10.

Teaching philanthropy: developing

critical and compassionate approaches
to giving
Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker and
Heather A. O’Connor

INTRODUCTION TO THE TOPIC

As nonprofit management education has grown, so has the study of philan-

thropy across college campuses in both the US and abroad. Most people
believe that philanthropy is a positive force in society. The United States has
one of the largest systems of organized, private philanthropy in the world,
yet individual giving has remained at a steady 2 percent of the national gross
domestic product for over 40 years (Giving USA Foundation, 2018).
There is value in teaching students to be informed philanthropists and
preparing them to educate others about philanthropy. Over the past ten years,
grant makers have noted this and prioritized professional training and educa-
tion (Carpenter, 2017, p. 67). Informed philanthropic action is more than just
giving away money—to be successful, grant makers must balance analytical,
emotional, ethical, and intra/interpersonal competencies (Castillo et al., 2014).
Professional competencies such as these can be strengthened by fostering
reflective practice to improve interpretation and understanding (Russell, 2005).

Philanthropic Studies as an Academic Field

The emerging field of philanthropic studies, a multi-disciplinary endeavor

rooted in the liberal arts, “seeks to reflect on its subject as well as see its work
carried forward into the world” (Turner, 2004, p. 2084). By drawing from
disciplines such as history, ethics, sociology, psychology, and economics,
philanthropic studies fosters introspection, entails assessment of personal
values, explores motivations to give and volunteer, and requires attention
to the responsibility to create positive and lasting change in the world. Far
from adopting an uncritical lens, studying philanthropy raises questions about

165

Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -

9781788118675
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
166 Teaching nonprofit management

power, wealth, justice, and social change. Furthermore, philanthropic studies

seek to further understanding of all people’s inherent capacity to be generous,
and to do so in a deliberate manner that speaks to individual and collective
values and visions for a just society.
In its introduction, the 2015 Nonprofit Academic Centers Council (NACC)
curricular guidelines include the study of philanthropy alongside that of
nonprofit leadership and the nonprofit sector. However, the NACC guide-
lines do not treat philanthropy as a separate and independent learning
objective but integrate it within a number of domains. For example, under
Comparative Global Perspectives on the Nonprofit Sector, Voluntary Action,
and Philanthropy, Section 1.3 states, “How individual philanthropy, voluntary
action, and volunteerism is expressed in different cultural and global contexts”
(p. 10). Under Ethics and Values, Section 4.1 reads, “Values embodied in
philanthropy and voluntary action, such as trust, stewardship, service, volun-
tarism, civic engagement, shared common good, freedom of association and
social justice” (p. 11). As such, philanthropy is not differentiated as a topic
of study. Further, the majority of the curricular guidelines emphasize learning
from an organizational perspective: How can nonprofit performance and
effectiveness be assessed? Or, in what way can human resource management,
finance, or marketing and communications knowledge be applied to nonprofit
organizations? The study of philanthropy takes a more individual approach,
focusing on engaged and reflective practice in the context of social institutions
and peoples. As the NACC guidelines suggest, the two philosophies can and
do complement one another, and there is value in exploring how to bring the
study of philanthropy into nonprofit management education and more explic-
itly into the NACC guidelines.

Chapter Focus and Organization

This chapter focuses on centering a philanthropic perspective in both gradu-

ate and undergraduate education. The following learning objectives provide
a foundation for teaching students about philanthropy:

1. To understand the psychological, sociological, historical, and cultural

influences on giving;
2. To examine the role of philanthropic giving and influence in contempo-
rary nonprofit organizations, including providing financial and human
resources and working with donors;
3. To learn how individuals and organizations can make gifts of time, talent,
financial resources, and voice to effect social change and influence policy;
4. To evaluate philanthropy from the perspective of donors and recipients,
considering questions of power and control;

Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -

9781788118675
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
 Teaching philanthropy 167

5. To investigate how diverse identities, experiences, and beliefs influence

and shape formal and informal giving;
6. To reflect on one’s own personal giving and community engagement as
an expression of values and experiences and to put them in the larger aca-
demic context of philanthropic studies;
7. To develop plans and structures to guide intentional and ethical giving by
individuals and/or foundations.

Just as it is important for nonprofit professionals to be educated about the

nonprofit sector, so too is it formative for them to learn about the role of
philanthropy, writ broadly, in society. This chapter provides a brief theoretical
framework, which underscores the learning objectives, for the academic study
of philanthropy. It includes activities and resources for undergraduate intro-
ductory or survey classes, experiential giving classes, and classes on individual
giving, among others. In addition to contributing to stand-alone courses, these
resources can be integrated within subject-oriented courses in nonprofit man-
agement curricula.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

At its root, the word “philanthropy” means love of (hu)mankind (Sulek, 2010).
Noting that academic definitions of philanthropy are much debated in the
contemporary context, today the public typically sees philanthropy as a vehicle
through which benefactors identify and express personal, moral, or social
value; give time, money, or influence; and seek to improve society (Payton and
Moody, 2008; Sulek, 2010). Teaching philanthropy can align with Payton and
Moody’s (2008) definition of philanthropy as “voluntary action for the public
good.” As a “positive human response to the uncertainties of the human con-
dition” (Moody and Breeze, 2016, p. 4), philanthropic behavior encompasses
a diverse array of philanthropic responses.

Forms of Philanthropy

People participate in philanthropy in all manner of tangible and intangible

ways, including “gifting” their time and social ties through volunteer and
advocacy activities (Goldseker and Moody, 2017; Payton and Moody, 2008;
Tempel et al., 2016; Worth, 2015). Philanthropy is perhaps most commonly
associated with financial contributions, large and small. These contributions
come from individuals and groups of people (i.e., giving circles, families),
estates, companies, and foundations. They may be small, one-time contribu-
tions, recurring gifts made through payroll or by credit card, large “major”
gifts, contributions of physical property (i.e., stocks or real estate), planned

Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -

9781788118675
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
168 Teaching nonprofit management

commitments through pledges or beneficiary designations, or combinations of

multiple forms. Foundations—which may be controlled by families, associated
with companies, or supported by gifts from the public—often have established
guidelines for giving and make “grants,” with budgetary and reporting expec-
tations on the receiving organizations. Companies, meanwhile, may bundle
organizational giving with employee fundraising and volunteering efforts,
see it as part of their public relations, and may carefully align philanthropic
strategy with business goals and objectives.
Each nation, religion, and generation holds its own conceptions of giving
and the role of non-governmental entities in furthering societal goals. Giving
may take the form of a spontaneous, informal response to a need, such as
giving money or food to a homeless individual or helping an elderly person
safely cross the street. Alternatively, philanthropy may involve a more formal,
coordinated act, such as a philanthropic foundation making a grant to benefit
a nonprofit organization. Far from a transactional process, the philanthropic
ideal is described as a reciprocal relationship in which people realize their
interconnectedness and both benefactor and beneficiary are provided with the
dignity and autonomy to give and receive (e.g., Hyde, 2009; Salamon, 2003).

Roles of Philanthropy

Scholars have identified several functions served by the nonprofit sector and,
therefore, the philanthropic behavior that supports it. For example, some
philanthropic actions aim to reduce suffering, while others aim to improve the
quality of life. Payton and Moody (2008) identify five key roles for philan-
thropy: (1) providing services and meeting needs neglected by the government
and market sectors; (2) advocating for reform, particular interests, particular
populations, or for particular views of the common good; (3) preserving or
expressing cultural values, traditions, or identities; (4) building community
and promoting civic engagement; and (5) serving as a vehicle for social inno-
vation, experimentation, and entrepreneurial invention.
In using both a broad definition and these multiple roles and functions, it is
clear that philanthropy permeates people’s lives. It is an essential tool through
which individuals make meaning of private experiences and collectively
attempt to address public problems. Regardless of an employee’s position
in a nonprofit organization, each person has a connection to philanthropy.
Developing an awareness of this personal and professional connection can
increase students’ capacity to engage in civic action and improve the world
around them.
The field of philanthropic studies seeks to understand the origins and evolu-
tion, forms and contexts, structure and institutionalization of philanthropic and
other pro-social behaviors (Hatcher et al., 2016). Philanthropy as voluntary

Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -

9781788118675
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
 Teaching philanthropy 169

action for the public good, is comprised of two equally important concepts:
intentions and action. Coursework in philanthropy engages students in an
examination of their individual values and discussion of the role of the public
good and also prepares them to take educated, informed, and deliberate action.

Motivations for Giving

Contemporary research into donor behavior and decision-making have revealed

an array of complex and nuanced motivations to give, both internal and exter-
nal. Internal, or intrinsic, motivations refer to giving motivations that satisfy
a personal need, relieve tension, or simply feel good – what many refer to as
“warm glow” (Andreoni, 1990). Intrinsic motivations include altruism, giving
back after attaining personal success, gaining a sense of meaning or purpose,
a gain in social status, or relief from guilt or anxiety (Mixer, 1993; Schervish
and Havens, 2003). External, or extrinsic, motivations refer to influences
from persons, events, or other conditions in the outside environment, such as
personal or social recognition, or a response to a personal request (Bekkers and
Wiepking, 2011; Mixer, 1993).
Donors do not give to others strictly based on a desire to help or an interest
in self-advancement, but rather through a combination of motives (Jeavons,
1991). High-net-worth donors, for example, are most commonly motivated
by a belief in the organization mission, a sense that their gift can make a dif-
ference, and an experience of personal satisfaction from giving (Osili et al.,
2016). The “Identification Theory of Care” suggests that individuals are most
likely to donate to causes when they identify with the recipient. The stronger
that identification is, the greater the level of donor commitment will be
(Schervish and Havens, 2002).
These complex motivations inform individual and organizational philan-
thropic behavior, underscoring the need for related academic study by non-
profit professionals. Castillo et al. (2014) note that foundation grant making
is more than just giving away money—to be successful, grant makers must
balance ethical, analytical, emotional, and intra/interpersonal competencies.
Over the past decade, organizations such as the Council on Foundations and
the Grant Professionals Certification Institute have proposed defined grant
maker competencies that reflect this broad range of skills and understandings
(Carpenter, 2017).
In teaching philanthropy, instructors aim to expand upon and apply those
varied competencies for all givers, including individuals, corporations, organ-
izations, and foundations. By exploring individual values, motivations, and
cultural considerations in philanthropic behavior, instructors aim to provide
a framework through which givers might better identify and act upon their
personal and professional responsibility to act for the public good.

Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -

9781788118675
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
170 Teaching nonprofit management

TEACHING APPLICATION EXERCISES

In recent years, the traditional emphasis on teaching future nonprofit profes-

sionals applied skills has expanded to include an appreciation for the roles
of relationships and self-reflection (Mirabella, 2013). The increase in the
application of experiential learning within philanthropy is a response to that
shift (Averitt Taylor et al., 2015; Olberding, 2009, 2012). Experiential learn-
ing is an instructional approach that attempts to integrate academic learning
with community engagement, often by focusing on the grant-making process
(Bryer, 2014). Over the last few decades, liberal arts education, meanwhile,
has worked to integrate “personal experience and practical application with
perceptive appreciation and understanding of concepts, and in so doing
requires the development of all these competencies” (Fry and Kolb, 1979,
p. 79). Philanthropic studies often follow this philosophy, integrating theory
and conceptual understandings of giving and serving with engaged learning
and experiential service (Hatcher et al., 2016).
This section includes a table with a range of activities to use in philanthropic
studies classrooms or by nonprofit management instructors who wish to inte-
grate philanthropic studies concepts into their courses (see Table 10.1). In the
table, each activity is associated with the learning objectives identified in the
first section of this chapter (see column 2). The activities are conceived across
a range of curricular areas; there are active learning, in-class exercises, and
several activities may also be expanded or built upon to craft larger projects
or assignments. Each activity includes adaptations for the undergraduate and
graduate levels. Based on Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom et al., 1956), which
educators use to define and designate the progressive nature of educational
outcomes, the activities designed for undergraduates or individuals with a rudi-
mentary topical knowledge require students to demonstrate an understanding
of the subject, to make distinctions, and to apply their knowledge to actual sit-
uations. Outcomes of graduate-level activities go beyond basic knowledge to
emphasize theory, analytical skills, and evaluation. The table also includes an
online variation for each activity, which utilizes the technologically enhanced
setting of the contemporary college classroom and can be modified for either
the graduate or undergraduate level.

TEACHING NOTES

Philanthropic studies classrooms should be active learning spaces in align-

ment with Chickering and Gamson’s (1987) best practices in undergraduate
education, which put students at the center of learning (Boyer, 1990). In these
settings, students are active rather than passive learners engaged in reflecting,

Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -

9781788118675
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
 Table 10.1 Philanthropic studies classroom activities by curricular area for undergraduate, graduate, and online
courses
Activity Description
Students construct their philanthropic
storyline.
Suggested text: Understanding
philanthropy: Its meaning and mission.
(Payton and Moody, 2008).
Students read letters from signers of The
Giving Pledge (givingpledge.org) and/or
watch donor stories from the Generosity
for Life website (http://​generosityforlife​
.org) as a way to understand a variety of
donor motivations.
Students evaluate how philanthropy
(giving and volunteering) supports
a specific nonprofit organization using
publicly available information such
as their website, annual report, and/or
Guidestar profile.
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
9781788118675
Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -
Learning Objectives Undergraduate
1, 3, 5, 6, 7 Students create a timeline
featuring their philanthropic
activities and influences. They
look across their timeline and
develop themes that tie their
experiences together.
1, 3, 4, 6 Students identify the motivations
and values expressed by the
donors. They discuss how those
motivations relate to their own
giving experiences.
2, 4 Students complete a worksheet
summarizing the organization’s
mission, programs, and
opportunities to give. They
compare the information to other
organizations and draw several
conclusions about the differing
roles philanthropy can play.
Graduate
Students create a concept map
associating their personal
philanthropic experiences and
write about how reflecting on
their experiences would guide
their work with donors.
Students identify donors’
motivations and make short
presentations connecting them
to different theories of donor
motivation and behaviors.
Students discuss the
organization’s mission,
programs, and philanthropic
support. They assess whether
the organization promotes a
“culture of philanthropy” and
develop suggestions for how
the organization might build
a culture of giving and better
serve its mission.
Online
Students interview a classmate
about their philanthropic history,
values, and priorities. They then
write a brief, blog-style profile of
their classmate and post it in the
online classroom community.
Students post their analysis of
a specific donor’s letter/video
in an online discussion forum.
They respond to their classmates,
commenting on similarities and
Teaching philanthropy
differences in their analyses and
across different donors.
Students are assigned organizations
from a small group so that
several students look at the
same organization. In an online
discussion, students post their
analyses of the role of philanthropy
in the organization and then
interact with other students in
their group to compare their
conclusions.
171

Activity Description
Students role play as prospective donors
responding to a fundraising request.
In a fundraising course, this could be
crafted as a mock solicitation activity.
Suggested text: Every gift matters
(Morgridge and Perry, 2015).
Students explore philanthropic practices
and traditions in diverse racial, ethnic,
religious, and cultural communities.
Suggested texts: Diversity and
philanthropy: Expanding the circle of
giving (Wagner, 2016); Philanthropy
in the world’s traditions (Ilchman et
al., 1998); The wisdom of generosity
(Jackson, 2008).
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
9781788118675
Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -
Learning Objectives Undergraduate
2, 4, 7 Students are given scenarios in
which they are asked to support
particular nonprofits as donors
with certain profiles. They must
determine what information they
want to know from the nonprofit
and how they will assess the
request, before making a choice
for their donor and justifying
their choice to their classmates.
1, 4, 6 Students are assigned to
read about a set of different
perspectives on philanthropy and
giving (e.g., ethnic, religious,
cultural). In class, they work
through a series of questions
about key tenets for their group.
Next, they teach one another
about what they learned.
Graduate
Students research different
potential or current donors
for an organization they
care about and prepare short
profiles. In groups, students
then take the roles of donor,
fundraiser, and one or more
observers. Students practice
inviting (asking) a donor to
give and responding to the
request. Observers listen for
specific skills taught in the
course.
Students are assigned to
read scholarly articles about
different cultural and social
contexts of philanthropy.
They use a common structure
to review their articles and
complete short presentations
in class about the studies
that they read. They provide
their printed reviews to their
classmates.
172
Online
Students are given scenarios in
which they are asked to support
particular nonprofits as donors
with certain profiles. They must
determine what information
they need from the nonprofit to
help them make the decision.
Then, they use the organization’s
website to see what information
is publicly available. Finally, they
will complete a series of questions
explaining their choice as the donor
and justifying it to others.
Students are assigned to read about
a set of different perspectives on
philanthropy and giving (e.g.,
ethnic, religious, cultural). Groups
Teaching nonprofit management
create short, recorded presentations
about their readings.
 Activity Description
Students participate in a “giving
game” where they debate giving
a small monetary grant to one of two
pre-selected organizations.
Suggested resource: “The Life You Can
Save” website.
Students engage in a debate about
whether recipients or beneficiaries
benefit most from philanthropy.
Suggested text: “The growth of donor
control” (Ostrander, 2007).
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
9781788118675
Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -
Learning Objectives Undergraduate
3, 4, 5 Students discuss which
organization they want to
support and why. Following the
discussion, students write a short
paper reflecting on the activity
and the ethical questions they
considered.
5 Students are asked to write short
persuasive arguments about
who they think benefits most
from philanthropy and why.
These are used by the students
to prepare for an oral debate in
which students are assigned roles
(attorneys, judges, researchers)
and either make the case or
determine which team makes the
better argument.
Graduate
Students begin by writing
about their personal criteria
for giving. Then, they are
asked to make a funding
decision. Following the
discussion, students reflect
on whether they were able to
make a decision that reflected
their giving ideals and/or
whether their criteria for
giving have changed.
Students find news articles
that illustrate the dynamics
between donors and recipients
and construct questions for
a classroom discussion about
donor control. They pose their
questions to one another in
small groups, recording their
conversation to share with the
whole class.
Online
Students first make a giving
decision as an individual. Then,
in an online discussion group,
students must engage in dialogue
with others to reach a consensus
in order to give the money away.
Following the activity, students
reflect on the decision and what
they learned.
In an online discussion, students
Teaching philanthropy
take a position on who they think
benefits most from philanthropy
and draw on at least one source of
evidence from an academic source
to support their point of view.
They must respond to one another
making the case for their own point
of view.
173

Activity Description
Students examine one or more
foundations’ grantee requirements
and critique them from an equity
perspective. They identify what kinds of
organizations can apply for such funding
and who is unable to be considered.
Students create a personal giving plan
following a series of reflective exercises
and questions to guide their philanthropy
over the next year.
Suggested Text: Inspired philanthropy
(Gary, 2008).
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
9781788118675
Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -
Learning Objectives Undergraduate
2, 5, 6 In groups, students examine
a grant maker’s application
requirements from an equity
perspective—who is able to
apply versus being eliminated
from consideration (due to
capacity building, access to
resources, etc.)? Students
summarize their findings and
discussion for their peers.
3, 4, 7 Students construct their own
giving plan following a provided
template. They consider all
types of philanthropy and are
encouraged to design a plan that
is actionable for them.
Graduate
In groups, students examine
a grant maker’s application
requirements from an equity
perspective—who is able to
apply versus being eliminated
from consideration (due to
capacity building, access to
resources, etc.)? Students
write a paper comparing and
contrasting two different
grantmaking approaches
discussing whether their
funding requirements
reinforce the status quo or
take an equity perspective.
Students construct their own
giving plan. They consider all
types of philanthropy and are
encouraged to design a plan
that is actionable for them.
174
Online
Students work in groups to
evaluate a grant maker’s
application requirements from an
equity perspective. They develop
brief presentations summarizing
their findings that are posted for
the entire class.
Teaching nonprofit management
Students construct their own giving
plan and present it in a 2-minute
narrated presentation. They
consider all types of philanthropy
and are encouraged to design
a plan that is actionable for them.
 Teaching philanthropy 175

analyzing, synthesizing, and communicating (Fink, 2003). Classes can also

utilize cooperative learning activities completed by small groups, requiring
students to be responsible for their learning while aiding their peers. The spe-
cific activities described in this chapter should be thought of as part of a larger
course design philosophy and methodology that is learner-centered (Barr and
Tagg, 1995). To illustrate how this works, a series of suggestions for course
design are included next, together with descriptions of how the classroom
activity of designing a personal giving plan integrates with each recommenda-
tion. (The integration of the plan is indicated by italics.)

• Use an established course design model: To ensure that philanthropy

education can provide students with the necessary skills at both the macro
and micro levels, instructors should adopt a learning-centered instructional
paradigm. This approach prioritizes the students and their learning and sup-
ports them with the curricular and pedagogical strategies of the instructor
(Barr and Tagg, 1995). Backwards design is one such strategy that instruc-
tors can use to infuse the learning needs of their students in each phase of
course creation and delivery (Wiggins and McTighe, 2005). Faculty would
decide to integrate an activity like creating a personal giving plan into
class only after making sure it aligns with the course learning outcomes.
• Use authentic assessment to craft assignments: Authentic assessment is
“a form of assessment in which students are asked to perform real-world
tasks that demonstrate meaningful application of essential knowledge and
skills” (Mueller, 2011, para. 1). Authentic “assignments” focus on (1)
performing a task; (2) real-life situations; (3) construction/application; and
(4) student-led activities. Students create their own giving plan for a given
amount of time (i.e., one year). Rather than constructing this in the form
of an academic paper, the final plan and product takes the form of a brief
essay that they could use in applying for a scholarship with the prompt:
How will you make a difference in society in the next year? The plan is
further summarized in a table or chart.
• Use scaffolding to create linkages among activities and assignments:
By designing major assignments first, faculty can then work in reverse, cre-
ating earlier activities and assignments that will allow students to develop
and practice the skills and techniques needed for successful completion
of the major assignments (Bean, 2011). In class, students work to develop
a list of activities that are the action steps in their personalized giving
plan. Then, they draw on this to create a more comprehensive out-of-class
product as a larger assignment.
• Use the lived environment to contextualize the learning experience:
In addition to grounding philanthropic learning in the community through
service learning (Zlotkowski, 1998), instructors can also draw on guest

Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -

9781788118675
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
176 Teaching nonprofit management

speakers to connect theory and practice, incorporate current events as

a mechanism for increasing relevance and relatability, and find other ways
to integrate distinctive aspects of the local environment into class assign-
ments. Faculty can prepare students to assemble their philanthropic action
plans by inviting guests to class to discuss issues of relevance to students.
Students can be asked to include current events and local needs as part of
the rationale for their plan.

Service Learning and Teaching Philanthropy

Contemporary service learning programs affirm “higher education’s funda-

mental connectedness to community and society” (Zlotkowski, 1998, p. xi),
and this connectedness is integral to teaching philanthropy. Introductory-level
philanthropy courses may integrate one-time or short immersion group
service experiences as a mechanism for introducing students to the social
issues that philanthropy addresses. Specialized topical courses may require
students to assess the social justice/advocacy work of a local nonprofit and
provide suggestions for addressing a key social issue in additional ways.
Some educational models provide students with the opportunity to assume
the role of a philanthropic funding agent on behalf of their local community
(Ahmed and Olberding, 2007). For example, 43 colleges and universities
partner with the Learning by Giving Foundation to offer philanthropy courses
in which students act as grantors by developing requests for proposals, eval-
uating applications, and distributing grants to local nonprofits (https://​www​
.learningbygivingfoundation​ .org). In these courses, students learn theories
relevant to philanthropy and then apply and reflect on this knowledge. Other
models integrate service learning more deeply, building academic study around
community service to enrich learning about philanthropy, strengthen commu-
nities, and foster civic responsibility (Olberding, 2009). Students in advanced
undergraduate or graduate-level courses may engage in semester-long partner-
ships with nonprofit organizations. In such courses, students complete projects
determined by needs assessments and thoughtful collaboration with organiza-
tional partners using research and theoretical knowledge gained through their
coursework.
Whether or not an instructor utilizes the exercises described in this chapter
or develops their own, philanthropic studies provide a wealth of opportunities
for engaged and active learning about the role of giving and receiving in
society.

Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -

9781788118675
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
 Teaching philanthropy 177

CONCLUSION

This chapter provides a framework and a series of exercises and suggestions

for incorporating philanthropy education into nonprofit management programs
and courses—as well as a starting point for additional articulation within the
NACC curricular guidelines. Ideas are provided for applying this framework
and activities at the undergraduate and graduate levels and in the online setting.
Nonprofit administrators of all kinds, including grant makers, will benefit
from knowing more about the forms of philanthropy, philanthropy’s role in
society, and people and entities’ motivations for charitable behavior. The
academic study of philanthropy allows for important (and critical) attention to
a key aspect of the human experience and the social structures that inform and
guide people’s lives.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

• What roles does philanthropy provide in society? What sector of society,

public, private, nonprofit, or informal, or combination of sectors, can
best meet societal needs?
• What motivates people to give? Are these motivations intrinsic or
extrinsic? What are dominant narratives in donors’ publicly stated
reasons for giving?
• How do philanthropic preferences vary among cultures and peoples?
What can students learn from different traditions? How does this knowl-
edge inform leadership of the nonprofit sector?
• What are the critiques of philanthropy? Should all philanthropy be
directed toward social change? How does philanthropy reinforce the
status quo, and what are alternative approaches?
• How can nonprofit students (and professionals) be effective philanthro-
pists in their own lives and professions? How can being philanthropic
contribute to living a good life?
• How can knowledge about philanthropy inform the work of nonprofit
professionals?

RESOURCES FOR STUDENTS

A range of digital and textual resources are available to support teaching phi-
lanthropy. Instructors can select those that match their preferences, learning
goals, and activities of choice. A selection of options follow:

Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -

9781788118675
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
178 Teaching nonprofit management

Alaimo, S. (2016). What is philanthropy? Documentary and teaching guide. Accessed

at http://​hdl​.handle​.net/​2022/​21095.
Davis, A. and Lynn, E. (eds) (2006). The civically engaged reader: A diverse col-
lection of short provocative readings on civic activity. Chicago, IL: Great Books
Foundation.
Frumkin, P. (2008). Strategic giving: The art and science of philanthropy. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Gary, T. (2008). Inspired philanthropy: Your step-by-step guide to creating a giving
plan and leaving a legacy. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Gates, B. and Gates, M. (2014, March). Melinda Gates and Bill Gates: Why giving
away our wealth has been the most satisfying thing we’ve done [Video file].
Accessed at https://​www​.ted​.com/​talks/​bill​_and​_melinda​_gates​_why​_giving​_away​
_our​_wealth​_has​_been​_the​_most​_satisfying​_thing​_we​_ve​_done.
Gunderman, R.B. (2009). We make a life by what we give. Bloomington, IN: Indiana
University Press.
Hyde, L. (2009). The gift: Creativity and the artist in the modern world. New York,
NY: Vintage.
Ilchman, W.F., Katz, S.N. and Queen, E.L. (eds) (1998). Philanthropy in the world’s
traditions. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Jackson, W.J. (ed.) (2008). The wisdom of generosity: A reader in American philan-
thropy. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press.
Joyaux, S. (2008). Philanthropy’s moral dilemma. Accessed at https://​ www​
.simonejoyaux​.com/​downloads/​PhilanthropysMoralDilemma​.pdf.
Kass, A.A. (ed.) (2002). The perfect gift: The philanthropic imagination in poetry and
prose. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Learning By Giving Foundation. https://​www​.learningbygivingfoundation​.org/​.
Lindahl, W.E. (2009). Principles of fundraising: Theory and practice. Jones & Bartlett
Learning.
Miller, M. (Director) (2016). Poverty, Inc. (Motion Picture). US: Brainstorm Media.
Nuland, S. (2003, February). The extraordinary power of ordinary people [Video file].
Accessed at https://​www​.ted​.com/​talks/​sherwin​_nuland​_on​_hope.
Ostrander, S. (2007). The growth of donor control: Revisiting the social relations of
philanthropy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36(2), 356–72.
Pallotta, D. (2013, March). Dan Pallotta: The way we think about charity is dead
wrong [Video file]. Accessed at https://​www​.ted​.com/​talks/​dan​_pallotta​_the​_way​
_we​_think​_about​_charity​_is​_dead​_wrong.
Palmer, A. (2013, February). Amanda Palmer: The art of asking [Video file]. Accessed
at https://​www​.ted​.com/​talks/​amanda​_palmer​_the​_art​_of​_asking.
Resource Generation (n.d.). Social change giving plan workbook. New York, NY:
Author.
Singer, P. (2013, March). Peter Singer: The why and how of effective altruism [Video
file]. Accessed at https://​www​.ted​.com/​talks/​peter​_singer​_the​_why​_and​_how​_of​
_effective​_altruism.
Singer, P. (2015). The most good you can do: How effective altruism is changing ideas
about living ethically. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Tierney, T.J. and Fleishman, J.L. (2012). Give smart: Philanthropy that gets results.
New York, NY: Public Affairs.
Wagner, L. (2016). Diversity and philanthropy: Expanding the circle of giving. Santa
Barbara, CA: Praeger.

Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -

9781788118675
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
 Teaching philanthropy 179

REFERENCES
Ahmed, S. and Olberding, J.C. (2007). Can student philanthropy help to address the
current nonprofit identity crisis? A case study of a multiyear, multidisciplinary
project at Northern Kentucky University. Journal of Public Affairs Education,
13(3/4), 593–615.
Andreoni, J. (1990). Impure altruism and donations to public goods: A theory of
warm-glow giving. The Economic Journal, 100(401), 464–77.
Averitt Taylor, J., Taylor, J.E. and Macke, C. (2015). The 505 initiative: Service
learning and student philanthropy in graduate social work. Journal of Community
Engagement and Higher Education, 7(1), 23–33.
Barr, R.B. and Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning—A new paradigm for under-
graduate education. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 27(6), 12–26.
Bean, J.C. (2011). Engaging ideas: The professor’s guide to integrating writing, criti-
cal thinking, and active learning. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Bekkers, R. and Wiepking, P. (2011). A literature review of empirical studies of phi-
lanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary
Sector Quarterly, 40(5), 924–73.
Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H. and Krathwohl, D.R. (1956).
Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals.
Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: David McKay Company.
Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. New York,
NY: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Bryer, T.A. (2014). Beyond job creation: Universities, citizens, and community.
Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Carpenter, H.L. (2017). Philanthropy: Evidence in favor of a profession. The Foundation
Review, 9(4), 65–75.
Castillo, E.A., McDonald, M.B. and Wilson, C.P. (2014). Where heart meets smart:
The making of a grantmaker. The Foundation Review, 6(2), 27–40.
Chickering, A.W. and Gamson, Z.F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in
undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 3, 7.
Fink, L.D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach
to designing college courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Fry, R. and Kolb, D. (1979). Experiential learning theory and learning experiences in
liberal arts education. New Directions for Experiential Learning, 6, 79.
Giving USA Foundation (2018). Giving USA. Chicago, IL: Giving USA Foundation.
Goldseker, S. and Moody, M. (2017). Generation impact: How next gen donors are
revolutionizing giving. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Hatcher, J., Shaker, G.G. and Freeman, T.M. (2016). Faculty learning communities:
Taking collective action approach to improve teaching and learning in nonprofit and
philanthropic studies. Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership, 6(3), 254–72.
Hyde, L. (2009). The gift: Creativity and the artist in the modern world. New York,
NY: Vintage.
Jeavons, T.H. (1991). A historical and moral analysis of religious fund raising. In D.F.
Burlingame and L.J. Hulse (eds), Taking fundraising seriously: Advancing the pro-
fession and practice of raising money (pp. 53–72). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mirabella, R.M. (2013). Toward a more perfect nonprofit: The performance mindset
and the “gift”. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 35(1), 81–105.

Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -

9781788118675
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
180 Teaching nonprofit management

Mixer, J.R. (1993). Principles of professional fundraising: Useful foundations for

successful practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Moody, M.P. and Breeze, B. (eds) (2016). The philanthropy reader. London: Routledge.
Morgridge, C. and Perry, J. (2015). Every gift matters: How your passion can change
the world. Austin, TX: Greenleaf Book Group Press.
Mueller, J. (2011). Authentic assessment toolbox: What is authentic assessment?
Accessed 18 February 2013 at http://​jfmueller​.faculty​.noctrl​.edu/​toolbox/​whatisit​
.htm​#top.
Nonprofit Academic Centers Council (2015). NACC curricular guidelines: Graduate
& undergraduate study in nonprofit leadership, the nonprofit sector and philan-
thropy. Cleveland, OH: NACC.
Olberding, J.C. (2009). “Indirect giving” to nonprofit organizations: An emerging
model of student philanthropy. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 15, 463–92.
Olberding, J.C. (2012). Does student philanthropy work? A study of long-term effects
of the “learning by giving” approach. Innovative Higher Education, 37(2), 71–87.
Osili, U., Clark, C., St Claire, M. and Bergdoll, J. (2016). The 2016 U.S. Trust Study
of High Net Worth Philanthropy. Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University Lilly Family
School of Philanthropy.
Payton, R.L. and Moody, M.P. (2008). Understanding philanthropy: Its meaning and
mission. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Russell, T. (2005). Can reflective practice be taught? Reflective Practice, 6(2),
199–204.
Salamon, J. (2003). Rambam’s Ladder: A meditation on generosity and why it is neces-
sary to give. New York, NY: Workman Publishing.
Schervish, P.G. and Havens, J.J. (2002). The Boston area diary study and the moral
citizenship of care. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit
Organizations, 13(1), 47–71.
Schervish, P.G. and Havens, J.J. (2003). New findings on the patterns of wealth and
philanthropy. Chestnut Hill, MA: Social Welfare Research Institute.
Sulek, M. (2010). On the modern meaning of philanthropy. Nonprofit and Voluntary
Sector Quarterly, 39(2), 193–212.
Tempel, E.R., Seiler, T.L. and Burlingame, D.F. (2016). Achieving excellence in fund-
raising. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Turner, R.C. (2004). Philanthropic studies as a central and centering discipline in the
humanities. International Journal of the Humanities, 2(3), 2083–6.
Wiggins, G.P. and McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA:
ASCD.
Worth, M.J. (2015). Fundraising: Principles and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Zlotkowski, E. (1998). Successful service-learning programs. New models of excel-
lence in higher education. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company.

Elizabeth J. Dale, Genevieve G. Shaker, and Heather A. O’Connor -

9781788118675
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 04/10/2024 03:26:44PM
via Nanyang Technological University, Singapore