592889

research-article2015
JEEXXX10.1177/1053825915592889Journal of Experiential EducationScott and Graham

Article
Journal of Experiential Education
2015, Vol. 38(4) 354­–372
Service-Learning: Implications © The Authors 2015
Reprints and permissions:
for Empathy and Community sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1053825915592889
Engagement in Elementary jee.sagepub.com

School Children

Katharine E. Scott1 and James A. Graham1

Abstract
The literature on service-learning outcomes in pre-adolescent children is relatively
sparse. Empathy (i.e., overall, cognitive, affective) and community engagement (i.e.,
connection to the community, civic awareness, civic efficacy) were assessed in 155
first, second, and fifth graders (n = 79 males; n = 76 females) using a pre/post design
for a five-session pilot service-learning program. Paired-samples t tests indicated
positive changes in empathy and community engagement over time. Post-community
engagement was examined by a mediation analysis of empathy (Time 2) on community
engagement (Time 1). Additional analyses revealed an overall change in empathy and
community engagement for all grades, but cognitive empathy increased only for fifth
graders. Similarly, only fifth-grade participants showed a significant change in civic
efficacy, pointing to a developmental factor for civic efficacy that should be examined
more extensively. Future research and recommendations for studies of the impact of
service-learning programs in primary and elementary school are discussed.

Keywords
service-learning, empathy, community engagement, middle childhood

Studies on adolescent and young adult service-learning outcomes have been appearing
more regularly in the fields of service-learning, education, and psychology over the
past decade. However, the current literature is not comprehensive in its covering of
service-learning outcomes in pre-adolescent children. Researchers have concluded
that service-learning is beneficial for high school and college students because of the

1The College of New Jersey, Ewing, NJ, USA

Corresponding Author:
James A. Graham, The College of New Jersey, 2000 Pennington Road, Ewing, NJ 08628, USA.
Email: jgraham@tcnj.edu
Scott and Graham 355

long-term lifestyle changes resulting from service-learning such as higher levels of

empathy and sympathy, more community engagement and civic responsibility later in
life, and lower levels of delinquency (National Commission on Service-Learning,
2002). Further research is starting to point to the benefit of service-learning for ele-
mentary schoolers, but this has mostly been examined from an academic standpoint
not from a social development perspective (Celio, Durlak, & Dymnicki, 2011; Richards
et al., 2013; Soslau & Yost, 2007).

Service-Learning Literature
Overview
Service-learning is an innovative teaching methodology that integrates community
service with academic study to teach community engagement, enrich learning, and
strengthen communities (National Commission on Service-Learning, 2002; Terry &
Bohnenberger, 2003). Service-learning must be a collaborative effort between the
community and the students in which authentic and articulated learning goals are pres-
ent, responses to genuine community needs are central, youth decision making occurs,
and analytic reflection is used at the end to explore the impact on the self and the com-
munity (Leeman, Rabin, & Román-Mendoza, 2011; National Commission on Service-
Learning, 2002). While service-learning is supported by both conservatives and
liberals, researchers in the field of education and service-learning are hesitant to con-
sider it the solution to end all problems (Terry & Bohnenberger, 2003). While there are
clearly beneficial impacts of service-learning, the influence of short-term programs
has been questioned, and Billig, Hofschire, Meyer, and Yamauchi (2006) have even
noted that service-learning may not be effective unless students are involved in at least
40 hrs of service. Further issues with service-learning arise when trying to incorporate
it into strict school curricula. Even though principals report that service-learning “has
a positive impact on academic achievement, teacher satisfaction, school climate,
school engagement, and community’s view of youth as resources” (Kielsmeier, 2003,
p. 6), many teachers and administrators protest against service-learning saying it takes
too much time to complete or detracts from traditional pedagogical methods. Despite
some of the limitations of service-learning programs that are not lengthy endeavors,
other evidence has pointed to the importance of such approaches for older students,
and the benefits cannot be denied.
Service-learning has been found to have a wider impact on society than community
service or community exploration because it allows students to have a hands-on expe-
rience in the community while learning about the community to lessen the knowledge
gap between students and the community (National Commission on Service-Learning,
2002). Terry and Bohnenberger (2003) elucidated the distinction well by explaining
community service as students volunteering in the community without academic ties
contrasted with community exploration as learning through a more authentic level
than textbook exploration without the inclusion of actual service. The current study
aimed to engage students in service while coinciding with the guidance curriculum to
356 Journal of Experiential Education 38(4)

teach about community helpers, social inequality, student leadership, community

awareness, valuing diversity, tolerance, and character education, topics previously
suggested to be integrated with service-learning projects (Moely, Billig, & Holland,
2009; Tannenbaum & Brown-Welty, 2006). Through collaborations with community
organizations such as a nursing home, a homeless shelter, a veteran’s hospital, a chil-
dren’s hospital, and the parent teacher association, the participants gained insight into
the community needs and learned about how service projects can play a role in ame-
liorating serious social issues.

Academic Outcomes
Recently, service-learning has been implemented more often than in the past as an
effort to counteract youth disengagement from school and community. In a study of
20,000 high school students, half of them found school disinteresting (Steinberg,
1996). The National Commission on Service-Learning (2002) found that students
become more engaged in school through service-learning because they are able to take
responsibility for their own learning, providing hope for staving off academic disen-
gagement. This was supported by Eccles, Midgley, and Adler (1984) who found that
students showed greater motivation when involved in service-learning because of the
control they had over their education. Recent evidence has replicated these results
showing that service-learning can lead to stronger academic engagement and perfor-
mance outcomes (Billig, Root, & Jesse, 2005). Further research has indicated that
students involved in service-learning have more positive academic outcomes in criti-
cal thinking, writing, and overall grade point average (Vogelgesang & Alexander,
2000).

Elementary School Service-Learning

Although most of the literature on service-learning focuses on high school or college
student participants, select literature has uncovered the significant impact of service-
learning on various outcomes for elementary school students. In a recent meta-analysis,
Celio and colleagues (2011) emphasized the importance of service-learning as a teach-
ing method from elementary school through college, yet in their review of 62 studies,
only 5% included students in elementary school and 5% included students in middle
school. Furthermore, Scales and Roehlkepartain (2004) found that 22% of elementary
schoolers are actively involved in service-learning without much evidence of the ben-
efit. Elementary school students who participated in service-learning programs showed
increases in their awareness of community needs and believed that they could make a
valuable impact in their community (Billig, 2000). A few other studies showed that
elementary and middle school students involved in service-learning showed more
civic responsibility compared with peers not involved in service-learning (Billig,
2000; Johnson & Notah, 1999; Stephens, 1995). Soslau and Yost (2007) found that
urban fifth graders involved in a service-learning project showed greater academic
achievement and fewer absences from school. Although studies are beginning to
Scott and Graham 357

surface about elementary school service-learning, many scholars still suggest that
more research is needed in K-8 settings (e.g., Billig, 2000).

Social Development Outcomes

Service-learning also provides a necessary bridge between school and community to
promote empathic growth (Roeper, 1992; Terry & Bohnenberger, 2003). In terms of
personal development, students involved in service-learning have increases in com-
passion, altruism, commitment, social competence, and responsibility (National
Commission on Service-Learning, 2002; Terry & Bohnenberger, 2003; Weiler, LaGoy,
Crane, & Rovner, 1998). Two outcomes that have been uncovered in previous studies
on service-learning and that will be examined in this study are (a) an increase in empa-
thy and (b) a strengthening of future community engagement (Weiler et al., 1998). The
current study focuses on the development of these two constructs through a service-
learning program in elementary school children.

Empathy
Empathy is a frequently studied personality facet in children because of the impor-
tance of empathy for prosocial behavior, reductions of antisocial behavior, and healthy
childhood development (Eisenberg, Hofer, Sulik, & Liew, 2013; Erikson, 1968). The
present study defines empathy as an emotional response elicited by another’s emo-
tional state or condition that is consonant with the other’s state (Eisenberg et al., 2013;
Eisenberg, Shea, Carlo, & Knight, 1991). While some classic research argues that
empathy is not present by first grade, more recent studies have suggested that children
show empathy toward the needs of others starting at age 2 (e.g., Hastings, Zahn-
Waxler, Robinson, Usher, & Bridges, 2000). From an early age, both the home envi-
ronment and parent−child interaction are expected to influence the development of
empathy, and once the child enters school, this environment becomes another social-
izing agent (Tong et al., 2012). Although empathy is now thought to develop early in
life, its development continues into adolescence, and thus, programs that promote the
development of empathy are important and useful across a wide range of ages
(Hoffman, 2000).
Past studies have found that empathy counteracts and moderates many negative
personality features, especially with a focus in interpersonal realms (Eisenberg et al.,
2013). Furthermore, empathy appears to lead to decreases in antisocial behavior,
delinquent attitudes, anger, externalizing behaviors, and physical and verbal violence
levels (Eisenberg et al., 2013; Robert & Strayer, 2004; Stanger, Kavussanu, & Ring,
2012). While the decrease in unfavorable traits holds important clinical implications,
this study examines the effects of empathy training from a positive psychology per-
spective. The positive psychology perspective looks at the strengths that help indi-
viduals and communities succeed and the virtues of situations and individuals rather
than the pathology and damage that psychologists often focus on (Seligman &
Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). This perspective tries to build up self-determination,
358 Journal of Experiential Education 38(4)

empathy, confidence, and coping skills to create a view of “normal” that does not
focus on mental illness but rather focuses on how to avoid detrimental situations.

Community Engagement
Community engagement is defined as attitudes, behaviors, knowledge, and skills
aimed to work for the common good, with responsibility toward the surrounding com-
munity (Lenzi et al., 2012). It can be further explained as community-oriented partici-
pation with an emphasis on volunteer work and membership in community
organizations (Bebiroglu, Geldhof, Pinderhughes, Phelps, & Lerner, 2013). The term
community engagement is not prevalent in the child development literature because
this concept is usually explored in adolescents. In adolescence, the focus on commu-
nity engagement switches from volunteer work in the community or neighborhood to
a responsibility toward the community with political ties. Because it is not usually
possible in the United States culture to be involved in political organizations before
adolescence, the term community engagement will be used instead of civic responsi-
bility for those under 18 years of age as suggested by previous research (Lenzi, Vieno,
Pastore, & Santinello, 2013).
There are many approaches to the development of community engagement in
youth. One approach follows Piaget’s (1950) cognitive development framework show-
ing that once children reach the concrete or formal operational stage, they are able to
understand individual and societal issues and will begin to develop a sense of com-
munity engagement if they are able to explore and reflect upon their community (Terry
& Bohnenberger, 2004). Another approach focuses on the child as a passive recipient
of outside socialization with parents and the media instilling values and ideals in chil-
dren without their active participation (e.g., Chaffee & Yang, 1990; Pancer & Pratt,
1999). The most applicable perspective for the current research is Bronfenbrenner’s
(1979) Ecological Systems Model. This model states that many contexts socialize
individuals instilling a moral commitment to contribute to the common good, help
other people, and participate in community organizations. Bronfenbrenner’s model is
extremely applicable to the current study because it provides evidence that it is possi-
ble to develop community engagement in school settings even if there is not the oppor-
tunity for involvement in other locations. Bronfenbrenner also noted that schools are
important microsystems that allow students to assume responsibilities in their
society.
One of the most important school factors leading to community engagement is an
open school climate in which students take part in making rules and organizing events
to develop democratic skills (Hahn, 1998). A sense of connection to the community
can also foster community engagement (Lenzi et al., 2013). The current study aimed
to create more ties between the students and the communities by having students reach
out to solve problems in the surrounding areas. Service-learning has proven to be one
method of reigniting community engagement in today’s youth as well as a method for
helping children learn that they have the ability to change their communities while
giving them the skills and materials to do so (Shiller, 2013).
Scott and Graham 359

Current Study
The current pilot study examined the personal impacts of service-learning by
exploring the constructs of empathy and community engagement in a school-based
service-learning program for primary and elementary school students. The hypoth-
esis of the current study was that after the implementation of a five-session ser-
vice-learning program, students would exhibit higher levels of empathy and
community engagement than prior to the service-learning program. Specifically,
concerning community engagement, we hypothesized that all of the measured sub-
categories of community engagement would increase with connection to the com-
munity increasing the most, followed by civic awareness, and finally civic efficacy.
Concerning empathy, the current study hypothesized that the subcategories of cog-
nitive empathy and affective empathy would both increase significantly, with the
latter having a higher significance level. Because the current sample spanned three
grade levels—first, second, and fifth—it was predicted that first and second grad-
ers would show similar results, and that fifth graders would show more significant
increases in civic efficacy and cognitive empathy as these constructs required
more analytical thinking, a skill that develops as children get older and more
mature.

Method
Participants
Demographics were collected from all of the participants in the study (N = 155). The
participants (49% female, 51% male) had a mean age of 8.2 years (SD = 1.76) with a
range of 6 years. The sample for this study consisted of 68.4% Caucasian, 14.8%
African American, 10.3% Hispanic/Latino, and 6.5% Other participants (Asian/Asian
American, Filipino/Filipino American, Biracial). The average per capita income in the
past 12 months (2011 dollars) from 2007 to 2011 in this zip code was US$39,295,
which is slightly higher than the state average of US$35,678. The participants were
spread across three grade levels, first (n = 48), second (n = 52), and fifth (n = 55).
During data collection, questions were read aloud for the first- and second-grade par-
ticipants. The participants in this study were recruited by a nonprofit organization
through an elementary school in the Northeast. This nonprofit organization is dedi-
cated to creating educational programs to help children overcome potentially detri-
mental circumstances and to avoid negative academic and behavioral outcomes. The
second author works in partnership with the nonprofit organization in the evaluation
of their other programs, and so, the organization worked with the authors to create this
service-learning program as an additional program they would continue to teach after
the completion of this study. The organization had its other programs running in the
kindergartens, third grades, and fourth grades of the elementary school; thus, this pro-
gram was placed in the other three grades (i.e., first, second, and fifth) to avoid con-
flicts of interest.
360 Journal of Experiential Education 38(4)

Measures

Empathy measure.  This study used Garton and Gringart’s (2005) empathy measure,
Feeling and Thinking for the assessment of cognitive and affective aspects of empathy
in children. This measure was an adaptation of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index
(Davis, 1980), a well-validated empathy measure for adults. Garton and Gringart
adapted this measure for 8- to 9-year-old children. The scale was further adapted by
the authors to make it appropriate for 6- to 7-year-old children by changing some lan-
guage and eliminating select questions (adaptation available upon request). After mod-
ifications to improve reliability, the final scale consisted of seven items. Participants
were asked on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 = do not agree at all, 5 = agree very much) how much
they agreed or disagreed with various statements. The items for fifth grade contained
two questions that were reverse coded. The empathy measure was further broken up
into two separate subcategories. The original measure contained a four-factor model,
but after assessing factor loadings, it became evident that the four factors did not allow
for enough differentiation between components. By creating a two-factor model, the
scale was shortened and established clear barriers between the two remaining catego-
ries (Garton & Gringart, 2005). The final categories were affective empathy (e.g., “I
want to help people who get treated badly”) and cognitive empathy (e.g., “When I am
angry or upset at someone, I usually try to imagine what he or she is thinking or feel-
ing”). After reverse coding the necessary questions, an “empathy” score was calcu-
lated by averaging the responses for each of the seven items. An empathy score was
calculated for each subcategory of empathy (i.e., affective and cognitive) as well as for
total empathy. Previous studies indicate that this measure had good psychometric
properties with a strong ability to differentiate various levels of empathy (Garton &
Gringart, 2005). For the sample in this study, the empathy scale as a whole and the
subscale of affective empathy had good reliabilities (0.73 and 0.67, respectively), but
the subscale for cognitive empathy had a low reliability (0.41).

Community engagement measure.  The Civic Responsibility Survey for K-12 Students
Engaged in Service-Learning was used to examine community engagement in the par-
ticipants (Furco, Muller, & Ammon, 1998). This measure was also modified to increase
reliability. The final scale consisted of seven fixed choice items. Participants were
asked to respond on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 = do not agree at all, 5 = agree very much)
about various statements. The version of this scale used for fifth grade contained one
item that needed to be reverse coded. After reverse coding the necessary question, a
“community engagement” score was calculated by averaging the responses for each of
the seven items. The scale was further broken down into the subcategories of civic
efficacy (e.g., “I feel like I can make a difference in the community”), connection to
the community (e.g., “I know a lot of people in the community and they know me”),
and civic awareness (e.g., “helping other people is something everyone should do,
even myself”). The current version of the measure has been found to have an overall
construct reliability of 0.73. The construct reliabilities for connection to the commu-
nity, civic awareness, and civic efficacy were found to be 0.78, 0.69, and 0.72,
Scott and Graham 361

Figure 1.  Visual representations of answer choices for first-grade scales.

respectively. The first-grade adaptation of each scale contained visual representations

of the answer choices (see Figure 1).

Procedure
After obtaining approval from an Institutional Review Board, a parent or guardian of
the participants provided written informed consent, and the participants provided ver-
bal assent to participate in the study. The study took place during school hours, and the
participants were not given an incentive to participate other than a free lesson that
corresponded with the guidance curriculum. All students in the classes participated in
the lessons, but study data were only collected from students who gave verbal assent
and whose parents provided written consent. Following the informed consent process,
participants in Grade 5 completed a demographics form. For the participants in Grades
1 and 2, the primary teacher in the classroom completed demographics forms for the
children. For the pretest, the researcher handed out the questionnaire, and the partici-
pants were asked to fill it out. Participants in Grade 5 were given sufficient time to fill
out the surveys on their own. The researcher read each item aloud for the first and
second graders. The administration of the questionnaire took 15 to 20 min fluctuating
based on grade level.

Service-learning program.  This program was a service-learning education program for

pre-adolescent school children. Participants were involved in many discussions, and in
the organization and execution of a community service project. All of these activities
took place over the course of five sessions, with 45-min sessions each week. The first
author led each session with the support of undergraduate students and a faculty advi-
sor (second author). The timing of the service-learning program occurred during a
schoolwide unit on community helpers and civic responsibility, and the teachers used
the service-learning project as a way to teach broader concepts discussed below. The
curriculum was divided into four components previously shown to be effective ser-
vice-learning procedures (Billig et al., 2005; Richards et al., 2013). The first compo-
nent was the Introduction to service-learning and to the lessons covered throughout the
process. During the first session, students learned the meanings of community, civic
362 Journal of Experiential Education 38(4)

engagement, and leadership, and were introduced to the concept of civic responsibil-
ity. After learning about these concepts, the students identified problems and chal-
lenges within their community and began to brainstorm organizations and people
whom they could ask for help in solving the problems. With the help of the teacher and
the first author, the students identified community organizations that could help with
their identified problems. Throughout the next week, students worked with their teach-
ers to write letters to community members asking for help, and the first author con-
tacted organizations to further determine what could be done to solve some of the
issues the students identified. During the second session, the students produced and
evaluated solutions to the problems they articulated and participated in the second
component of the service-learning curriculum, Getting Informed. During this session,
the first author discussed the social issues identified the previous week with the stu-
dents and taught the students about the history of the specific social issues they previ-
ously discussed. The lesson also identified how the social issues had been combated in
other locations to provide ideas that could be applied by the students. After thoroughly
learning about the social issues through discussions, worksheets, and group activities,
the children anonymously voted on which issue they would like to target for their
service project. During the third session, children began the Getting Involved aspect of
the curriculum using the creative problem solving method with students planning how
to put their solutions to use. Students worked in small groups, with each group having
an undergraduate student supervisor to determine what they could do to help. A repre-
sentative from the community organization the students decided to partner with
attended this session and worked with the students to determine which of their ideas
would be possible, given their time span, age, and outreach. The teachers in each class-
room continued to work with the students throughout the next week to plan their ser-
vice project. The fourth session of the program continued with the implementation of
a service project in which the students worked in the classroom alongside community
partners who were brought into the school or went out into the community to make a
tangible difference in some aspect of their community. The third and fourth sessions
were specifically designed to have the children connect with members of the commu-
nity by working directly with them, and this connection with members in the commu-
nity and understanding of different life circumstances were designed to foster empathic
growth and community engagement. The fifth session of the program followed Terry
and Bohnenberger’s (2003) and Billig and colleagues’ (2005) recommendation to con-
clude with reflection and celebration for inspiring personal and developmental growth,
and increasing self-confidence and engagement in school, social responsibility, and
empathy levels. Furthermore, an aspect of reflection was present at the end of each
session in which the students discussed what they had accomplished, how it made
them feel, and what they could do next. The sessions differed slightly between class-
rooms as every classroom had a different service-learning project that they were com-
pleting. The service-learning projects included the following: making a quilt to hang
in a nursing home, hosting a toy drive for a local hospital, having a clothing drive for
a nearby homeless shelter in an urban city, collecting clothing for mentally disabled
veterans, fundraising for a no-kill animal shelter, planting a flower garden for the
Scott and Graham 363

Table 1.  Descriptive Statistics for Dependent Variables (N = 155).

Variables M (pre) SD (pre) M (post) SD (post)

Community engagement 3.99 0.68 4.32 0.45
Connection to the community 3.67 1.01 4.17 0.70
Civic awareness 4.34 0.87 4.73 0.46
Civic efficacy 3.78 0.97 3.87 0.78
Empathy 4.08 0.72 4.34 0.42
Affective empathy 3.98 0.93 4.55 0.50
Cognitive empathy 4.22 0.64 4.06 0.56

Note. Participants could respond on a scale of 1 to 5 on all scales.

beautification of their own school, and teaching a lesson to the kindergartener classes
about diversity.

Posttest.  At the end of the fifth session, the participants completed a post-survey to see
how community engagement and empathy levels changed throughout the program. A
research assistant who was unfamiliar with the children administered the posttests
with a standardized script to maintain consistency throughout the classrooms.

Results
To investigate the changes in empathy and community engagement over the course of
the five-session service-learning program, means and standard deviations were calcu-
lated for each of these constructs for participants before and after the program. The
scales were further broken down into affective and cognitive empathy, connection to
the community, civic awareness, and civic efficacy. Main effects and interactions of
gender with the dependent variables did not yield statistically significant differences;
thus, gender was excluded from subsequent analyses. To reduce the family wise error
rates among the mean comparisons (i.e., increased probability of making a Type I
error), we adjusted the alpha level from .05 to .01. See Table 1 for descriptive
statistics.

Empathy and Community Engagement

Paired-samples t tests were run to analyze the changes in total empathy scores and
total community engagement scores before the service-learning program and after the
service-learning program. There was a significant difference in empathy, t(154) =
−4.59, p < .01, r2 = .12. Participants scored on average 0.26 points higher on empathy
on the posttest. Similarly, there was also a significant difference in community engage-
ment, t(154) = −6.43, p < .01, r2 = .21. Participants scored on average 0.33 points
higher on community engagement after the service-learning program than they did
before the program. The results of the paired-samples t tests supported the initial
364 Journal of Experiential Education 38(4)

Table 2. Paired-Sample t test Analyses.

Variables t p r2
Community engagement −6.43 .00** .21
Connection to the community −6.01 .00** .19
Civic awareness −5.98 .00** .19
Civic efficacy −1.07 .29 .01
Empathy −4.59 .00** .12
Affective empathy −8.15 .00** .30
Cognitive empathy 2.40 .02* .04

*p < .05. **p < .01.

hypothesis that community engagement and empathy would increase through the
course of a five-session service-learning program.
Furthermore, paired-samples t tests were run to analyze the subcategories of com-
munity engagement and empathy for the entire sample. Significance was found for
affective empathy, connection to the community, and civic awareness. See Table 2 for
results from paired-samples t tests for each subcategory.

Grade Differences
A repeated measures ANOVA to examine empathy from pretest to posttest accounting
for grade level revealed a significant interaction between time and grade, F(2, 152) = 9.58,
p < .01, η2 = 0.11. Significant increases occurred from pretest to posttest for fifth grad-
ers (pretest: M = 3.72, SE = 0.09; posttest: M = 4.30, SE = 0.06), t(54) = −5.85, p < .01,
r2 = .39. For affective empathy, repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant inter-
action between time and grade level, F(2, 152) = 8.60, p < .01, η2 = 0.10. Fifth graders
showed the greatest increase in affective empathy, t(54) = −7.85, p < .01, r2 = .53.
Contrary to our hypothesis, a significant decrease in cognitive empathy was shown in
second graders going from 4.48 (SE = 0.08) to 4.17 (SE = 0.08), t(51) = 2.86, p < .01,
r2 = .14. First and fifth graders did not show significant changes in cognitive empathy.
A repeated measures ANOVA to compare grade-level differences in community
engagement across the program demonstrated a positive increase in overall commu-
nity engagement scores for first graders and fifth graders, t(47) = −4.95, p < .01, r2 = .34,
and t(54) = −5.05, p < .01, r2 = .32, respectively. A significant interaction was noted
between grade and time for civic efficacy, F(2, 152) = 7.35, p < .01, η2 = 0.09, for
Grade 5 (pretest: M = 3.62, SE = 0.13; posttest: M = 4.04, SE = 0.10).

Post-Program Empathy Ratings as a Mediator of the Relation Between

Pre-Program Empathy Ratings and Community Engagement
In this study, program participation had a direct and positive effect on empathy and
community engagement. The number of mediation studies conducted with youth
Scott and Graham 365

Pretest c = 0.12 (0.04)* Community Engagement

Empathy
Score

Posttest
Empathy
α = 0.17 (0.04)* β = 0.31 (0.08)*

Pretest c’ = 0.05 (0.02)*

Community Engagement
Empathy
Score

Figure 2.  Posttest empathy (Time 2) as a mediator of the relation between pretest empathy
(Time 1) and community engagement score.
***p = .001.

populations is relatively small, even though the importance of such outcomes has been
expressed in the literature over the past decade. Mediation analysis is an important tool
for researchers because it explains why or how a certain program achieves its effects.
When establishing mediation of post empathy, we investigated whether pretest empa-
thy affects the mediator (i.e., posttest empathy) and whether these changes in the
mediator lead to changes in community engagement. For the content areas that
revealed significant differences across time, mediation analyses were conducted.
These analyses assessed whether pretest empathy differences in community engage-
ment after the program were mediated by posttest empathy. Results from three regres-
sion analyses allowed us to assess mediation: (a) a regression analysis predicting
community engagement score from pretest empathy, (b) a regression analysis predict-
ing posttest empathy from pretest empathy, and (c) a regression analysis that included
pretest empathy and posttest empathy as predictors of community engagement score.
We conducted mediation analyses using the PROCESS syntax (Hayes & Preacher,
2013) that runs each of these regression analyses and provides bias-corrected boot-
strap confidence intervals (CI) for the mediated effect.
Results showed that pretest empathy was a significant predictor of posttest empathy
(b = 0.17, sb = 0.04, p = .001; sb = standard error). The regression analysis predicting
community engagement scores from both pretest empathy and posttest empathy
showed that posttest empathy predicted community engagement scores, b = 0.31,
sb = 0.08, p = .001. The product of the path coefficients (αβ) for the indirect path from
pretest empathy to community engagement score through posttest empathy was sig-
nificant (point estimates of .05, 95% CI = [0.02, 0.12]). In sum, posttest empathy
mediated the relation between pretest empathy ratings and students’ community
engagement scores (see Figure 2).
366 Journal of Experiential Education 38(4)

Discussion
The primary goal of this pilot study was to provide preliminary evidence regarding the
impact of service-learning on the constructs of empathy and community engagement in
primary and elementary school children, a topic that is scarcely studied in the education
and psychology literature to date. Although service-learning is a widely researched teach-
ing methodology for high school and college students, few studies had previously looked
at the effects of service-learning in a younger cohort (Leeman et al., 2011). The results of
this study indicated a positive increase in empathy and community engagement from
pretest to posttest after the administration of a five-session service-learning program.
The current findings are significant because they provide groundwork that can be
further studied and eventually used to modify current educational curricula to incorpo-
rate service-learning or other similar approaches. While the current study looked at
how service-learning can be incorporated into character education and community
education, future research should look at how service-learning can be applied in all
core academic subjects and what the influence of service-learning is in different aca-
demic domains. For example, social studies curricula can incorporate service-learning
through a unit on community helpers, different socioeconomic classes, or even history
of altruistic organizations. Math curricula can also incorporate service-learning by
having students run a fund-raiser while learning money management and marketing
skills. As shown here, while schools often have a strict set of educational guidelines
that they must follow, service-learning programs can be incorporated into other lesson
plans to reverse student disengagement, increase internal motivation to succeed, lessen
behavioral problems, decrease at-risk populations, and increase school cohesion
(Kirby, 2007; National Commission on Service-Learning, 2002). Furthermore, this
study showed that service-learning can significantly increase empathy and community
engagement, both of which are critical constructs to develop during childhood as
empathy mediates prosocial behavior in adolescence (Eisenberg, 1986), and previous
studies have shown that community engagement and civic responsibility developed
through elementary school service-learning lead to commitment to service 15 years
later (Billig, 2000). Along with some of the positive results listed above for service-
learning, empathy has been found to decrease antisocial behavior, delinquent attitudes,
anger, externalizing behavior, and physical and verbal violence, while increasing
social competence, prosocial behavior, affective reasoning, sympathy, altruism, and
helping behaviors (Batson, 1987; Eisenberg et al., 2013; Feshbach & Feshbach, 1982;
Hoffman, 1990; Robert & Strayer, 2004; Saarni, 1990; Zhou et al., 2002). In the future,
designs for school curricula may want to focus more on lessening the knowledge gap
between the community and the children to aid in the development and growth of
empathy and community engagement as suggested in previous literature that discusses
how students and the community are unaware of how they can benefit each other
(National Commission on Service-Learning, 2002). The current study used a moderate
level of communication with community members, but future research should increase
interaction with the community and help students become aware of how they can help
in the community beyond the allotted time period for the projects.
Scott and Graham 367

An unexpected finding was a significant decrease in cognitive empathy for second-

grade participants, while fifth-grade cognitive empathy showed a marginally signifi-
cant increase, and first-grade cognitive empathy did not show any significant changes.
A possible explanation for this unexpected finding could be developmental differences
in perspective taking and theory of mind. While the fifth-grade difference can be
explained in line with previous research, the decrease in cognitive empathy for second
graders requires additional analyses. Conceivably, the time of year could have had an
effect as the transition into new classrooms and into the new school year could have
posed some difficulties for certain students in understanding how other people in their
classroom were behaving.
To further examine the differences between first-, second-, and fifth-grade results
for cognitive empathy, future research should examine other factors such as current
content units being taught in various subjects in different grade levels. The results sur-
rounding civic efficacy also contradicted the original hypothesis that community
engagement would significantly increase for all grade levels. The current results only
showed significant increases in civic efficacy for fifth-grade participants. This could
possibly have occurred because civic efficacy is a complex concept that requires
knowledge of civic duties and responsibilities and is a construct that may not be devel-
opmentally appropriate for first and second graders (White, 1963). Furthermore, civic
efficacy generally refers to how much a person believes they engage in civic life, such
as voting, community service, and belief expression in a public setting. It is under-
standable that first and second graders would not gain as much from lessons about
civic efficacy as would fifth graders who are more able to visualize how civic efficacy
will affect them in the future.
Based on the current findings that fifth graders showed the most significant
increases on all measures, the program used in this study should be assessed in third
and fourth graders to see for which grade levels the program has the greatest effect.
Furthermore, the five-session model for a service-learning program should also be
expanded up into middle school populations as middle school aged participants are
also not a commonly studied cohort for service-learning research. The current findings
show conditional evidence that by connecting students to their community, students
will feel moral and social obligations to become valuable citizens and, therefore, will
show more promise for their futures. Based on past research that elucidates long-term
effects of successful short-term service-learning programs, we expect that the children
engaged in this program will volunteer more as adults (Independent Sector Survey,
2001), will develop higher levels of trust and more positive views of their communi-
ties (Flanagan, Gill, & Gallay, 2005), and will feel more secure in their leadership
abilities and personal and social responsibility in the transition to adolescence
(Richards et al., 2013). This is consistent with past research that shows that through
service-learning, instructors can successfully engage children and help them find ways
to cope with difficult situations (Wu, Mar, & Jiau, 2013). While the family has previ-
ously been shown to be the primary agent for socializing empathic behavior, the cur-
rent research provides some support that school programs can have a significant
impact as well (Barnett, 1987). These findings also relate back to and support
368 Journal of Experiential Education 38(4)

Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) Ecological Systems Model, discussed earlier, by showing

that the many different contexts an individual participates in all have substantial influ-
ences on human development and by showing that the microsystem of the school plays
a significant role in socialization and the development of important constructs such as
empathy and community engagement.

Limitations
Future research should examine a control group that does not receive the program to
account for the possibility that empathy and community engagement would show
increases as the school year progresses regardless of the service-learning. Furthermore,
while this study yielded significant results, the limited amount of time with the stu-
dents poses a possible limitation, especially for the empathy outcome that likely has
developmental components. An aspect that could prove valuable to examine in future
research would be the impact of service-learning for children in varying socioeco-
nomic groups and from various ethnicities. Specifically, it would be important to look
at how service-learning in elementary schools can decrease negative outcomes for at-
risk children. In addition, the recruitment for this study only occurred in one school in
which prevention education programs frequently occur, and thus, empathy levels may
have started at a higher level than average. The recruitment from only one school may
be a limitation for the diversity of the sample. However, this could also be beneficial
because it takes away some possibilities of external environmental influences from
different school environments playing a role in the results. Through observation, it
also seemed as though the participants developed a strong sense of pride in their abili-
ties and in themselves. This construct could be further examined in future research.
It is important to note that participants (i.e., first, second, and fifth graders) were
aggregated into a single group. Given the developmental and social complexity of the
topic, future research might want to examine this topic within a closer age range.
Another possible factor that could influence the results is the fact that every classroom
was engaged in a different service-learning project. While this could potentially create
greater changes in the measured variables for certain classes, if the researchers were to
control the service project in each classroom, the students’ voice would be eliminated
losing an important aspect of the program that has been shown to lead to greater
empathic growth, stronger community engagement, improved self-efficacy, and more
academic enjoyment (Billig et al., 2005; Celio et al., 2011). Because of the previous
findings showing the importance of giving youth a strong voice in the planning and
execution of service-learning projects, the authors of the current study found it invalu-
able to allow the students to choose what service project they participated in.

Conclusion
In summary, this study showed that service-learning has an overall positive effect on
empathy and community engagement in elementary school students. Understanding
this connection has implications for future citizenship, community engagement,
Scott and Graham 369

altruism, and empathy. Considering decreasing trends of empathy and community

engagement in adolescents and young adults in the past 10 or more years, working to
instill these characteristics in childhood is becoming more crucial.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.

References
Barnett, M. A. (1987). Empathy and related responses in children. In N. Eisenberg & J. Strayer
(Eds.), Empathy and its development: Cambridge studies in social and emotional develop-
ment (pp. 146-162). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Batson, C. (1987). Prosocial motivation: Is it ever truly altruistic? In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),
Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 20, pp. 65-122). San Diego, CA:
Academic Press. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60412-8
Bebiroglu, N., Geldhof, G., Pinderhughes, E. E., Phelps, E., & Lerner, R. M. (2013). From
family to society: The role of perceived parenting behaviors in promoting youth civic
engagement. Parenting: Science and Practice, 13, 153–168. doi:10.1080/15295192.20
13.756352
Billig, S. H. (2000). Research on K-12 school-based service-learning: The evidence builds. Phi
Delta Kappan, 81, 658-664.
Billig, S. H., Hofschire, L., Meyer, S., & Yamauchi, L. A. (2006). Student outcomes associated
with service-learning in a culturally relevant high school program. Journal of Prevention &
Intervention in the Community, 32, 149-164. doi:10.1300/J005v32n01_10
Billig, S. H., Root, S., & Jesse, D. (2005). The relationship between quality indicators of service-
learning and student outcomes: Testing the professional wisdom. In S. Root, J. Callham,
& S. H. Billig (Eds.), Advances in Service-Learning Research: Vol. 5. Improving service-
learning practice: Research on models that enhance impacts (pp. 97-115). Greenwich, CT:
Information Age.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and
design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Celio, C. I., Durlak, J., & Dymnicki, A. (2011). A meta-analysis on the impact of service-
learning on students. Journal of Experiential Education, 34, 164-181.
Chaffee, S., & Yang, S. (1990). Mass communication and political socialization. In O. Ichilov
(Ed.), Political socialization, citizenship education and democracy (pp. 647-666). New
York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS
Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 85.
Eccles, J., Midgley, C., & Adler, T. F. (1984). Grade-related changes in the school environment:
Effects on achievement motivation. Advances in Motivation and Achievement, 3, 283-331.
Eisenberg, N. (1986). Altruistic emotion, cognition, and behavior. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
370 Journal of Experiential Education 38(4)

Eisenberg, N., Hofer, C., Sulik, M. J., & Liew, J. (2013). The development of prosocial moral
reasoning and a prosocial orientation in young adulthood: Concurrent and longitudinal cor-
relates. Developmental Psychology, 50, 58-70. doi:10.1037/a0032990
Eisenberg, N., Shea, C. L., Carlo, G., & Knight, G. P. (1991). Empathy-related responding and
cognition: A “chicken and the egg” dilemma. In W. M. Kurtines & J. L. Gewirtz (Eds.),
Handbook of Moral Behavior and Development: Vol. 2. Research (pp. 63-88). Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Erikson, E. (1968). Identity, youth, and crisis. Behavioral Sciences, 14, 154-159. doi:10.1002/
bs.3830140209
Feshbach, N. D., & Feshbach, S. (1982). Empathy training and the regulation of aggression:
Potentialities and limitations. Academic Psychology Bulletin, 4, 399-413.
Flanagan, C. A., Gill, S., & Gallay, L. (2005). Participation and trust. In A. Omoto (Ed.),
Processes of community change and social action. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Furco, A., Muller, P., & Ammon, M. S. (1998). Civic responsibility survey for K-12 students
engaged in service-learning. Berkeley: Service-Learning Research and Development
Center, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved from http://cart.rmcdenver.com/
instruments/civic_responsibility.pdf
Garton, A. F., & Gringart, E. (2005). The development of a scale to measure empathy in 8- and
9-year old children. Australian Journal of Education and Developmental Psychology, 5,
17-25. Retrieved from http://www.newcastle.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/100394/
v5-garton-gringart.pdf
Hahn, C. (1998). Becoming political: Comparative perspectives on citizenship education.
Albany: State University of New York Press.
Hastings, P., Zahn-Waxler, C., Robinson, J., Usher, B., & Bridges, D. (2000). The development
of concern for others in children with behavior problems. Developmental Psychology, 36,
531-546.
Hayes, A. F., & Preacher, K. J. (2013). Conditional process modeling: Using structural equation
modeling to examine contingent causal processes. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.),
Structural equation modeling: A second course (2nd ed.). Greenwich, CT: Information Age
Publishing.
Hoffman, M. L. (1990). Empathy and justice motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 14, 151-172.
Hoffman, M. L. (2000). Empathy and moral development: Implications for caring and justice.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Independent Sector. (2001). Giving and volunteering in the United States. Washington, DC:
Author.
Johnson, A. M., & Notah, D. J. (1999). Service learning: History, literature review, and a pilot
study of eighth graders. The Elementary School Journal, 99, 453-467.
Kielsmeier, J. (2003). A time to serve, a time to learn: New roles for youth. Generator, 21, 5-14.
Kirby, D. (2007). Emerging answers: Research findings on programs to reduce teen pregnancy.
Retrieved from https://thenationalcampaign.org/sites/default/files/resource-primary-down-
load/EA2007_full_0.pdf
Leeman, J., Rabin, L., & Román-Mendoza, E. (2011). Identity and activism in heritage language
education. Modern Language Journal, 95, 481-495. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01237.x
Lenzi, M., Vieno, A., Pastore, M., & Santinello, M. (2013). Neighborhood social connected-
ness and adolescent civic engagement: An integrative model. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 34, 45-54.
Lenzi, M., Vieno, A., Perkins, D. D., Santinello, M., Elgar, F., Morgan, A., & Mazzardis,
S. (2012). Family affluence, school and neighborhood contexts and adolescents’ civic
Scott and Graham 371

engagement: A cross-national study. American Journal of Community Psychology, 50, 197-

210. doi:10.1007/s10464-012-9489-7
Moely, B. E., Billig, S. H., & Holland, B. A. (Eds.). (2009). Creating our identities in service-
learning and community engagement. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
National Commission on Service-Learning. (2002). Learning in deed: The power of service-
learning for American schools. Retrieved from http://www.wkkf.org/knowledge-center/
resources/2002/10/learning-in-deed-the-power-of-service-learning-for-american-schools-
full-report.aspx
Pancer, S., & Pratt, M. (1999). Social and family determinants of community service involve-
ment in Canadian youth. In M. Yates & J. Youniss (Eds.), Roots of civic identity (pp. 32-55).
New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Richards, M. H., Sanderson, R. C., Celio, C. I., Grant, J. E., Choi, I., George, C. C., & Deane,
K. (2013). Service-learning in early adolescence: Results of a school-based curriculum.
Journal of Experiential Education, 36, 5-21. doi:10.1177/1053825913481580.
Robert, W., & Strayer, J. (2004). Children’s anger, emotional expressiveness, and empathy:
Relations with parents’ empathy, emotional expressiveness and parenting practices. Social
Development, 13, 229-254.
Roeper, A. (1992). Global awareness and the young child. Roeper Review, 15, 52-53.
doi:10.1080/02783199209553459
Saarni, C. (1990). Emotional competence: How emotions and relationships become integrated.
In R. A. Thompson (Ed.), Socioemotional development (pp. 115-182). Lincoln: University
of Nebraska Press.
Scales, P. C., & Roehlkepartain, E. C. (2004). Community service and service learning in U.S.
public schools, 2004: Findings from a national survey. St. Paul, MN: National Youth
Leadership Council.
Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction.
American Psychologist, 55, 5-14. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.5
Shiller, J. T. (2013). Preparing for democracy: How community-based organiza-
tions build civic engagement among urban youth. Urban Education, 48, 69-91.
doi:10.1177/0042085912436761
Soslau, E. G., & Yost, D. S. (2007). Urban service-learning: An authentic teaching strategy to
deliver a standards-driven curriculum. Journal of Experiential Education, 30, 36-53.
Stanger, N., Kavussanu, M., & Ring, C. (2012). Put yourself in their boots: Effects of empathy
on emotion and aggression. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 34, 208-222.
Steinberg, L. (1996). Beyond the classroom: Why school reform has failed and what parents
need to do. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Stephens, L. (1995). The complete guide to learning through community service, grades K-9.
Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Tannenbaum, S. C., & Brown-Welty, S. (2006). Tandem pedagogy: Embedding service-learning
into an after-school program. Journal of Experiential Education, 29, 111-125.
Terry, A. W., & Bohnenberger, J. E. (2003). Service-learning: Fostering a cycle of caring in our
gifted youth. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 15, 23-32.
Terry, A. W., & Bohnenberger, J. E. (2004). Blueprint for incorporating service learning: A basic,
developmental, K-12 service learning typology. Journal of Experiential Education, 27, 15-31.
Tong, L., Shinohara, R., Sugisawa, Y., Tanaka, E., Yato, Y., Yamakawa, N., & Anme, T.
(2012). Early development of empathy in toddlers: Effects of daily parent-child interac-
tion and home-rearing environment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, 2457-2478.
372 Journal of Experiential Education 38(4)

Vogelgesang, L. J., & Alexander, W. (2000). Comparing the effects of community service and
service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 7, 25-34.
Weiler, D., LaGoy, A., Crane, E., & Rovner, A. (1998). An evaluation of K-12 service-learning
in California: Phase II final report. Retrieved from http://www.servicelearningcourse.org/
docs/s08rd02.pdf
White, E. S. (1963). Intelligence and sense of political efficacy in children. Journal of Politics,
30, 710-731. doi:10.2307/2128802
Wu, Y. C., Mar, L. W., & Jiau, H. C. (2013). A service-based program evaluation platform
for enhancing student engagement in assignments. Educational Technology & Society, 16,
122-132.
Zhou, Q., Eisenberg, N., Losoya, S. H., Fabes, R. A., Reiser, M., Guthrie, I. K., . . . S. A. (2002).
The relations of parental warmth and positive expressiveness to children’s empathy-related
responding and social functioning: A longitudinal study. Child Development, 73, 893-915.
doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00446

Author Biographies
Katharine E. Scott is currently a student at University of Wisconsin-Madison in the psychol-
ogy PhD program focusing on social and developmental psychology. Katharine E. Scott gradu-
ated Summa Cum Laude from The College of New Jersey receiving her BA in Psychology.
James A. Graham is currently a Professor at The College of New Jersey. Dr. Graham’s research
focuses on empathy and prosocial behavior, and school/community based research. Dr. Graham
is the faculty advisor of the Children’s Social Development Laboratory at The College of New
Jersey.