International Service Learning

Engaging Host Communities

Marianne Larsen, Marianne Larsen

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9781317554578
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Comparative Education

International service learning (ISL) programs are growing more popular with students looking to advance their skills and knowledge to become global citizens. While the benefits of these programs among students are well documented, little is known about the implications they have on host communities themselves. This volume explores the impact of ISL programs on members of host communities (e.g. host families and local partner NGOs) who are increasingly influenced by the presence of international students in their lives. Drawing upon post-colonial, feminist and other critical and decolonizing theories, it examines the complicated power relations between North American ISL students and host communities in East and West Africa, the Caribbean and Central America. It stresses the importance of developing trusting relations between ISL students, faculty and individuals in the host communities to create mutually engaging learning experiences.

Part I Overview

DOI: 10.4324/9781315732305-1

1 International Service Learning Engaging Host Communities—Introduction

DOI: 10.4324/9781315732305-2

Marianne A. Larsen

Each year, hundreds of thousands of global North post-secondary students participate in volunteering and study abroad programs, including international service learning (ISL), with the aim of developing their skills and knowledge to engage more fully in local and global civic affairs (Lewin, 2010). Yet, many are calling for substantial increases in the numbers of students who participate in these international programs. The Lincoln Commission has called for one million U.S. students to participate in study abroad by 2016–2017, and the Canadian Bureau for International Education advocates that at least 15% (or 300,000) of Canadian post-secondary students should have a study/service abroad experience (Lincoln Commission, 2005; Statistics Canada, 2014).

There is a growing field of research on how students are transformed through their participation in ISL internships. However, much less is known about the communities, primarily in global South settings, that host these students. What do they gain, if anything at all, from having these students live in their communities for extended periods of time? What are the implications, both positive and negative, for these communities who host foreign students? The need to consider (and prioritize) the views and experiences of those in the global South who host global North ISL and study abroad students has been noted for many decades now (Illich, 1968). More recently, many other scholars have called for research on this topic (Crabtree, 2008; Cruz & Giles, 2000; Erasmus, 2011; Grusky, 2000; Kiely & Hartman, 2011; Ogden, 2007; Stoecker, Tryon & Hilgendorf, 2009; Tonkin, 2011). There are compelling reasons to engage in this research, as Adrian Bochner and Stephen Furnham (1986) explain:

[A]ll contact has two-way reciprocal consequences, although the extent to which each party is affected by the interaction depends on a variety of factors. To ascertain better the true impact of the exchange experience, it is necessary to consider both the exchange students themselves and the receiving groups in the host culture. (p. 44)

Although there is an urgent need for such research that examines the implications of “reciprocal consequences,” there is actually very little existing published research in this area. This book, International Service Learning: Engaging Host Communities, addresses that need by interrogating the complicated and complex impact of ISL programs in global South host communities. To this end, there are three main objectives to the book:

1. To problematize the impact and influence of international service learning programs on individuals and groups in host communities in the global South.
2. To legitimize and privilege the experiences, values, and voices of those in global South communities that host ISL students.
3. To provide possibilities for rethinking paternalistic and colonized relations between global North and global South communities, in favor of relations based on principles such as interdependence, reciprocity, solidarity, and mutuality.

To address these goals, this book brings together a wide range of individuals who share findings from their empirical research and have years of experience participating and facilitating ISL programs through work in universities, and third party intermediary organizations, including NGOs and private providers. The authors of the book report on their findings drawn from their ISL research that highlight the experiences of those working within intermediary and other partner organizations, host families, community leaders, and others in the local community who have had regular contact with foreign ISL students over the years. Most importantly, International Service Learning: Engaging Host Communities includes chapters authored (and co-authored) by individuals from Ghana, Kenya, Nicaragua, and Uganda who have facilitated and overseen ISL programs in their communities.

ISL AND HOST COMMUNITIES: LITERATURE REVIEW

Since there is little existing literature on the impact of international, experiential programs on host communities, it is helpful to turn to findings from studies on the impact of service learning (SL) on local (i.e., domestic) communities. This review is done with the recognition that in many ways, ISL differs from domestic service learning; however, the research on SL provides a strong base upon which to conduct ISL-host community research (Eyler, 2011). That being said, it is also important to acknowledge the potentially different socio-historical and geo-political spaces within which ISL functions, and that often the degree of difference between students and host community members is enhanced in international settings.

Summaries and reviews of the existing literature reveal a number of key findings stemming from this research (Cruz & Giles, 2000; Eyler, Giles, Stenson, & Gray, 2001). Some existing research shows how SL contributes to community development by providing data for leveraging resources and by strengthening horizontal linkages through networking amongst community agencies. For example, Worrall (2007) points out in her study of community partners involved in a community-based service learning program that many community-based organizations entered into SL relationships with the local university because they perceived access to new resources. As one of her respondents explains, “We’re understaffed, over burdened, under-resourced, we’ll take all the hands we can get. And that’s the really practical answer” (Quoted in Worrall, 2007, p. 14).

There are also studies that show how service learning bridges town-gown divides by enhancing community-university relationships and providing a link between the university and community-based organizations. This occurs when there is clear and open communication, and an understanding of each partner’s roles and responsibilities, assets, and limitations between all partners (e.g., Sandy & Holland, 2006; Vernon & Ward, 1999).

Existing studies have also shown that SL offers benefits to community partners through accessing university resources, budgetary savings, the use of the ‘free’ labor of student volunteers, an appreciation of the energy and enthusiasm of student volunteers, enhancing organizational capacity, and contributing to the visibility of the community organization (e.g., Driscoll et al., 1996; Miron & Moely, 2006; Vernon & Ward, 1999). For example, one study found that university SL students, as part of a workforce of partner organizations, help to extend the capacity of those organizations to take on new projects that they might not have had the time or capacity for otherwise (Sandy & Holland, 2006). Moreover, a number of studies have shown that local partner organizations feel they play a role in the preparation of future professionals by teaching local students about racial, ethnic, and socio-economic inequalities (e.g., Worrall, 2007).

In addition, there are a few studies that focus on the transformative impact of SL students on community members. One study showed that community members engaged in reciprocal tutoring programs with university students seemed genuinely transformed by the service experience. Their confidence was enhanced and they came to see university students as “human beings with dreams, problems, and aspirations similar to their own, reduction of stereotypes took place—the class format empowered community member students to speak up, trust their views, and look for solutions” (d’Arlach, Sánchez, & Feuer, 2009, p. 13). Community partners in Marie Sandy and Barbara Holland’s (2006) study spoke about ways in which partnerships can transform knowledge by bridging the gap between theory and practice, providing opportunities for reflection and furthering new theories to change existing practices.

Despite these documented benefits about the positive impacts of service learning partnerships on local community members, research also shows the negative effects of these arrangements. Some studies have highlighted the demands on time and resources that local organizations face in training and supervising SL students, as well as a concern about the lack of communication between the local agency and university (e.g., Vernon & Ward, 1999; Stoecker et al, 2009). A number of studies point to the unequal relations and lack of reciprocity between the university (or college) involved in the service learning partnerships and local community organizations (Shalabi, 2013; Stoecker et al, 2009). For example, community partners interviewed in Sandy and Holland’s (2006) service learning study spoke about the lack of engagement with university faculty and a desire to work more directly with them. Similarly, based on the results of her study of community organizations involved in local SL partnerships, Worrall (2007) concluded that none of the organizations “indicated that there was a genuine sharing of power and resources, nor a defined set of mutually agreed upon goals and objectives” (p. 14). This lack of agreement over goals and expectations can contribute to conflicts between universities and community organizations involved in SL partnerships (Prins, 2005).

This theme also arises in the literature on the impact of study abroad and voluntourism programs on host communities, especially in the global South. Scathing critiques of the impact of international ‘excursions’ to the global South have been voiced for decades, and Ivan Illich’s 1968 piece “To Hell with Good Intentions” is one such example. Broadly speaking, much of this critique has focused on the damaging consequences of well-intentioned students who participate in short-term study and service abroad programs. Many question whether international students who are studying abroad or engaged in service are actually meeting the needs of the local community (Ver Beek, 2002), and suggest that these international experiences are much more self-serving than altruistic (Heron, 2007; Ogden, 2007; Tiessen, 2012; Zemach-Bersin, 2007). Others go so far as to claim that the students engaged in these types of international activities reinforce colonial relations by engaging in new forms of imperialism, akin to “missionaries, colonizers, anthropologists, and humanitarian aid workers who have served as ‘goodwill ambassadors’, promoting soft power interests of the metropole” (Zemach-Bersin, 2007, p. 24).

While much of this research is rich theoretically, it is weak in that it presents broad generalizations based on anecdotal, descriptive information, rather than empirical evidence (Cruz & Giles, 2000). As Richard Kiely and Eric Hartman (2011) conclude, “Much of the ISL literature is not empirical, cumulative, or theory-based while descriptions of programs, activities, nuts and bolts, and rationales for ISL are plentiful” (p. 303). Two exceptions consist of empirical research on the impact of study abroad on host communities, which focuses on the experiences of host (home-stay) families (e.g., Lutterman-Aguilar & Gingerich, 2002; Ogden, 2007; Stephenson, 1999), and ISL research that focuses on partnerships as unit of analysis (e.g., Erasmus, 2011; Sandy & Holland, 2006; Schroeder, Wood, Galiardi, & Koehn, 2009; Shalabi, 2013; Sharpe & Dear, 2013; Wood, Banks, Galiardi & Worrall, 2007). This research is important in focusing on those working within NGOs and other partner organizations, their motivations for engaging in ISL partnerships, and the benefits and challenges that accrue from these relationships. However, these studies leave out the voices of others in the local community that students interact with during their stays, a point taken up in further detail below.

Finally, it is worth noting that the existing research reviewed above is carried out by individuals in the global North universities, rather than by individuals from the global South. Mabel Erasmus’s (2011) study of her experiences hosting study abroad and ISL students from the United States at the University of the Free State in South Africa is one of the few exceptions. This book is an attempt to address the lack of community voice in ISL research, as well as the other related lacunae noted above.

ABOUT THIS BOOK

International Service Learning: Engaging Host Communities brings together an inter-disciplinary, intersectoral, and international group of individuals that includes new, emerging, and experienced scholars in the field of ISL research, and individuals working within universities, NGOs, and private sector intermediary organizations that plan and facilitate ISL programs. Significantly, this book includes the voices of individuals from communities in the Caribbean, Central America, and Africa, such as staff working in host-community NGOs that facilitate ISL programs, host families, community leaders, and others in the local community that interact regularly with ISL students.

Part I of the book consists of this introductory chapter and Chapter Two, in which a number of the authors who have written chapters for the book engage in a shared discussion about the epistemological, theoretical, and methodological challenges of carrying out ISL research in and with host communities. They review what the existing literature and their own experiences as global North researchers tell us about the challenges involved in conducting research in global South communities. They problematize their own research, reflecting critically upon their positions as privileged outsiders engaged in host community research, and point out the ethical dimensions and challenges of carrying out this research.

Part II is comprised of case studies about the impact of ISL on host communities. These qualitative case studies were carried out between 2012–2015 to study the impact of North American ISL programs on host communities in the Caribbean, Central America, and Africa. The first three chapters focus on host communities in Central America. In Chapter Three, Nora Pillard Reynolds and her Brazilian co-author, Junior Cezar Gasparini, examine Nicaraguan community partner motivations in engaging in an ISL partnership, and the need to be reflexive about the kinds of relationships we develop through these partnerships. In Chapter Four, Harry Smaller and Michael O’Sullivan, both Canadian university-based researchers who have had many years of experience participating in and facilitating ISL programs in Nicaragua, report on the findings of their case study, which involved interviews with members of five western Nicaraguan communities that have hosted Canadian ISL students, as well as Managua-based Nicaraguans who have been involved in developing and coordinating ISL programs. In Chapter Five, Cynthia Toms Smedley addresses the impact of ISL programming on economic development in three rural communities in Costa Rica. She reports findings from three case studies she carried out on the impact of ISL programs on Costa Rican communities, and the ways in which the presence of ISL students has affected the capacity of host community organizations.

The next four chapters in Part II shift attention ...