"The time is always right to do the right thing."

–Martin Luther King Jr.

I
believe that citizenship is not a passive status, but an active
process. From Washington D.C. to Somerville, MA, the pathetic state of
our dreary, divisive, ineffectual and money-driven politics results in
large part from reduced citizen participation.

When citizens do
not actively engage the world, they do not understand it. They become
more vulnerable to ideology and to the simple-minded nonsense pushed by
spin doctors whose goal is to manage impressions rather than convey
truths.

The institutions that nurtured communities – extended
families, neighborhoods, churches, service organizations, unions,
precinct organizations, political clubs, fraternal organizations, and
so on – were also venues in which people discussed current events,
challenged each other's perceptions and formed opinions. As these
institutions have all disintegrated, citizens have become more
isolated. They have become more susceptible to the pabulum broadcast on
television and the hateful and cartoonish views transmitted through
talk radio.

Coming together to make a difference in their
communities is one of the few ways in which citizens now learn
political and economic reality, one of the few contexts in which they
listen to each other and test their assumptions. You can bet that
Somerville citizens who organized to change real estate developments at
Lincoln Park, Craigie Street, Park Street, Max Pack, Magoun Square,
Assembly Square, Union Square and the Inner Belt have a much better
understanding of how Somerville's politics work than do citizens who
remained uninvolved.

Another outcome of institutional
disintegration is that schools are increasingly burdened with functions
that family and community once performed. Among these are moral and
civic education. As with most subjects, civics and American history are
largely forgotten once the tests have been taken and the grades
awarded. There is little lived experience to attach these subjects to
in students' minds.

A partial solution is service learning. It
is based on what the ancient Greeks called "praxis," and advocated by
such educators as David Kolb and Paolo Freire. Students learn concepts
in their classes and learn from practicing the concepts in their
communities. The concepts guide and inform the practice; the practice
illuminates and tests the concepts.

Service learning can
involve assisting nonprofit agencies to improve people's lives. Or
older students tutoring younger students in such basic skills as
reading. Or students participating directly in political organizing.

Lisa
Grabelsky teaches at the Winter Hill Community School. Last fall she
required her students to spend three hours working in the offices of
the presidential candidate of their choice. Students initially
resisted, but once into it, they were enthusiastic. They became more
engaged in their studies. Their sense of self worth increased.

This
suggests some benefits that go beyond learning a subject. Students who
do service learning have lower dropout rates and more positive
attitudes toward school. They are better prepared for the work world.

By
working with each other and with people outside school, they form bonds
and begin to reweave the ties of community. They discover their own
capabilities by making a tangible difference in something that matters.
They often bring their parents into the life of the community.

On
January 22nd, three Teach-for-America veterans with roots in Somerville
led a community meeting to discuss possibilities for service learning
in Somerville. After a terrific presentation, attendees engaged in
lively and wide-ranging discussion.

Many thought that service
learning should be a requirement. Former aldermanic candidate Fred
Berman said that we think math or reading is important enough to make
it a requirement. If we believe that citizenship and community service
are important, we should require them as well. He suggested that
younger kids look up to older kids, and older kids can set an example
of service.

Others were more cautionary. They said that
requiring service learning puts an additional burden on
already-burdened teachers. Its quality can vary significantly based on
the teacher's enthusiasm. School Committee member Mark Niedergang
expressed ambivalence about requiring it.

Rob Hollister, Dean
of Tufts University's Tisch College of Citizenship and Public Service,
suggested an alternative to requirements: create service learning
opportunities that are compelling. He added that students who have done
service learning enhance the colleges that they attend and enrich the
quality of their education. He believes that colleges can support
service learning in their local communities.

Regarding when to
begin service learning, School Committee member Mary Jo Rossetti
thought that the younger that it begins, the more effective it will be.
I agree. It's possible to find something meaningful for kids to do in
almost every grade level. Rossetti and Niedergang believe that we
should research the best practices across the U.S. and then improve on
them.

Local activist Alex Pirie anticipated that
service-learning might suffer from a disparity in students' income
levels, where the more advantaged are more able to participate. He
thinks that there are solutions, however. Others said that students
with little to do at home have become enthusiastic participants.

An
official from the Massachusetts Department of Education said that its
important to "map" services performed onto the curriculum. That is, to
effectively align service activities with their related subjects to
yield the greatest learning.

Pirie, described an unanticipated
benefit of the service learning in which he was involved. Adults are
better behaved when young people are watching them. And students'
intolerance of tedium makes meetings go faster.