Sustained Engagement with a Single Community Partner

Abstract

As scholarly work has recently turned its attention to the role of the community partner in Community Service-Learning (CSL) relationships, empirical frameworks for describing and executing community partnerships have emerged. This article applies those frameworks to one such partnership, which is presented from the perspective of both the community partner and the faculty member. The article details the work of the community partner and faculty member (coauthors) to design and revise CSL projects for a total of seven teams of business Spanish students. These projects advanced the work of a community organization serving Hispanic microentrepreneurs in need of support to formalize and grow their businesses.

Affordances, complexities, and challenges of intercultural citizenship for foreign language teachers

“…For example, in the 2013 Hispania special issue The Scholarship of Community Engagement: Advancing Partnerships in Spanish and Portuguese (not reporting any study on Portuguese, however), Barreneche and Ramos‐Flores (), Carney (), Ebacher (), Hartfield‐Méndez (), and other authors published in the journal beyond that special issue (e.g., Pellettieri, ) departed from the guest editors’ premise, shared with intercultural citizenship theory, that “it is an advantage as well as a challenge trying to teach the utilitarian aspects of languages while also connecting them to other more humanistic goals” (Hellebrandt & Jorge, 2013, p. 209). While Hartfield‐Méndez () addressed internationalization needs explicitly, Bugel (); Lear and Sánchez (); Tijunelis, Satterfield, and Benkí (2013); and Petrov (), among others, fell within the “within one country” option together with Tacelosky () and Jovanović and Filipović ()—the only two cases outside the United States (Mexico and Serbia, respectively). J. García, Pierce, and Zambrano () described a study abroad option in which American college students collaborated with Ecuadorian adolescents to produce short films.…”

Toward a framework for heritage learner service learning in languages for specific purposes

“…In the process, students acquire specialized language skills, learn about the needs of and issues facing local communities and community partners, build professional networks, and are exposed to linguistic and cultural diversity within the target language (e.g., Hellebrandt & Varona, 1999;Barreneche, 2011;Pérez-Llantada & Watson, 2011;Zapata, 2011;Falce-Robinson & Strother, 2012;Lafford, 2012;Lear, 2012;Ruggiero, 2015). At the same time, community partners receive student support and additional resources in meeting service objectives and local community needs (see Lear & Abbott, 2009;Hellebrandt & Jorge, 2013;Lear & Sánchez, 2013). In addition, among other student-learning benefits, studies report gains in student confidence in language use as well as increased motivation for continued study in the target language (e.g., Falce-Robinson & Strother, 2012;Barreneche & Ramos-Flores, 2013;Petrov, 2013;Medina & Gordon, 2014).…”

“…Foremost among the limitations informing SL design are access to local heritage-language communities, community partner needs, the focus and learning objectives of the course, and the language proficiency and technical skills of the students in question (Abbott & Lear, 2010). Student career interests, training in related professional skills, and preparation for community service, for example, may be limiting factors in the choice of community partners and in project design for an LSP SL project (Lear & Abbott, 2009;Lear & Sánchez, 2013). Yet another factor is the number of hours students may be required to commit to SL.…”

The CruCES Project: A Consideration of Service Learning and Intercultural Sensitivity Among Heritage Learners

“…CSL is likewise shown to benefit students in terms of language acquisition, motivation, career opportunities, knowledge of other cultures, as well as in self-esteem and in attitudes regarding cultural difference and community service (e.g., Barreneche, 2011;Ebacher, 2013;Falce-Robinson & Strother, 2012;Grassi, Hanley & Liston, 2004;Hellebrandt & Varona, 1999;Medina & Gordon, 2014;Pellettieri, 2011;Pérez-Llantada & Watson, 2011;Zapata, 2011). These benefits are likewise extended to the community as local organizations receive needed language other skilled help in meeting the needs of local populations in the target language (e.g., Hellebrandt & Jorge, 2013;Hellebrandt, Arries & Varona 2003;Lear & Sanchez, 2013;Lear & Abbott, 2009). Furthermore, CSL complements and furthers the goals of LSP, as many educators and scholars likewise recognize (e.g., Nelson & Scott, 2008;Ruggiero 2015).…”