Where’s the Service in Service-Learning?

A popular book in the service-learning literature asks the important question, Where’s the Learning in Service-Learning? —and it has guided many educators to community engagement practices that maximize student learning.

At a recent event at Hamline University, Robert Lupton, the author of Toxic Charity:  How Churches and Charities Hurt Those They Help, essentially asked people to think critically about the other side of that question.  Where’s the service in service-learning and other efforts by volunteers or nonprofits?  Lupton puts forth a strong argument that “most mission trips and service projects:

• weaken those being served,
• foster dishonest relationships, and
• erode participants’ work ethic, and deepen dependency.”

His book is by no means simply intended to chastise and blame. It contains a message of hope that the “compassion industry” can be changed and that virtuous people can do good. As a place to begin, he offers an Oath for Compassionate Service.

• Never do for the poor what they have (or could have) the capacity to do for themselves.
• Limit one-way giving to emergency situations (crisis situation=YES, chronic situation=NO).
• Strive to empower the poor through employment, lending, and investing, using grants sparingly to reinforce achievements.
• Subordinate self-interests to the needs of those being served.
• Listen closely to those you seek to help, especially to what is not being said – unspoken feelings may contain essential clues to effective service.
• Above all, do no harm.

Lupton’s book is filled with examples from his own four decades working on inner-city poverty. For example, he talks about a Christmas charity tradition where people would ‘adopt ‘ a poor family and purchase gifts for the children based on knowing a child’s gender and age, and then deliver those gifts to the family’s home. Mothers would politely bear the brunt of the humiliation and fathers who felt emasculated (Lupton’s word), would slip out the back door, as the evidence of their inadequacy was left behind by the suburban folks doing them a service. Meanwhile, as Lupton puts it, “children get the message that the ‘good stuff’ comes from rich people out there and it is free.”

The non-toxic solution to this annual program was to re-direct the giving to help set up a seasonal Christmas store where financial donations would go toward reducing the cost of new merchandise, and where parents could work and earn the money to buy presents that they themselves picked out. Meanwhile, some residents are learning useful job skills in the store.

This would be a great reading for anyone interested in an honest conversation about going beyond good intentions.  How have you tried to develop service-learning courses and community partnerships that are genuinely transformative?  That advance both students’ learning and community members’ well-being?

John Hamerlinck

Knowing Your Capabilities, Making a Declaration, and Being Believable

Tony LookingElk spoke at Minnesota Campus Compact’s Assets and Wellness event on March 8th. Below are excerpts from his powerful remarks.

There are three things I think are essential in doing asset-based work, especially when working with marginalized communities:  capabilities, making a declaration, and being believable.

What are our institutions capable of?  It’s amazingly important to know your capabilities when you engage communities.  People are going to wonder about that if they don’t have a relationship with you.  As an organization, the Bremer Foundation can’t have shy people.  You get 90 minutes to get to know an organization, who they serve, what they’re trying to achieve, and at the end of the day what is their impact. You have to have a conversation that gets at all of those points, so when we hire staff, we look at people’s ability to build relationships quickly, have those conversations, and communicate that information to the trustees.

A declaration is a formal explicit statement, not a big thing but an important thing.  In 1961, President John F. Kennedy gave a speech and basically said before the decade is out we will land a man on the moon and safely return him to earth.  If you can imagine 1961, the audacity of that statement, it was an amazing statement, and literally when people heard it at the time, you couldn’t help but look upward and wonder if it was possible.  Who’s heard of Wernher von Braun?  He was a rocket scientist and six weeks before the pres gave that speech, Russia successfully had the first man orbit around planet earth.  Wernher von Braun was supposed to fig out what we as a country could do, so he wrote the White House a month before the speech and said we have the resources to beat Russia, to lead the world in space travel.  That gave the president the ability to make such a bold statement.  Who’s ever heard of Ralph Abernathy?  In 1963 Martin Luther King gave his I Have a Dream speech, which is oddly enough as visionary if he gave it today as it was in 1963.  Again he was transporting people to a place they couldn’t imagine themselves.  Why would he stir up so much hope, with the realities of what life was like in 1963?  Part of it was Ralph Abernathy, a minister and a leader in the civil rights movement.  I would characterize him as having the backroom skills, how to organize, plan, teach people to do the work of the movement, and King knew that and it gave him the confidence to set a very high bar for himself and our country.  So why would an ordinary citizen make a big statement that is visionary and make it public so everyone can hear it?

I’d say I got four proposals in the last year that said we’re going to end poverty.  It’s one thing to set a high bar, and another to know you can do it.  Especially with marginalized communities, it’s important to know your declaration and your capabilities.  Which brings us to believability.  It happens in two ways, the stories you tell and the life you lead.  I’m a fan of stories.  When you think of who you are, what you’ve learned from your family and community, give me a value or a principle you live by, share with us a story that demonstrates that value or principle.  Stories tend, especially when you engage marginalized communities, tend to be the way they communicate, so part of the ability to engage with stories is also the ability to hear them.

About a month ago I had to take my mom to the hospital, and I answered questions and listened, they took her vitals, asked her what she was experiencing, and looked at her medical history, which together enabled them to make what was essentially a hypothesis about her condition.  How do you diagnose a problem?  When you think about what you do, what is the information you took in, whether you did or someone before you, what is the assumption about information taken it to inform your program?  Are you able to take in diverse information and to make good decisions with diverse information?  The diagnosis is amazingly important and being clear about the information you’re taking in relates to your believability, shapes your declaration, and relates to your understanding of your readiness.

When you pursue making a difference, you’re actually asking for behavior to change, and part of it is being real clear about what behavior has to change to get to that outcome.  The road goes two ways—to people in communities and your own institutional behavior.  Being able to articulate that and understand it feeds into the idea that the conditions are ripe for these behaviors to change.  Lay out the reality of what we need to be willing to do to make that happen.

Tony LookingElk is son to Helen and Phillip LookingElk and is an enrolled member of the Red Lake Band of Chippewas and his father is Lakota from the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota. Tony’s professional experience include government (county and federal level), non-profit and community based organizations addressing disparities in wealth, health and well-being. His philanthropic experience includes working with the Northwest Area Foundation where he served as a Community Liaison and currently with the Otto Bremer Foundation serving as a Program Officer. While Tony has a variety of formal education experiences, he credits his informal education through elders, community, family and culture that have provided him the skills, abilities and knowledge to serve communities well.

St. Cloud State Partners with the Community to Effectively Reduce High Risk Drinking

By Jennifer Sell Matzke

Thanks to a series of successful collaborative efforts to alter the culture when it comes to alcohol and drug use on the campus of St. Cloud State University and the surrounding community, dramatic, positive and measurable changes are occurring.

In 2005, results from a college student health assessment showed that 58% of St. Cloud State students reported engaging in high risk drinking (defined as 5 or more alcohol beverages in a single sitting) within the last two weeks — a rate significantly above the national average reported by college students across the country.  The negative consequences associated with this behavior were taking a toll not only on students but also on the campus and surrounding community.

In order to address this problem, SCSU implemented an environmental management approach to addressing high risk drinking and the related harmful consequences.  Now, just seven years later, the high risk drinking rate for SCSU has fallen to 34.1%, a rate on par with the national average.  This is a feat that is now bringing national attention to SCSU and the city of St. Cloud, primarily because of the partnerships that have evolved and developed to make this change possible.

This change in culture can be attributed in large part to the numerous collaborative efforts put forth between members of St. Cloud State University, the Neighborhood University Community Coalition, the St. Cloud Police Department and St. Cloud city administrators.  In July 2010 the Social Host, Provisional Licensing for Liquor Establishments, and Disruptive Intoxication Ordinances were proposed as a collaborative effort by the various groups mentioned above to address concerns within the community.  These ordinances were ultimately adopted in the city of St. Cloud and the impact has been extremely positive.  For example, as a result of the Social Host Ordinance, the city has seen a drastic reduction in the number of loud parties and university neighbors report a significantly improved quality of life as a result.

In August of 2010, shortly after the new ordinances were passed, the city and university partnered together to introduce and implement the IMPACT Diversion Program. This joint program is designed to offer individuals who have been charged with an underage alcohol violation the opportunity to receive alcohol education and prevention services. The Diversion program has resulted in a reduction in underage consumption recidivism from 12% to 6.9%, in nearly 1900 cases in the past two years as well as a significant decrease in the number of alcohol related emergency room admissions.  Since Diversion is also an option for non-students, underage individuals have returned to St. Cloud to complete Diversion from as far away as Illinois, North Dakota, Wisconsin, and Texas.

Beginning in fall 2012, SCSU has also partnered with St. Cloud Technical and Community College to provide IMPACT programming on their campus. The two colleges now share a graduate assistant who works to provide prevention programming to both campuses.  These combined efforts have drastically changed the environment in the city of St. Cloud and the culture around drinking on campus at both SCSU and SCTCC.

Through these efforts, the city of St. Cloud and area colleges have witnessed firsthand the impact of collaboration in affecting change, the importance of partnerships and data collection and the power of education to reduce alcohol use.  These efforts have been the catalyst for various other partnerships to address alcohol issues in the community. For example, the St. Cloud Community Alliance (SCCA) evolved out of these efforts and brings together city leaders, campus leaders, residents, students and businesses from throughout the city of St. Cloud and the surrounding communities.  The SCCA is a coalition with a simple mission:  to make St. Cloud a better place for everyone; with a primary focus to reduce high-risk drinking and the negative impacts on our community.

The collaborative relationships that were built and exist between these entities continue to thrive and provide numerous opportunities for partners to work together for the sake of creating an improved quality of life for all residents, students, visitors, faculty and staff within the city of St. Cloud.

Jennifer Sell Matzke is Interim Assistant Dean of Students for Chemical Health and Outreach Programming at St. Cloud State University.

Discovering Citizenship: Public Discourse at Gustavus Adolphus College

By Tristan Richards

“As  a citizen, I have the responsibility to act,” said Junior Management and Communication Studies major Blia Xiong.  This is what she learned from Public Discourse, a 100-level course in the Department of Communication Studies at Gustavus Adolphus College.  Public Discourse challenges students, who are often first-years, to identify a problem in their community, research it fully, and take action to address that problem.  They are encouraged to choose an issue that they are passionate about.  Students spend an entire semester working on one intensive project, learning about citizenship along the way.

In 2007, Public Discourse replaced a Public Speaking course which used to be a requirement for the Communication Studies major.  Leila Brammer, Professor of Communication Studies and Gender, Women, and Sexuality Studies said, “We thought we could do a better job teaching argument—particularly practical public argument—that [students] could use in the real world.”

The Department of Communication Studies spent a year discussing alternatives and structuring what later became Public Discourse.  “Public speaking is about citizenship, and it always has been […] so we really wanted to find that foundation again,” Brammer said.  “We stepped back and said, ‘So when do citizens engage in a community?  When do they engage in ways that are really useful in helping them develop skills, but also for the community?’ and we realized it’s when people are passionate,” Brammer said.

The faculty decided that they wanted to channel that kind of passion into students’ own communities, so they came up with the civic engagement portion of the class.  Students work directly with leaders in their home (or Gustavus) communities to find ways to address whichever problem they choose.  Instead of writing and giving many speeches about unrelated topics, students now work on the same project all semester, relating each presentation to a different stage or piece of their project.

Since switching courses, research completed in the department has shown that students develop better argument skills, speaking skills, group interaction skills, interpersonal skills, and communication skills in general.  They are more confident in asking questions in large group settings and more likely to participate in class discussions, and, anecdotally, they become better writers.  Beyond these skills though, students come out of the class feeling empowered.  “They really come out believing that they can make a difference in the world,” said Brammer.

Junior Spanish and Secondary Education major Laura Flicek took Public Discourse as a first-year student at Gustavus, after shadowing an ELL teacher at St. Peter High School during January Term.  “I really enjoyed it but I also saw how much those kids struggle on a day to day basis,” Flicek said.  “[ELL students] were thrown into the mainstream classes and expected to do just as well as the American students.”  In order to address this issue, she started a program through Study Buddies where Gustavus students tutor ELL students at the high school.

Before students take action, though, there is extensive background work happening.  Public Discourse students spend the first half of the semester researching their topics, before ever taking action.  “That research process isn’t just about supporting your argument and finding the best available evidence.  It’s also about finding out what voices have been left out,” said Brammer.  Before starting her ELL tutor program, Laura spent a large amount of time in the classroom, observing and interviewing students.  She wrote a case study about each student in a portfolio that was handed in at the end of the semester.

Public Discourse has made enormous change in its students and their communities.  Flicek commented, “If you think about each year, all the different projects that go out and how they affect other people and communities—that probably wouldn’t have happened if they wouldn’t have taken that Public Discourse class.”  Each year, countless students engage in their communities through their Public Discourse projects.

However, at the heart of the course is an emphasis on civic engagement, which Brammer defined as, “going in the community and interacting with the community as a citizen.”  She continued, “You’re thinking very clearly about your perspective, your privileges, your oppressions, and also about other people’s viewpoints.”  Each student is required to analyze these ideas in relation to their projects.  Professors and students have agreed that civic engagement is more intentional and intensive than general volunteer work.

Junior Communication Studies major Brian Simons, whose project focused on creating understandable signage at a hospital, said, “Civic engagement is about giving back to my community and realizing that the world is full of problems that need to be addressed.”  These are powerful lessons coming from a 100-level class, but many students learn much more.

Through this intentional civic engagement, students subtly learn about their responsibilities as citizens.  “In their final papers, [students talk] about this obligation of citizenship and talk about their own privilege as well,” said Brammer.  When students take action against a social problem that they are passionate about, they learn how to act in the ‘real world.’

Alumni Matt Wasson ’12 commented, “[Citizenship] is not easy; it must be intentionally practiced and expanded upon.”  When he took Public Discourse, Wasson created a student-led recycling program at Duluth East High School.  He says that since taking the class, his project has become a huge interview topic.  This sentiment is shared by many other students.

During Public Discourse, many students get their first taste of citizenship.  “Public Discourse is the best thing I’ve ever done in my career,” said Brammer.  “It’s an incredible privilege to watch students have that type of transformational experience, where all of a sudden they see themselves as citizens.”

Senior French and Communication Studies major Anna Morton’s project focused on researching child sponsorship programs in Rwanda.  “Going into the semester, I had no idea how I could actually do something productive or make a real, genuine difference in any sphere,” Morton said.  Months later, she changed her mind.  “I have a responsibility as a citizen to my community.  It is both a responsibility and a privilege, because as I work to make my community a better place, I receive intrinsic benefits as well.”

Public Discourse is making change at Gustavus and in communities around the world, by preparing students to be active citizens and to stand up for what they believe in.  “What I have learned from Public Discourse has been an integral part of my education here at Gustavus,” Simons said.  Students often take what they learned from Public Discourse and apply it to projects and themes from their other classes.

Most importantly, though, Public Discourse opens students’ eyes to the world around them.  Reflecting on his experience in Public Discourse, Wasson said, “Always look for ways to learn more, dig deeper, or change your life while changing others for the better.”

Tristan Richards is a senior at Gustavus Adolphus College.

Congratulations to Minnesota Campuses Named to President’s Honor Roll

The President’s Higher Education Community Service Honor Roll, launched in 2006, annually highlights the role colleges and universities play in solving community problems and placing more students on a lifelong path of civic engagement by recognizing institutions that achieve meaningful, measureable outcomes in the communities they serve. The 2013 Honor Roll recipients will be announced at the American Council on Education’s 95th Annual Meeting, Leading Change on Monday March 4, 2013.

We are delighted to announce that 18 Minnesota Campus Compact member campuses are recognized in the The 2013 Honor Roll. Congratulations to the following campuses:

Honor Roll with Distinction:

• Augsburg College
• Metropolitan State University
• Winona State University

Honor Roll Members:

• Carleton College
• Central Lakes College
• Century College
• College of St. Benedict
• Gustavus Adolphus College
• Hamline University
• Macalester College
• Minnesota State University Mankato
• Normandale Community College
• St. Catherine University
• St. Cloud State University
• St. John’s University
• St. Olaf College
• University of Minnesota Crookston
• University of Minnesota Duluth

Some Reflections on our Conversations About the Public Purposes of Higher Education

“How should higher education help us create the society we want?” isn’t your usual water cooler topic of conversation. When Minnesota Campus Compact and partners around the state convened 12 dialogues focused on that question, many of the 295 participants—students, educators, nonprofit leaders, newspaper editors, even state legislators on higher education committees—commented that they had never talked about it before. Yet when given the chance to share their own experiences and perspectives, and to listen to others’, most emerged with new energy, insights, and connections with others who care about higher education’s public purposes.

image:freedigitalphotos.net

The dialogues began by considering three options outlined in the National Issues Forums discussion guide: focus on staying competitive in the global economy by emphasizing STEM education; work together and repair an ailing society by supporting a broader liberal education; and ensure that everyone gets a fair chance by ensuring they can pursue higher education without accumulating huge debts. Facilitators emphasized that the guide was meant to provoke conversation and that participants were welcome to disagree with its points, to add important ideas they thought were missing, to synthesize the options as they saw fit, and so on. The goal was to come to their own answers to the question.

Participants generally saw the three options as interconnected. Increased
opportunity to attend college, for instance, would boost economic competitiveness by no longer wasting so many people’s talents and potential—and it would help to “repair an ailing society” since inequality is at the root of many social problems. A broad, actively engaging approach to education would encourage more students to be interested in STEM and would develop the non-technical skills critical to innovation and economic development; incorporating ethics in education would also encourage (if not guarantee) the socially responsible use of technical advances. In a diverse, global society, what people used to refer to as “soft skills” (problem-solving, teamwork, cultural awareness, and communication—sometimes specified as including listening as well as speaking and writing) have become the core, transferable skills necessary for professional success, civic participation, and life in general.

As a result, dialogue participants frequently supported a more interdisciplinary and community-engaged higher education. Some of those pursuing science degrees mentioned being motivated by earlier experiences such as testing lake water to inform local environmental policy decisions. Learning that seemed relevant to students and their communities—that gave them the chance to learn and contribute outside the classroom—was powerful. Since we don’t know exactly what the economy or society will need years from now, we must teach people how to think and learn, prepare them to innovate and collaborate, coach them to act responsibly. That does not mean indoctrinating students with particular values or taking over the moral guidance provided by parents and spiritual leaders, but engaging them in dialogue and action across differences and recognizing that no education is neutral.

Another clear theme was that we cannot consider higher education apart from other educational institutions and opportunities—early childhood, K-12 schools, community-based learning, on-the-job training, etc. Many people voiced concern that too many students are showing up at college needing remedial or developmental classes, which contributes to high debt and low graduation rates. Many also lamented the perceived stigma on attending a two-year college or taking time after high school to gain “real world” experience and greater focus before entering higher education. Even students from relatively privileged backgrounds thought that they had not been ready for college right out of high school, yet they found themselves on campus because it was an unquestioned expectation—and at least one student suggested that deciding what you want to do with the rest of your life shouldn’t be so expensive.

To increase students’ success in college and society’s benefit from its investments, dialogue participants were eager to see more people, programs, and institutions encouraging young people to understand and consider multiple options, to find the path right for them and the resources that will help them follow it. They want the same for older people, for higher education is no longer a go-once-and-only-when-you’re-young kind of thing. Providing more deliberate and accessible support for transitions both to college and after college—creating a more seamless, collaborative system of education—was a clear priority across the state.

(Only a few students at one four-year institution expressed strong opposition to increased access to college. They struggled to consider the public purposes of higher education, focusing instead on ramifications for themselves—if more people graduated from college, their own degrees would “be less valuable in the marketplace” when they searched for a job.)

In a departure from the standard NIF format, to support local action as well as deliberation, after participants discussed how higher education should help us create the society we want, they gathered in small groups to strategize around specific priorities for change that they identified. Those discussing the cost of higher education and growing student debt saw that as a major challenge but had a particularly hard time defining find concrete, actionable items to address it. Interestingly, one group of first-generation college students, also African immigrants, said they were better students than they had been in high school, and one added that she needed to do well precisely because college was so expensive; high school required no direct payments, but in college if she did not excel her family’s money would be “wasted,” which they could not afford.

Groups at most of the dialogues focused on deepening partnerships between K-12 schools and higher education—aligning expectations and messages, supplementing educational programming, supporting more service-learning, internships, and other engaged types of learning—and some individuals reported coming away with ideas for steps they could take, despite the daunting task. Others explored how they could provide more collaborative learning opportunities, both by sharing higher education resources (computer labs and other facilities, as well as people) with the broader community and by recognizing community assets that advance both formal and informal learning.

Many participants emphasized the need for continued dialogue, organized in ways that would make it possible for even more people to be at the table. This series had few attendees without any higher education experience, so future events might provide child care as well as food, involve interpreters or offer opportunities for dialogue within particular linguistic or cultural communities. More time would also allow for more substantial consideration of local issues, assets, and practical strategies for change. As one participant said, higher education is “critical infrastructure” for Minnesota, and though its deterioration is not as dramatically visible as a bridge collapse, it has serious consequences for our economic vitality and social and civic well-being.

We are grateful not only to the National Issues Forums Institute and the American Commonwealth Partnership for developing the issue guide, but also to the Blandin Foundation, the Travelers Foundation, InCommons, A Minnesota Without Poverty, and all our local partners for supporting the series of dialogues in Bemidji, Brooklyn Center, Duluth, Mankato, Minneapolis, Moorhead, Morris, Rochester, St. Cloud, and St. Paul. Much more challenging than facilitating these dialogues is effectively building on the new connections and energy that emerged there. Our next steps include writing a report to share with policy makers and other stakeholders and working with local partners on follow up, such as organizing additional dialogues about specific priorities and strategies for change, disseminating information about relevant community initiatives, and supporting implementation of the ideas for collaborative action that participants already identified.

As one university chancellor pointed out, the growth of online learning
opportunities, financial pressures, and other factors will probably result in
fairly radical changes in higher education in the years ahead—making it
critically important that we clarify our sense of its public purposes and invest in ways that increase its value.

Julie Plaut and John Hamerlinck

Student Profile: Will Lutterman, St. Olaf College

Will Lutterman is a sophomore studying Economics, Environmental Studies and Statistics at St Olaf College.  In his first year at St Olaf, Will wanted to pursue his passion for public policy through opportunities that would give him practical experience.  He explains, “I see my college education going hand in hand with community development work.  They are equally valuable to me.”  In exploring his options, he was connected to a city councilwoman who opened the door for him to get involved in many projects throughout the community.  Among the many projects Will was heavily involved in were Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE), Northfield Downtown Development Corporation (NDDC), Northfield Marriage Amendment Opposition, Northfield Anaerobic Digester, and an independent study on job creation in Northfield.  Will says, “[Public policy] is exactly what I want to do when I graduate. I’m using this to build a repertoire of passion, strengths, skills, and experience in order to tackle the larger world head on.”

Through all of his community involvement Will has taken on an incredible amount of leadership roles and pursued many impressive opportunities for civic engagement.  For example, through PACE Will was able to research and present a new style of energy retrofitting program.  He even wrote the Northfield’s documentation and designed the entire program.  Through NDDC Will built a database of local businesses, crunched data on the town’s industry profile and is now working to provide and analysis of the local economy to promote economic development.  He provided the City Council with information about the proposed Marriage Amendment and testified in opposition, which brought the council to approve a resolution to publicly oppose the amendment.  This fall, Will began to do research for an initial feasibility study of a proposed anaerobic digester near Northfield.  Currently, he is preparing for a J-Term independent study for which he plans to do a comprehensive job creation analysis of Northfield based on his previous work through NDDC.  This will ultimately serve an academic purpose as well as advise the city in regards to economic development.

Will has found that after only one year at St Olaf his civic engagement service has connected him with the community on a very intimate level.  He says, “I grew up in the Twin Cities, but Northfield is my real home. After living here only a year, I find joy coming back and I want to make a real and serious commitment to a place where I see people coming together and living their lives in the best ways possible.”

UMM Civic Engagement Rooted in Sustainability

The University of Minnesota Morris is one of the most environmentally responsible colleges in the United States with recognition from multiple national organizations.  Civic engagement and sustainable, environmentally friendly focused initiatives are foundational pieces of the institution’s mission.  Students seeking change in their local communities have led these efforts and have also received national leadership recognition for their efforts.

Students are involved in many outreach programs that promote community engagement as it relates to Morris’ core values of sustainability.  For example, the University of Minnesota Morris has programs such as the Center for Small Towns, Minnesota GreenCorps, and the West Central Regional Development Partnership.  Senior Seth Elsen is very involved in the Center for Small Towns and was able to pursue an internship at the Upper Sioux Indian Community through the Center for Small Towns.  Elsen did research and conducted a feasibility study for the Upper Sioux Community on wind and solar energy prospects for the reservation trust lands before presenting his findings to the organization.  He said, “During my presentation, I stood there knowing I was making a difference, and hopefully helping make something very big happen for the community, both economically and environmentally.”

Laura Anne Hunt is also a Senior at Morris but has been very involved in the Minnesota GreenCorps program at the University of Minnesota Morris.  Within the program Hunt has chosen to focus on green infrastructure, specifically urban forestry.  As a GreenCorps member, Laura Anne began the conversation about trees in her community to help people understand why they are so important and beneficial, threats to trees, and how community members can contribute.  She says, “This experience has opened my eyes to real-world work, professional relationship building and growth. It was a great experience to have as a college student, because I could start a project and still have all of the resources of the University to learn from and get help from.”

Through Morris’ sustainable civic engagement programs, students like Hunt and Elsen are given the opportunity to enrich their college experience and provide resources to local communities they are passionate about.  Elsen said, “It has given me a way to gain experience in possible careers, while also giving me a chance to apply what I learn in classrooms to the real-world setting.  I am very grateful for the opportunities that have been given to me here at University of Minnesota Morris.”

Click here to learn more about sustainability at University of Minnesota Morris.

Civic Engagement Teaches Workplace Skills

Click image to view or download as a PDF.

A Path Toward Cooperation

By Janet Lewis Muth

This summer I attended the State of the State conference hosted by MN Campus Compact at Macalester College.  While I appreciated all of the speakers in the “TED Talk” style sessions, I was most drawn to the message delivered by Dick Senese, from University of Minnesota Extension.  His main message – or at least what I took away from it – was that we too often surround ourselves by the messages that we already agree with, and neglect to listen to those messages that conflict with our already held beliefs about an issue.

I was intrigued enough by the topic to sit in on his small group discussion – and found myself the only community partner present in the group.  The conversation was a nice deepening of what he’d presented, along with resource and idea sharing for folks with specific issues they wanted to explore or address.  I raised the issue of having difficulty partnering with a group in our community because of their perception of who we are as an organization – and in particular who we aim to serve.  One of the ideas presented was to seek out an intermediary – or spanner – who has a relationship both with the group in question and our organization.  The point was to use existing relationships to strengthen avenues of communication and to even build new relationships.  I left the conference feeling far more confident than I had in weeks about how to move forward on several issues in our work.

So how did it work out?  In one instance, it didn’t really pan out.  We were trying to engage the local vendors at the farmers’ market to support the use of a card reader that would allow customers to shop using a debit card or their food support dollars.   We met with the local Chamber of Commerce to discuss the issue, and while they weren’t able to help us create new relationships or lines of communication, we did strengthen our relationship with them by broaching the subject and using them as a resource.  In the other instance, it appears to be working out quite well.  We’ve been dealing with a large-scale bed bug infestation in many of the low-income apartment complexes in our community.  We learned about the issue through tenants of the apartments who were frustrated at being asked to pay for the extermination costs.  Our initial approach was to pursue legal means to force landlords to pay for the extermination and relieve low-income families from this burden.  But through several conversations with multiple parties with whom we have relationships and who also have relationships with the landlords, it became clear that we were ignoring the significant problem/cost/burden that is placed on the landlords in this type of situation.  We have not yet come to a solution, but we have already partnered with Public Health to deliver a forum on the issue and are actively working to develop more educational opportunities for tenants.  In addition, we are pursuing a conversation with a City inspector, introduced to us through our partnership with Public Health, with the goal of brainstorming solutions that are acceptable to all parties involved.  I no longer feel like we are fighting an impossible battle; I feel like we are on the path toward cooperation.

In short, we’ve learned to take a step back from the really tough issues and approach them less from an “Us or Them” mentality and more from a “We’re in This Together” mentality.  Many thanks to Campus Compact for sponsoring the event and giving us the resources to move our work forward in such a positive way!

Janet Lewis Muth is Project Coordinator at Growing Up Healthy in Rice County.