{"title":"Civic-Minded Graduate: Additional Evidence","authors":"R. Bringle, Elizabeth Wall","doi":"10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0026.101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The civic- minded graduate (CMG) construct provides a set of common civic learning objectives that can guide the design, implementation, and assessment of curricular and cocurricular civic engagement programs. This research examined components posited to be part of the CMG construct and found correlations between identity as a student and CMG, between civic identity and CMG, between CMG and all of the motives for volunteering on the Volunteer Functions Inventory, and between CMG and measures of interest in charity, service programs, and advocacy types of service. Implications for practice and future research are proffered. The sine qua non of service- learning as well as some cocurricular civic engagement programs (Bringle, Studer, Wilson, Clayton, & Steinberg, 2011; Jacoby, 2015; Weinberg, 2005) is to develop democratically based civic attitudes, civic knowledge, civic skills, and civic intentions in students so that they can be engaged and effective citizens who contribute to the public good during their lives and careers (Hatcher, 2008). Because higher education is increasingly expected to support graduates who are committed to lifelong habits of civic engagement (Bringle, Games, & Malloy, 1999; Colby, Ehrlich, Beaumont, & Stephens, 2003; Percy, Zimpher, & Brukardt, 2006; Saltmarsh & Hartley, 2011), the availability of clear conceptual frameworks that detail the nature of students’ civic outcomes is important to progress on designing programs and conducting research. There is no com-monly accepted set of outcomes for civic education (Battistoni, 2013; Hatcher, Bringle, & Hahn, 2017; Hemer & Reason, 2017). For example, Battistoni (2002) identified 12 different meanings of citizenship, civic education, and associated civic skills, each linked to a cluster of disciplines and professions: (a) liberalism, (b) communitari-anism, (c) participatory democracy, (d) public work, (e) social capital, (f) civic professionalism, (g) social responsibility, (h) social justice, (i) connected knowing and the ethic of care, (j)","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan journal of community service learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0026.101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12
Abstract
The civic- minded graduate (CMG) construct provides a set of common civic learning objectives that can guide the design, implementation, and assessment of curricular and cocurricular civic engagement programs. This research examined components posited to be part of the CMG construct and found correlations between identity as a student and CMG, between civic identity and CMG, between CMG and all of the motives for volunteering on the Volunteer Functions Inventory, and between CMG and measures of interest in charity, service programs, and advocacy types of service. Implications for practice and future research are proffered. The sine qua non of service- learning as well as some cocurricular civic engagement programs (Bringle, Studer, Wilson, Clayton, & Steinberg, 2011; Jacoby, 2015; Weinberg, 2005) is to develop democratically based civic attitudes, civic knowledge, civic skills, and civic intentions in students so that they can be engaged and effective citizens who contribute to the public good during their lives and careers (Hatcher, 2008). Because higher education is increasingly expected to support graduates who are committed to lifelong habits of civic engagement (Bringle, Games, & Malloy, 1999; Colby, Ehrlich, Beaumont, & Stephens, 2003; Percy, Zimpher, & Brukardt, 2006; Saltmarsh & Hartley, 2011), the availability of clear conceptual frameworks that detail the nature of students’ civic outcomes is important to progress on designing programs and conducting research. There is no com-monly accepted set of outcomes for civic education (Battistoni, 2013; Hatcher, Bringle, & Hahn, 2017; Hemer & Reason, 2017). For example, Battistoni (2002) identified 12 different meanings of citizenship, civic education, and associated civic skills, each linked to a cluster of disciplines and professions: (a) liberalism, (b) communitari-anism, (c) participatory democracy, (d) public work, (e) social capital, (f) civic professionalism, (g) social responsibility, (h) social justice, (i) connected knowing and the ethic of care, (j)