By Paul Pimentel and Naomi Johnson
Mandatory volunteering for students, once the province of posh private academies with an over-wrought sense of noblesse oblige, has become the latest fad in public education. It’s being spun as community involvement, but what it boils down to is all students entering Grade 9 this year or later are required to complete 40 hours of community service in order to graduate.
Community service can teach students about the role they can play in strengthening their communities, even if it is mandatory. It’s also an opportunity to explore different career paths. But as lofty as the policy objectives of this government are, several problems emerge when the policy is closely scrutinized.
First of all, a cash-strapped educational system can’t afford to create community service programs that actually teach students something, and this is reflected in the policy. For instance, the school’s role in this is to approve the activity a student chooses, and then receive written confirmation that the student has completed the 40 required hours.
The policy doesn’t require educators to teach students what they can get out of service, nor does it require students to discuss what they might have learned through the experience. One would think that a government so intent on testing, would at least have a mechanism in place to demonstrate that students actually learned something from this program.
Second, a financially stretched voluntary sector isn’t ready to offer students community service opportunities that actually teach them something. Many, if not all, community groups require volunteers to go through training and orientation sessions. These sessions involve an investment of time and resources on the part of the community groups — an investment many groups might be unwilling to make given that they will only receive 40 hours of service in return.
Most of the opportunities available to students will likely be through special events, where their jobs will include such things as answering telephones, canvassing, and stuffing envelopes. From the perspective of community groups these activities require little investment in training and orientation. In other words, these activities do not require community groups to teach students much.
Finally, this requirement has the potential to turn a whole generation of students off volunteering. Many students will see community involvement as just another thing they have to do in order to graduate. With no resources and no one responsible for helping students make the connection between the service they perform and how that service helps people in the community, that view will persist, and a begrudging attitude towards community service will be solidified.