Intergenerational Service Learning: Linking Three Generations: Concept, History, and Outcome Assessment

Abstract

In August 2006, the Foundation for Long Term Care (Albany, New York) received funding for a variant on service learning in elder care in which Boomers, other older adults, as well as college students would jointly engage in service-learning projects designed to address community needs in five different college towns and cities. This article reviews the historical antecedents to this project describing how it evolved from service of youth for the benefit of elders to the conceptualization of intergenerational service learning as service with elders. This new conceptualization ties in with Erikson's concept of generativity and the rising interest in civic engagement among elders. Recent research on the impact of volunteerism and health on an older population is reviewed, as is a summary of the different service-learning projects at each academic institution. This article discusses culminating evaluation findings on civic engagement, generativity, and satisfaction from participants at the five colleges in the project and describes challenges associated with evaluating outcomes of the diverse service-learning projects. Recommendations for future work are also discussed.

The Act of Giving: A Systematic Review of Nonfamilial Intergenerational Interaction

“…Of the seven studies that employed quantitative methods, two did not include control groups in their design, which clearly limits their ability to attribute changes in outcome measure to specific aspects of the intergenerational exchange (Chung, 2009;Hegeman et al, 2010). Of the five remaining quantitative studies, Wenzel and Rensen (2000) failed to clearly distinguish between the control and intervention groups (i.e., the methodology was designed to minimize, not eliminate intergenerational interaction) and Meshel and McGlynn's (2004) study included a control group for the adolescent group only (causing them caution in concluding that intergenerational interaction contributed to their finding of increased life satisfaction).…”

“…A service learning study partnering students from five colleges with older adult volunteers found no significant change in generativity scores for the older adults, measured over three semesters (Hegeman et al, 2010). The intergenerational interaction involved collaborating in activities planned to meet local communities' needs.…”

“…However, there is an issue with this definition. While the giver may not expect anything in return, less tangible benefits of feeling good (MorrowHowell, Hong, & Tang, 2009), achieving a sense of purpose or meaning in life, or increasing self-esteem as a result of contributing to another's wellbeing (Folts, 2006;Hegeman, Roodin, Gilliland, & Ó'Flathabháin, 2010;Reisig & Fees, 2007;Rozario, 2006) are frequently present. Whether these benefits can be classified as truly unexpected when they are often fundamental motivators of altruism and giving is questionable.…”

“…This response raises the importance of the perceived value and meaningfulness of the giving. Intergenerational research has emphasized the importance of the older generation perceiving their contribution to the interaction as valued and meaningful in order to instill a sense of generativity (Hegeman et al, 2010). reported an increase in depression scores of older adults who merely attended a recreational activity with university students in an intergenerational study, and were not encouraged to contribute to the training or education of the younger adult.…”

Fostering a new model of multigenerational learning: Older adult perspectives, community partners, and higher education

“…The success of SCIL is dependent upon the continued participation of its elders as leaders and innovators as opposed to recipients of an educational experience designed by academics or programming personnel (Hegeman, Roodin, Gilliland, & O'Flathabhain, 2010). In many ways, this is similar to the organization and success of lifelong learning institutes where older adults design and deliver programs to meet their interests (Lamb & Brady, 2005).…”