Exploring service-learning outcomes and experiences for low-income, first-generation college students: A mixed methods approach

According to a 2008 Pell Institute report, Moving Beyond Access: College Success For Low-Income, First-Generation Students, about 24% (4.5 million) of the undergraduate college population in America are low-income, first-generation (LIFG) students. However, for many of these students their chances of persistence to degree are extremely low. In fact, the persistence rate for LIFG students is a mere 11%---startling when compared to the national average persistence rate of 55% (Engle & Tinto, 2008). In efforts to increase the academic success and persistence rates of these students, several institutions have turned their attention to pedagogical strategies like service-learning.;A growing body of literature indicates that students who participate in courses that utilize a service-learning pedagogy have significant gains in cognitive and affective outcomes (Eyler & Giles, 1999; Campus Compact, 2010 & 2011; Vogelgeslang & Astin, 2000; Astin, Vogelgesang, Ikeda, & Yee, 2000). This research has been invaluable to the exploration of how service-learning is related to learning and development; however, very little has focused on the outcomes and experiences for "high-risk" students, such as low-income, first-generation. Investigation of service-learning experiences for LIFG students is vital for increasing our understanding of this pedagogy's relationship to learning and developmental outcomes, especially as it pertains to overcoming environmental barriers that hinder academic success.;This study utilizes a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design to explore the outcomes and experiences related to service-learning participation for LIFG college students. The first phase of the study explores a national, longitudinal dataset from the Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP) of over 5,000 cases at 86 public and private universities. Analysis is conducted to examine differentiating characteristics between LIFG students that participate in service-learning courses and LIFG students that do not participate in service-learning courses. Exploratory factor analysis is conducted for the LIFG population to explore latent constructs. Analysis is also conducted for the overall sample of college students for comparison purposes. The service-learning outcomes and experiences of LIFG students are then explored in phase two with the collection of in-depth, face-to-face interviews of LIFG students that have participated in service-learning courses from three institutions. This phase's interview protocol and multi-step coding procedure were informed by the findings of the quantitative phase.;Quantitative analysis indicates that very factors differentiate whether or not LIFG students will participate in service-learning courses. Other findings indicated that participation in service-learning has a significant positive relationship with college GPA, even when controlling for pre-college academic preparation. Interviews yielded three core themes that were related to LIFG students' participation in service-learning: faculty and staff interactions, targeted programs, and a predisposition to service. Five core themes and one tentative theme emerged from the interview data about the outcomes related to participants' service-learning experiences: Cognitive Diversity, Service as Reciprocal, Critical Consciousness, Encountering the "Self", Aiding in Biculturalism, Career Acculturation.;This study has resulted in findings from each phase that provide greater understanding to the experience of LIFG students who participate in service learning. Four primary conclusions result from the synthesis of the findings of both phases: (1) LIFG students participate in service-learning at equal rates to the overall student population; (2) LIFG students' participation in service-learning results from the combination of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations and has little to do with pre-college characteristics; (3) service-learning participation has positive impacts on academic outcomes for LIFG student; and, (4) service-learning participation has positive impacts on affective outcomes LIFG student.;These conclusions have implications most readily for institutional and classroom practice, but also for policy and research. Finally, the findings of this study highlight continuing gaps in our knowledge on this topic, and subsequently include a discussion of future directions for inquiry. Suggested areas of future research include extending the current research to a variety of institutional contexts; continued investigation of the unique learning and developmental needs of LIFG students and the ways in which curricular strategies may be employed to meet those needs; and, exploration into the impact of service-learning participation on persistence for students who transfer from community colleges to 4-year institutions.