REPORT FOR THE UNIVERSITY SENATE

 

University Senate Committee: Academic Policies Committee

 

Charge to Committee (Brief History of Issue - why the issue is being considered):

 

UW-Eau Claire requires that students complete thirty hours of service-learning in order to graduate.  Approximately 57% of UW-Eau Claire students complete their service-learning requirement in official course work.  Some majors such as education and nursing automatically meet the service-learning requirement in the course work.  Other students complete the service-learning requirement in internships.  The remaining 43% select a project of their choosing with a community partner and a faculty sponsor.  The service-learning operational budget is paid for by $150,000 in student differential tuition money, and for 2004-2005 almost double this amount of support has been from grants obtained in whole or in part by the Center for Service-Learning to support specific community service-learning programs such as Jumpstart, AmeriCorps*VISTA, and several Learn & Serve grants through Wisconsin Campus Compact and the Upper Midwest Campus Compact Consortium. Until two years ago, most types of service were accepted – a student could complete the service-learning requirement in community service activities including religious education or political advocacy.

 

On May 5, 2002, the Academic Affairs Advisory Committee for Service-Learning [AAACS-L] unanimously passed a proposal stating that  religious instruction, religious proselytization, conducting religious services, or projects requiring a specific religious belief or affiliation were not acceptable as service-learning experiences since they are generally viewed as constituting a violation of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. This proposal was passed after a long period of discussion in the AAACS-L, consultation with UW-System attorneys, consultation with Associate Vice Chancellor Steven Tallant and Provost and Vice Chancellor Ron Satz, and contacts with the small number of public universities nationwide with similar service-learning graduation requirements. The Center for Service-Learning enforced this proposed language as official university policy for two years even though the language had never been approved by the appropriate governance bodies (the University Senate Academic Policies Committee and University Senate).  The Center for Service-Learning, once it recognized this problem, stopped enforcing this prohibition of religious service-learning projects in August 2004. 

 

The Center for Service-Learning then brought the motion to Faculty Senate Chair Susan Harrison in late April of 2004, and the proposal made it onto the APC agenda in October 2004.  APC spent three meetings debating the issue.  These meetings were held in Davies Center with a much larger gallery of interested persons than is typical for an APC issue.  Debate in APC was rather polarized, and the APC approved the proposal by an 8-2 vote.  The proposed changes in language for the service-learning guidelines, as well as the materials submitted by the Center for Service-Learning, are supplied with the information packet associated with this motion to help Senators evaluate the proposed change (the Executive Order on Faith-based and Community Organizations and the Guide to Charitable Choice were not used by the committee, but are available on the senate website at http://www.uwec.edu/usenate/RP_Links.htm).  For non-Senators who might be interested in the issue, the materials submitted to APC are on the University Senate web site under “Important Links.”

 

A synopsis of UW-Eau Claire service-learning requirements if the proposed changes were approved:

 

  • Religious instruction, religious proselytization, conducting religious services, or projects requiring a specific religious belief or affiliation would no longer be acceptable service-learning experiences.
  • Service activities for religious organizations that are primarily focused on other needs of the organization or can be viewed as in the common good, such as helping an organization establish a web site, serving in a soup kitchen, etc. would be acceptable service-learning experiences (unchanged from current practice).
  • The Community Action and Lifelong Learning (CALL) Program would post religious activities that fall outside of acceptable service-learning activities in the official listings coordinated by Ms. Paula Stuettgen (unchanged from current practice).
  • Political advocacy would be allowed as an acceptable service-learning experience (unchanged from current practice, but an important part of discussion points listed below).

 

Points Discussed by Committee:

 

The debate on this issue is not easy to break down into a simple Pros/Cons format.  Some committee members looked at the same issue and came down on opposite ends of the Pros/Cons spectrum.  Thus, I will attempt to summarize the differing viewpoints in order to help Senators understand the Academic Policies Committee debate more clearly.

 

Issues voiced by committee members who supported this service-learning proposal

 

  • Because service-learning is a degree requirement, the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution requires that religious service should not be an acceptable option at a public university.
  • Locke v. Davey, a recent Supreme Court decision, was used as justification for this proposal.  (See court decision on the University Senate website.)
  • Many APC members did not feel comfortable as non-lawyers evaluating the legality of the proposed motion.
  • UW System legal worked with the AAASC-L to develop this language, so there must be valid legal basis for this proposal.
  • Religious teaching or proselytization is not sufficiently rigorous academically to be a valid service-learning experience.
  • This proposal would not prohibit students from participating in religious service.  It would just prevent them from using religious service to fulfill a degree requirement at a public institution.
  • Service-learning projects are a reflection on the university, and people might think that the university is endorsing religion if students were observed participating in religious service-learning projects.
  • There might be some problems associated with allowing political advocacy but not religious advocacy.  In the view of most committee members, this was a separate issue that might need to be addressed later.
  • If a project requires a specific religious belief or affiliation, this discriminates against students who are not part of that religious belief or affiliation, and that might offend students as well.

 

Issues voiced by committee members who opposed this service-learning proposal

 

  • Because religious service-learning is just one option available to students to meet a degree requirement, religious service does not violate the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
  • Students are not paid money to complete religious service, and it is their money that is used to partially fund the service-learning operating budget.
  • Locke v. Davey, a recent Supreme Court decision, does not require that UW-Eau Claire prohibit religious service.
  • Numerous Supreme Court decisions such as Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia (1995) state that governmental bodies must pass laws that are viewpoint neutral with regards to religion.  Allowing political advocacy, but not religious advocacy, would not be viewpoint neutral and could therefore expose the university to legal jeopardy.  For this reason, discussions associated with allowing political advocacy but not religious advocacy must not be put off until a later time. 
  • Even though the APC is not composed of lawyers, it is appropriate to examine legal precedents to see if this proposal seems legal. No written legal justification from UW System Legal was supplied to APC with the motion.
  • Religious teaching or proselytization is more academically rigorous than some service-learning activities that are currently acceptable such as walking dogs at the Humane Society or picking up litter.
  • In the original materials supplied by the Center for Service-Learning, the University of South Dakota’s service requirement prohibits all political advocacy and religious advocacy.  This is viewpoint neutral, but it seems rather counterproductive.  If we wish to encourage students to serve after graduating from UW-Eau Claire, it seems that political and religious service would be major areas where they might serve in the future. (Please note:  Dr. Mowry discovered after the APC vote that the University of South Dakota has changed its service requirement under pressure from the university community.  The University of South Dakota now accepts partisan political activity as a service option during an election year.)
  • The university approves service-learning projects, but it cannot endorse the activities.  Can the university endorse a project that is doing advocacy work for George W. Bush or John Kerry?  Instead of banning religious and political advocacy, why not pass a disclaimer saying that the university does not endorse the activities?

 

 

Committee Recommendation: that the University Senate approve that religious instruction, religious proselytization, conducting religious services, or projects requiring a specific religious belief or affiliation are not acceptable as service-learning experiences

 

 

 

MOTION FOR THE UNIVERSITY SENATE

 

The University Senate Academic Policies Committee:

 

by a vote of  8 - 2  (for, against), on October 26, 2004

 

Recommends to the University Senate the following language be inserted into the service-learning guidelines.  See attachment to view the proposed language in the proper context.

 

Please note: Religious instruction, religious proselytization, conducting religious services, or projects requiring a specific religious belief or affiliation are not acceptable as service-learning experiences, since they are generally viewed as constituting a violation of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

 

 

Implementation Date: Upon Approval

 

 

Kent M. Syverson, Chair

Academic Policies Committee