Including the Voices and Recognizing the Skills of Students of Color in Community Engaged Pedagogy

Abstract: In recent years, critical service learning pedagogy has drawn attention to how traditional pedagogies center the needs of white students. While many scholars have provided valuable insights on how traditional pedagogies can be adapted to promote inclusivity, relatively little scholarship has focused on the voices of students of color. For students of color, what are the goals, experiences, and outcomes of community engaged learning? How do these differ from the goals, experiences, and outcomes for white students? In this paper, we analyze these questions drawing on 42 interviews with students of color and 14 interviews with white students at Trinity College in Hartford, CT. We find that on average students of color have distinct goals, experiences, and outcomes in a diverse, urban community engaged learning setting. Students of color tend to be attracted to promoting mutually beneficial relationships with community partners in Hartford who may share aspects of their identity and experience. They often bring experiences and skills that facilitate connections with community partners and enable a more nuanced critique of partnerships. In contrast, white students tend to approach Hartford with caution and view community engagement as a means to build their own skills related to empathy and navigating diversity. These findings underline the importance of recognizing that heterogeneity of skills in the community learning classroom can be related to student race/ethnicity, with students of color often possessing distinct skills and knowledge that prepare them for community engagement in diverse urban settings. We offer recommendations to address these findings.

Narrative: In recent years, critical service learning pedagogy has drawn attention to how traditional community engaged pedagogy centers the needs and experiences of white students (Mitchell 2007, Motoike 2017). While many scholars have provided valuable insights on how traditional pedagogies center whiteness and can be adapted to promote inclusivity (Bocci 2015, Green 2003, Hickmon 2015, Mitchell et al 2012, Motoike 2017, Novick et al 2011, Van Cleave and Cartwright 2017), relatively little scholarship has focused its analysis on the voices of students of color in community engaged learning settings (although see Barrett and Jenkins 2018). For students of color, what are the goals, experiences, and outcomes of community engaged learning? How do these differ from the goals, experiences, and outcomes for white students? In this paper, we analyze these questions drawing on 42 interviews with students of color and 14 interviews with white students, coupled with a brief demographic survey. The interviewees were drawn from a stratified, random sample of Trinity College undergraduates in Hartford, CT in 2021-2022. They included 15 students with no community engaged learning courses, 20 somewhat engaged students with 1-2 relevant courses, and 21 highly engaged students with three or more relevant courses. The interviews were conducted by student researchers of color in partnership with Trinity faculty and staff. The project was approved by Trinity’s Institutional Review Board. Care was taken to protect student confidentiality and to allow students to opt out of questions that produced discomfort. Student interviewers and interviewees were compensated for their time, regardless of whether they opted out of questions.

We find that while the term “students of color” constitutes a broad category with considerable internal diversity, on average this group has distinct goals, experiences, and outcomes in a diverse, urban community engaged learning setting, as compared to white students. Students of color tend to be attracted to promoting mutually beneficial relationships with community partners in Hartford who may share aspects of their identity and experience. They often bring experiences and skills that facilitate connections with community partners and enable a more nuanced critique of whether partnerships are achieving mutual benefit. In contrast, white students tend to approach Hartford with caution and view community engagement as a means to build their own skills related to empathy and navigating diversity. In the community learning classroom, these distinct motivations and skills can create tensions between white students and students of color. These tensions are compounded when faculty fail to address issues of structural racism in preparation for community engaged learning. Students of color, who often possess greater skills and insights in the community learning context, experience harm when they feel forced to speak up to educate white students.

These findings underline the importance of recognizing that heterogeneity of skills in the community learning classroom can be related to student race/ethnicity, with students of color often possessing distinct skills and knowledge that prepare them for community engagement in diverse urban settings. Faculty can address the diversity of skills and experiences in two ways. First, they should include frequent, robust discussions of structural racism within and outside of the community learning setting. Second, they should incorporate early and ongoing reflection on student identity and positionality throughout the community engagement experience. Further research should evaluate whether these findings extend beyond the setting of a small, predominantly white liberal arts college in a diverse city. If so, more research and advocacy is necessary to ensure that faculty have the skills to address students’ diverse needs and experiences in the community learning setting.

Barrett, Michelle Sterk, and Isabelle Jenkins. “Service-Learning: A Powerful Pedagogy for Promoting Academic Success Among Students of Color.” International Journal of Research on Service-Learning and Community Engagement 6, no. 1 (December 31, 2018): 1–14.

Bocci, Melissa. “Service-Learning and White Normativity: Racial Representation in Service-Learning’s Historical Narrative.” Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, (2015): 5–17.

Green, Ann E. “Difficult Stories: Service-Learning, Race, Class, and Whiteness.” College Composition and Communication 55, no. 2 (2003): 276–301.

Hickmon, Gabrielle. “Double Consciousness and the Future of Service-Learning.” Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, The SLCE Future Directions Project (2015): 86–88.

Motoike, Pamela T. “Service Learning Course Construction and Learning Outcomes: Searching for the Soulfulness in Service Learning.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Service Learning and Community Engagement, edited by Corey Dolgon, Tania D. Mitchell, and Timothy K. Eatman, 132–46. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.

Mitchell, Tania D. “Critical Service-Learning as Social Justice Education: A Case Study of the Citizen Scholars Program.” Equity & Excellence in Education 40, no. 2 (2007): 101–112.

Mitchell, Tania D., and Kathleen M. Coll. “Ethnic Studies as a Site for Political Education: Critical Service Learning and the California Domestic Worker Bill of Rights.” PS, Political Science & Politics 50, no. 1 (2017): 187–192.

Mitchell, Tania D., David M. Donahue, and Courtney Young-Law. “Service Learning as a Pedagogy of Whiteness.” Equity & Excellence in Education 45, no. 4 (October 2012): 612–29.

Novick, Sarah, Scott C. Seider, and James P. Huguley. “Engaging College Students from Diverse Backgrounds in Community Service Learning.” Journal of College and Character 12, no. 1 (February 1, 2011).

Van Cleave, Tommy J., and Chris Cartwright. “Intercultural Competence as a Cornerstone for Transformation in Service Learning.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Service Learning and Community Engagement, edited by Corey Dolgon, Tania D. Mitchell, and Timothy K. Eatman, 204–18. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.