Abstract
Bertram and Burr begin discussion with the properties of service-learning that make it an effective practice to support student learning and support students in Family Life Education. They focus the discussion to the instructional level of planning a service-learning project highlighting the approaches of transmission, transaction, and transformation. They follow with discussion over the embedded high-impact elements such as spending time on meaningful tasks, interacting about substantive matters, experiencing diversity, application of activities to different settings on/off campus. The authors conclude that students’ awareness of community needs may increase as an outcome of service learning and can help them be more prepared to plan effective programming as Family Life Educators as well as provide an opportunity where students gain professional skills and knowledge and experience personal growth.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ballard, S. M., & Taylor, A. C. (2012). Family life education with diverse populations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Brown, L. A., & Roodin, P. (2001). Service learning in gerontology: An out of classroom experience. Educational Gerontology, 27(1), 89–103.
Darling, C. A., Fleming, W. M., & Cassidy, D. (2009). Professionalization of family life education: Defining the field. Family Relations, 58, 330–345.
Deeley, S. J. (2010). Service learning: Thinking outside the box. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11, 43–53.
Duncan, S. F., & Goddard, H. W. (2011). Family life education: Principles and practices for effective outreach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hamon, R. R. (2002). Service learning program pairs, students, elders. The Older Learner, 10(3), 4–5.
Hamon, R. R., & Way, C. E. (2001). Integrating intergenerational service learning into Family Science curriculum. Journal of Teaching in Marriage and Family, 1, 65–83.
Jones, S., Gilbride-Brown, J., & Gasiorski, A. (2005). Getting inside the underside of service learning: Student resistance and possibilities. In D. W. Butin (Ed.), Service learning in higher education: Critical issues and directions (pp. 3–24). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Knapp, J. L., & Stubblefield, P. (2000). Changing students’ perceptions of aging: The impact of an intergenerational service learning course. Educational Gerontology, 26, 611–621.
Smart, L. S., & Berke, D. L. (2004). Developing professional standards in Family Science internships. Journal of Teaching in Marriage and Family, 4, 101–126.
Stanberry, A. M., & Azria-Evans, M. (2001). Perspectives in teaching gerontology: Matching strategies with purpose and context. Educational Gerontology, 27, 639–656.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bertram, A.G., Burr, B. (2017). Service Learning in Family Life Education: Incorporating High-Impact Strategies in Undergraduate Family Science Programming. In: Newman, T., Schmitt, A. (eds) Field-Based Learning in Family Life Education. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39874-7_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39874-7_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-39873-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-39874-7
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)