Giles and Eyler
appear in the literature (Cohen & Kinsey, 1994;
Eyler, 1993; Eyler & Giles, forthcoming; Giles &
Eyler, in press; Krug & Kraft, 1994; Markus et
al., 1993).' In the last two years we have seen
sessions on research become a standard feature of
most conferences on service-learning. More telling perhaps is that many of these sessions have
been full or standing room only. This year's
annual meeting of the American Educational
Research Association included sessions, apparently for the first time, on service-learning research. This interest appears to be driven by a
number of factors, such as funding availability,
institutional accountability, as well as a genuine
interest in what we know about service-learning.
It is striking, therefore, that there have been no
similar calls for theory; in fact, this topic seems
markedly absent from conferences in the field
(for an exception, see Shumer, 1993b). It is our
judgment, however, that the call for research
leads to the call for theory. If we are to know
about the social phenomenon of service-learning,
we need a systematic way of generating and
organizing our knowledge. In discussing the relationship between theory and research and the
need for theoretically derived research hypotheses, Robert Merton (1949) wrote, "By providing
a rationale, the theory introduces a ground for
prediction which is more secure than mere empirical extrapolation from previously observed
trends" (p. 94).
The Conceptual Basis of Service-Learning
Coining the term "service-learning" in 1967
was a major first step toward providing conceptual clarity; this term grew out of the work of
Robert Sigmon and William Ramsey at the Southern Regional Education Board (Sigmon, 1990;
Southern Regional Education Board, 1973). But
in subsequent years the efforts in this field have
focused more on principles of good practice in
combining service and learning and in developing a common, agreed upon definition (Honnet &
Poulsen, 1989; Kendall & Associates, 1990;
Shumer 1993a; Sigmon, 1990; Stanton, 1990).
The National and Community Service Acts of
1990 and 1993, especially the latter, also reflect
the results of this twenty-five year period of
searching for a definition. Another area of important thinking in service-learning has been linking
service-learning to the mission and philosophy of
higher education (Stanton, 1991). In all of these
writings the central tenet is the one that is stated
in the preamble to the "Principles of Good Practice in Combining Service and Learning" (Honnet
& Poulsen, 1989), "Service, combined with learning, adds value to each and transforms both" (p.
1).
Indeed considerable activity has focused on
defining service-learning along these lines;
Kendall's review of the literature revealed 147
different terms and definitions related to servicelearning (1990). Following Stanton's discussion
of a service-learning definition (1990), Kendall
concluded that the definitions of service-learning
could be grouped into two categories: servicelearning as a kind of education and service-learning as a philosophy (1990).
In an effort to contribute toward an undergirding
theory of service-learning, we have turned to the
writings of John Dewey. While any extended
discussion of Dewey is a separate study, we
believe that his philosophy is a legitimate source
(among others) for developing a theory of service-learning. The background of our analysis is
Robertson's very comprehensive review of the
debate about using Dewey. Entitled, "Is Dewey's
Educational Vision Still Viable?," the article gives
a balanced and detailed review of both Dewey's
defenders and his critics (1992). Given this broader
debate, it seems appropriate that service-learning
be part of the effort to understand and apply one
of the unquestionably most important educational and social philosophers of the 20th century.
An additional reason for probing Dewey is that
it appears that service-learning reflects, either
consciously or unconsciously, a Deweyian influence. Making that influence explicit can help
determine if the theory is truly relevant and useful. Also, because neo-Deweyians such as David
Kolb exert an influence on service-learning as
one form of experiential learning, knowing about
Dewey's theory on experience and education also
seems important (see Kolb, 1984).
We will divide our analysis of Dewey's relevance to developing a theory of service-learning
into two parts. First we will examine his relevance to learning in service-learning and then
turn to his relevance to the service side of servicelearning. By dividing our analysis of Dewey into
two sections, we run the risk of creating a false
dichotomy between the ideas related to learning
and those related to citizenship and democracy.
For Dewey, pedagogy and epistemology were
related-his theory of knowledge was related to
and derived from his notions of citizenship and
democracy. As Robertson notes, experimental
78
