MAKE IT LAST FOREVER: THE ... - National Service Resource Center

to support one of four main functions of the institutionalization process: power, proficiency, leadership, and collaboration. Each
strategy primarily, though not exclusively, supports one of these functions.
The project consisted of analysis of other research, articles, manuals, and education reform and restructuring initiatives. This
information provided important contextual information about the process of institutionalization in general and within the field of
education and service-learning. From this analysis, three phases of the process of institutionalization were identified: Capacity-
Building, Widespread Use and Support, and Systemic Integration.
Collectively, this information spawned several tools which can be used to assess and design a process of institutionalizing
service learning, including:
(1) the map of the categories and their relationship to the four functions;
(2) a list of model schools and school districts which are making good progress towards service-learning
institutionalization;
(3) a ranking of the 20 states and the District of Columbia participating in the study in terms of their progress
towards service-learning institutionalization;
(4) brief profiles of the states and their efforts to systemize service-learning;
(5) a rubric of each category of strategies and what it may look like at three phases of institutionalization;
(6) a description of the institutionalization design process, including principles of effective design and specific
recommendations on how to support each category of strategies; and
(7) illustrations of how the categories support the functions and are supported by other categories.
Data Analysis and Key Findings
The study clarified that infusing service-learning into the educational system is a formal and organized process, the
components of which can be identified, ranked, and supported. The 24 institutionalization categories demonstrate the complexity of
facilitating systemic change; the identification of 261 specific strategies used by schools, districts, and states suggests that an infinite
number of combinations of approaches are possible. This diversity of approaches indicates that while there is no blueprint for servicelearning
institutionalization, there are ways to prioritize areas of focus according to how each strategy leverages change within the
system. For example, professional development emerged as an essential category, even though some schools have managed to integrate
service-learning without any faculty training, because it can impact an entire school or district in a short period of time. Other essential
categories include: links to educational standards, curricular integration, strategic planning, organizational culture, state/district/nonprofit
personnel, funding, and partnerships. The second tier of categories are labeled “important”, and include: policy, building
personnel, project evaluation, student assessment, philosophy/mission, youth leadership, evidence of impact, and resources. The third
circle of categories are identified as “supportive” and consist of: school structures, logistical structures, pre-service education, peer
mentoring, public support, recognition, faculty camaraderie, and in-kind services.
The locations where these approaches have been implemented with particular success are provided in the study, and from this
information, over 40 model schools and districts are listed, their innovative features highlighted; approximately 50% of the schools
and districts recommended by state and national coordinators and experts were deemed exemplary. Each state is also briefly profiled
in terms of its interesting infrastructure features, and this information is used to characterize the 21 participating states according to the
three levels of progress towards institutionalization: capacity-building (6 states), widespread use and support (7 states), and systemic
10