparative analysis cal) view. Journal of Political Philosophy , 16 (3), 272-292. informed by john dewey and julius nyerere. Michigan Rorty, R. (1979). Philosophy and the mirror of nature . Journal of Community Service Learning , 15 (1), 49-61. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

14 Pragmatism, Pedagogy, and Community Service Learning Rorty, R. (1982). The consequences of pragmatism . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Rorty, R. (1991). Objectivity, relativism, and truth . Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Saltmarsh, J. (1996). Education for critical citizenship: John dewey's contribution to the pedagogy of communi - ty service learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning , 3(1), 13-21. Saltmarsh, J., & Hartley, M. (2011). Democratic engage - ment. In J. Saltmarsh & M. Hartley (Eds.), To serve a larger purpose: Engagement for democracy and the transformation of higher education (pp. 14-26). Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Tucker, R. E. (1999). Biting the pragmatist bullet: Why ser - vice-learning can do without epistemology. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning , 6, 5-14. West, C. (1989). The american evasion of philosophy: A genealogy of pragmatism . Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Author SCOT D. YODER ([email protected]) is an associate professor in the Residential College in the Arts and Humanities at Michigan State University. His philosophical interests range from American pragmatism and the philosophy of religion (especial - ly religious naturalism) to health care and environ - mental ethics. He has published articles in the Hasting Center Report , the American Journal of Bioethics , and the American Journal of Theology and Philosophy . He has a particular interest in the schol - arship of teaching and learning and has taught grad - uate seminars on teaching philosophy.

15