Hybrid E-Service Learning Practice during COVID-19: Promoting Dog Adoption in Philosophy of Life Course in Taiwan

Abstract

There are several models for e-service learning, from traditional (without any online content) to extreme online service learning (without any actual interactive elements) which suggested by L. S. Waldner. In Type III, (hybrid) e-service learning, the instruction or service can be offered partially onsite and partially online. Waldner cites four successful case studies to prove such a model can work. Teachers should prepare students to participate in service learning during other disasters that may occur anytime, and offer servification dimensions for teaching. Using the Waldner Type III model, this paper aims to promote and stimulate service learning in shelters, as well as onsite and online, for the adoption of animals. Considering this paper is the leading research on the project’s application, we employ a qualitative research method, observing the students’ reflection work to clarify the basic proposition, and to describe what happened when we changed the model of hybrid e-service learning from Type III to Type I during the epidemic.

1. Preface

This article discusses the process of service learning (SL) practiced through action research at Fu-Jen Catholic University, New Taipei City in Taiwan, during the COVID-19 epidemic. This study adopts an action research model, ho** to solve two problems faced by the author in teaching onsite SL. The first problem is that students are not interested in SL. Service learning has been implemented at Fu-Jen Catholic University for many years. In the implementation, in addition to being able to combine with professional courses or school-defined core courses, SL can also be taught as a stand-alone course. However, students were not interested in SL and found it troublesome because of the inappropriate methods they had experienced before in high school, or because of the misunderstanding shown by their seniors. This can be seen in their experience with students’ dissatisfaction with SL as shared on an online forum called Dcard in Taiwan. For example, on 11 April 2018, a student coming from Fu-Jen University posted a story on Dcard titled “Stupid Service Learning” (https://www.dcard.tw/f/fju/p/228667873, accessed on 1 June 2022); he complained about the distress SL was causing him. Some other students also thought that SL was just volunteering work, or that it was a waste of time and life. This article is still there, at the end of July 2022, and we can find some similar articles there today. We can also see similar reports in the news. For example, in a 2 February 2021 report, a study by a civil society group pointed out that less than 20% of students in SL in Taiwan believe they have learned something [1]. The second problem is the disruption caused by COVID-19. To prevent the spread of COVID-19, many SL courses have been canceled. Since SL is a helpful learning model for students, can we lead students in a more flexible way? For this purpose, this paper examines the conducting of hybrid e-service learning (eS-L), which is being employed in the Philosophy of Life course, and the model of action research, to determine whether this method of SL can improve the attitudes of students, and whether it provides the teachers with more flexibility.

2. Literature Review

As we already know, SL is a common mode of instruction and is associated with experiential education [2]. Beginning with John Dewey, SL is a learning process that combines learning with hands-on experience. Thus, Dapena, et al. argued that SL is an approach to teaching and learning that allows students to provide service to the community while gaining competency in the curriculum [3]. This statement is also consistent with J.C. Kandall’s description of service learning as a program, a philosophy, and a pedagogy [4]. In the context of higher education, SL emphasizes that college students validate what they have learned in the classroom through experience by actually participating in community service activities. Not only the actual experience, but also the different reflective works such as writing and report compilation, integrate the relevance of what they have learned to the real world [5]. With this goal, MaCarthy argued that learning in SL can be classified as a triangle built on experience (doing), reflection (learning), and knowledge (thinking) [6].

In recent years, due to technological advances and the epidemic, scholars have begun to move SL from face-to-face to online delivery. As we have seen, the discussion in the literature on eS-L can be divided into two main parts: research on the practice of eS-L, and the demands of eS-L.

2.1. Research on E-Service Learning in Theory and Practice

Regarding eS-L, the Practical guide on e-Service-Learning in response to COVID-19 published by the European Association for Service Learning in Higher Education in 2020 cites Waldner, et al. and Manjarrés Riesco, et al. as defining eS-L as follows: “e-Service-Learning (electronic Service-Learning—eS-L) or Virtual Service-Learning (vSL) is a Service-Learning course mediated by information and cmmunication technologies which the instructional component, the service component, or both occurs online, often in a hybrid model” [7,8]. According to the definition given by EASLHE, eS-L is still a type of SL, but uses the Web as a tool in part or in whole, or has the Web as a scope of service. Additionally, according to Yusof, et al., service learning can be divided into traditional SL, in which both service and learning are face-to-face, or that based on the degree of dependence on technology, such that SL is fully virtual [9]. Both service and learning can be either onsite or virtual tech-based SL, and whether it is service or learning, both are virtual extreme SLs (vSL/eS-L). In this action research, we adopted the second option and adopted a course content that was partly face-to-face and partly virtual, regardless of service or learning. By eS-L, here, we mean that for the service objects, we used any suitable software and hardware to complete the SL.

The operations in our courses are based on those of Waldner, et al. [10]. Research about online SL appeared as early as 2010. According to Waldner, et al. [8], SL content can range from traditional (without any virtual content) to fully online (without any onsite elements, which is called extreme e-service-learning (xSL)). Waldner cites two case studies to demonstrate that xSL does work. Waldner, et al. later proposed a further theoretical study on eS-L and divided eS-L into four categories [8]. Among them, Type III (hybrid) e-service learning can be partly onsite and partly online, providing guidance or service. Waldner’s model became the basis for later studies. For example, Jill Stefaniak also divided eS-L into four categories [11].

2.2. Demands for E-Service Learning

Before the COVID-19 epidemic, many scholars had noticed the advantages of eS-L and tried to practice it in school. For example, Branker, et al. in 2010 tried to enable engineering students to use SL for businesses by promoting Green Information Technology through the internet [12]. They believed that this would help students apply their learning on the one hand, and help companies fulfill their social responsibility on the other. After the epidemic, the implementation level of SL has been affected; we observed that more and more implementing institutions or schools have been studying how to continue SL in a situation that may at any time be interrupted by external factors that prevent us from doing our job properly. In such a situation, teachers should be ready to help students continue to participate in SL throughout various types of disasters, and provide the required teaching. In response to this situation, many schools and institutions began to implement SL during the epidemic. For example, the topics of the academic seminars held in 2021 and 2022 by the Service Learning Inter-School Alliance Service in the Northern District of Taiwan were related to the epidemic. The 2021 symposium also included several papers and keynote speeches on eS-L [13,14].

Many studies have revealed the actual situation of eS-L. Kenji Ishihara and Hitomi Yokote provided an overview of the theory and practice of eS-L in their paper “Reflection on Online Service-Learning at ICU” [15]. Based on their teaching experience of leading students to conduct hybrid SL (partly online and partly face-to-face) during the epidemic at Tokyo International Christian University in Japan, they discussed how to maintain SL through technology during the epidemic, as well as the problems arising from online SL, including over-reliance on internet technology, the lack of actual interaction, or the presence of students who may have insufficient learning experience to discuss. Michael J. Figuccio highlighted that eS-L can eliminate the limitation of physical space and reduce the anxiety of students when participating [16]. Moreover, compared with onsite service, students are more satisfied with themselves under these conditions. M.E. Schmidt led a team of students in a child psychology course on service learning, and observed that students may have lacked face-to-face experience during the process, but they still highly identified with eS-L [17]. The scholars also noted that eS-L was conducted in relation to an operation system. Dapena, et al. used the Microsoft 365 system, which is commonly used by students for SL, and monitored the students’ status during SL through the system’s monitoring function [3]. They also created a webpage related to SL so that participants could access SL-related information and content at any time.

In fact, eS-L has become a mode of operation recognized by official organizations. As we have said, the handbook Practical Guide on e-Service-Learning in response to COVID-19 was published by EASLHE in 2020 to support the continuation of service activities. In Chapter 3 (pp. 23–35 of the book), it is suggested that the standards for operating eS-L should be compared to the requirements of traditional SL in the past, except that these requirements are achieved in a digital environment [7]. The chapter also gives advice that should be heeded in areas such as technology, communication, and teaching. This guide also provides operators with 23 different communication software programs, and gives directions for the use of and practical help for eS-L.

2.3. Analysis of the Literature Review

Observing the research on eS-L, Marcus, et al.’s research results concerning eS-L in the paper “A Systematic Review of e Service Learning in Higher Education” made observations and suggestions [18]. After sifting through 97 results from two journal databases and finally selecting 20 of them for research, they noticed that most of the research papers, in terms of methodology and research design, typically used cases as research objects, followed by mixed methods, action research or qualitative research. They noted that, while many teachers who engage in lectures are concerned that switching from traditional to online training will create barriers to delivery, many studies have shown a trend toward eS-L, regardless of the challenges teachers may face in eS-L, or in hel** students to reflect. For example, they cited Guthrie and McCracken’s paper, suggesting that reflection journaling is an appropriate tool to prevent teachers and students from lacking the teamwork relationship that traditional school services have when adopting eS-L. In the words of the Marcus team, “students were empowered to assess their own individual learning goals and collaborate with others to make meaning of their service learning experience. Reflection process is so much easier and richer with the use of technology in e-Service Learning platform. Students that were involved in eS-L also reported a strong sense of learning from the open discussion”. That is, no matter how advanced the technology, one of the important purposes of SL is guiding students to achieve learning outcomes through experience and reflection.

In addition, the earliest papers discussing eS-L are more likely to mention technical issues, especially the performance of the equipment and the user’s operating familiarity [8,10]. Although the former has been rarely mentioned in recent years, this problem still exists in the field of SL; the latter problem only continues to appear in a different form due to the continuous innovation of communication software. The internet has become more convenient, and it is beneficial to eS-L; however, there is too much communication software to choose from, which creates different problems for users. For this reason, what software should be used for eS-L becomes a new question. Dapena, et al. used the latest operation system, Microsoft 365, and the handbook of EASLHE manual lists the most readily available software [3,7]. However, the software that is needed not only matches what kind of software is available at the time (for example, FB already existed in 2010, but it may not have been used), but also includes the learning objectives and service items when eS-L is carried out.

We also noticed that most of the research on eS-L was mainly targeted at humans; as B. Jacoby stated in his definition of SL, in the action of SL, students work for the needs of humanity and communities, such that they can learn from structural reflections—there are almost no cases about animals or other entities as the service objects [2]. However, since one of the important purposes of SL is to allow students to gain valuable learning experience through practice, a variety of service methods should be considered and planned as the content of the lesson plan.

3. Operating Procedures

The purpose of this action research is to verify that the hybrid eS-L can improve students’ attitudes towards service, and give teachers more flexibility to respond. The action research undertaken in this paper dates back as far as the beginning of the 2020 epidemic, when the author discussed with volunteer groups how SL should be sustained during the epidemic. After discussion and experimentation with different approaches, it was decided that we would continue the SL in 2021–2022 through an eS-L process, identified through a collaborative design process. To determine the appropriateness of this approach to address the questions raised in the introduction, we conducted observations through this action research, focusing on the flexibility of the process to address the questions and the ability of students to develop a correct understanding of dog limb signs through the process. The implementation time of this action research was from September 2021 to May 2022. Based on Ming-Lung Wu and Zeng-Tsai Cheng, we designed this process as shown in Figure 1 [19,20].

3.1. Implementation Object of Hybrid E-Service Learning

To verify the practicability of the hybrid eS-L, we chose two classes for implementation: both classes were part of the Philosophy of Life course, and the implementation methods were all designed as a one-time program with exploration value as the focus of development. According to Liu ** new abilities;

*

Forty-two students said they had learned how to get along with dogs, get close to dogs through practical operations, develop feelings for dogs, or, having been afraid of dogs, can now overcome such difficulties;

*

Twenty-two students said they had real experiences of the problems of dog shelters and an understanding of the current problems encountered by animal protection in Taiwan;

*

Twenty students said that they recognized the hard work of animal protection volunteers;

*

Twenty-six students said they had learned the skills of online promotion and video production;

*

Eighteen students said that they will do something for the dogs, including give their support and continue to spread the word online. If they have the opportunity, they would like to bring their friends to visit the shelter.