Service Learning in Auditory Rehabilitation Courses: The University of Texas at Dallas Purpose The aim of this work was to review service learning (SL) principles and its implementation into the auditory rehabilitation (AR) curriculum at the University of Texas at Dallas and to evaluate the courses to determine whether potential benefits of SL are worth the substantial time commitment and course restructuring. ... Supplement Article
Supplement Article  |   December 01, 2011
Service Learning in Auditory Rehabilitation Courses: The University of Texas at Dallas
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Carol G. Cokely
    The University of Texas at Dallas
  • Linda M. Thibodeau
    The University of Texas at Dallas
  • Correspondence to Carol G. Cokely: cokely@utdallas.edu
  • Editor and Associate Editor: Sheila Pratt
    Editor and Associate Editor: Sheila Pratt×
Article Information
Audiologic / Aural Rehabilitation / Professional Issues & Training / Supplement: Using Service Learning to Enhance Undergraduate and Graduate Education in Audiology and Aural Rehabilitation
Supplement Article   |   December 01, 2011
Service Learning in Auditory Rehabilitation Courses: The University of Texas at Dallas
American Journal of Audiology, December 2011, Vol. 20, S233-S240. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2011/10-0050)
History: Received December 10, 2010 , Accepted September 12, 2011
 
American Journal of Audiology, December 2011, Vol. 20, S233-S240. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2011/10-0050)
History: Received December 10, 2010; Accepted September 12, 2011
Web of Science® Times Cited: 2

Purpose The aim of this work was to review service learning (SL) principles and its implementation into the auditory rehabilitation (AR) curriculum at the University of Texas at Dallas and to evaluate the courses to determine whether potential benefits of SL are worth the substantial time commitment and course restructuring.

Method Via retrospective review, student outcomes for 25 students from 3 cohorts who completed the adult AR course prior to implementation of SL curriculum (pre-SL) were compared with those of 28 students from 3 SL cohorts. Data included final examination grades, ratings for overall course content, amount learned, clarity of responsibility, workload, relevance, and course comments. Student journals from the SL group and mentor surveys also were reviewed.

Results The majority of student outcomes were comparable for pre-SL and SL cohorts. Clarity of responsibility and workload were rated lower for SL courses than for pre-SL classes, with medium and small to medium effect sizes, respectively. Mentors rated the projects and process of high value and benefit, and several projects remain in use beyond the end of the course.

Conclusion Continued use of an SL approach is supported, but additional guidance for students is needed for reflection and project analysis.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire American Journal of Audiology content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access