Evans, B., C. Marsicano, and C. Lennartz “Cracks in the Bedrock of American Democracy: Differences in Civic Engagement Across Institutions,” Educational Researcher 48, no. 1 (2018): 31–44.
CENTRAL TAKEAWAY
Living on campus is associated with greater civic engagement outcomes, including ROTC enrollment, Peace Corps volunteering, and number of community service hours. Some evidence is provided to suggest that private institutions offer significantly higher numbers of civic engagement activities than public institutions, even though public institutions often have more of a focus on civic engagement in their mission statements. Finally, liberal arts colleges were ten percentage points more likely to require a service-learning course as part of the curriculum than were research institutions.
SUMMARY
The purpose of this study was to examine institutional characteristics and their association with civic engagement activities and outcomes. Civic engagement activities included mission statement emphases, infrastructure (i.e., having a civic engagement office, number of staff per 1,000 students, and membership in the Campus Compact), and activities (i.e., service trips, day of service, alumni day of service, legislative action day, service orientation, themed residence halls, scholarships for current students, scholarships for incoming students, service work study programs, required service-learning courses, and optional service-learning courses). Civic engagement outcomes were assessed by measures including membership on the President’s Service Honor Roll; Carnegie civic engagement classification; membership in ROTC: Army, Navy, and Air Force per 1,000 students respectively; and membership in Peace Corps per 1,000 students.
The data source for the study was complicated and nuanced, merging IPEDS data with “civic engagement website information” (p. 35), institutional mission statements, and ranking information provided “from the 2013–2014 edition of Robert Kelchen’s Washington Monthly ‘Schools Most Devoted to Service’” list” (p.35). In addition, the authors examined research institutions that were part of the American Association of Universities (AAU), liberal arts colleges included in the Annapolis Group, “a consortium of 125 elite, undergraduate focused liberal arts colleges” (p. 35), and commuter institutions that U.S. News & World Report listed as “Universities Where Most Freshmen Commute” (p. 34).
The results from the study derived from two sets of analyses. The first set compared institutions: private versus public, research versus liberal arts, and residential versus commuter. The second included three regression models that examined the numbers of Peace Corps volunteers, total ROTC enrollment, and community service hours (in thousands), respectively, as a function of institutional control (i.e., private versus public), research funding, student services funding, total residence hall capacity, total undergraduate enrollment, and SAT Composite 75th percentile with ACT accordance.
DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS
Results from the first set of analyses serve as a point of interest for CIC members. First, although public institutions centered their mission statements on civic engagement to a greater degree than private institutions, the latter invested more in civic engagement. When compared to public institutions, privates were more likely to have a civic engagement residence hall (e.g., 11 percentage points higher); were more likely to have an office dedicated to civic engagement; and had “ten times the number of staff per capita than publics” (p. 37). Privates also spent, on average, four times more on student services than did public institutions. Finally, private institutions had nearly two more Peace Corps members per thousand students than publics, although publics were more likely “to receive the Carnegie Foundation’s civic engagement classification and had a larger proportion of students in the Air Force ROTC” (p. 37).
The authors also examined liberal arts institutions versus research universities. Although there were no differences in mission statements between the two, liberal arts colleges, on average, employed over “three times the number of staff members per 1,000 students than did research institutions” (p. 37). Even though the option for taking service-learning classes existed for students enrolled at each type of institution, liberal arts colleges were more likely to require them (i.e., ten percentage points more). At nearly “twice the rate of research institutions” (p. 37), three of every 1,000 graduates from liberal arts college became members of the Peace Corps. On the contrary, research institutions were more likely than liberal arts colleges to offer days of service for students and alumni; have a service work-study program; sponsor legislative action days; and had “far greater” (p. 37) Navy and Air Force participation.
The authors found the greatest differences comparing residential to commuter institutions. By way of infrastructure, residential institutions had nearly double the likelihood of having a service-learning office and “ten times the number of staff members per capita” (p. 37). Also, the opportunities for students to participate in all of the 11 activities were greater at the residential colleges when compared to commuter institutions. In tandem, residential college graduates were more likely to join the Peace Corps and ROTC than those at commuter colleges. The one outlying finding involved the Carnegie Classification: Commuter colleges were more likely to appear on this list than residential colleges.
For the regression analysis, results demonstrate that residency is “an important determinant of civic engagement outcomes in this comprehensive sample of four-year colleges” (p. 38). Residency mattered, regardless of control (i.e., private versus public), research funding, student services funding, total undergraduate enrollment, and SAT Composite 75th percentile with ACT accordance.
IMPLICATIONS FOR ACTION BY CAMPUS LEADERS
CIC member institutions may have some competitive advantages regarding their programmatic offerings as they relate to civic engagement and outcomes. Although public institutions often benefit from some seemingly romanticized connections between public education and service, the data presented in this paper suggest otherwise. That Peace Corps participation is much more related to attending a private and/or liberal arts and/or residential institution seems like a message CIC institutions may want to embrace. Aligning CIC messaging with the renowned reputation that Peace Corps participation deserves may help to attract, retain, and graduate the civically engaged students our democracy so desperately needs.
For CIC leadership, perhaps a review of strategies that center CIC members as stewards of civic engagement might be needed, especially during a presidential election year. In light of the data presented here, the CIC research office may wish to conduct a civic engagement review and/or data collection exercise at its member institutions as a way of initiating a collective argument for Carnegie inclusion based on the importance CIC members place on civic engagement.
Finally, there is still power in residential college experiences. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, this study serves as an important reminder that the civically engaged graduate was most likely a student living on campus at some moment in time.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Brent J. Evans is an assistant professor in the Department of Education at Vanderbilt University.
Christopher R. Marsicano is an assistant professor in the Department of Educational Studies at Davidson College.
Courtney J. Lennartz is a senior manager in the People Analytics Department of PricewaterhouseCoopers.
RECOMMENDED FOLLOW-UP LITERATURE
Jacoby, B. Civic Engagement in Higher Education: Concepts and Practices. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2009.
Rowan-Kenyon, H., M. E. Soldner, and K. Kurotsuchi Inkelas. “The Contributions of Living-Learning Programs on Developing Sense of Civic Engagement in Undergraduate Students.” Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice 44 no. 4, (2007): 1147–1175.
Sax, L. J. “Citizenship Development and the American College Student.” New Directions for Institutional Research 122, (2004): 65–80.