Conceptual Framework: CLEA Model of Civically-Engaged Learning

This chapter explores how one introductory-level Religious Dimensions course that incorporated elements of community-based learning provided students with firsthand experiences of “faith in action,” which is a hallmark of DePaul’s mission. This course sought to supplement critical thinking with affective forms of learning. Students engaged religious thought and practice not only as intellectually complex realities, but also in terms of their own social location, their capacity to be empathetically accountable, and their ability to move toward motivated action. These four capacities— intellectual complexity, social location, empathetic accountability, and motivated action—are what Clingerman and Locklin (2016) identified as the CLEA model of civically engaged learning.

Briefly, Clingerman and Locklin (2016) defined intellectual complexity as “the capacity to engage in sustained, complex modes of deliberation and discussion” (p. xv). Intellectual complexity points to one’s ability to articulate nuance and grey-areas when making cognitive sense of complex realities. Social location refers to “the capacity to understand the dynamics of social location and diverse social frameworks, including the imbrication of such frameworks in networks of power and privilege” (p. xv). Social location involves processes of metacognition, whereby students step back and reflect on an array of contextual factors that inevitably shape their knowledge (e.g., economic and social status, ethnicity/race, gender identity, religious affiliation, and citizenship status). Empathetic accountability involves “the capacity not merely to foster empathetic connections across boundaries of social, economic, and/or religious difference but to identify such connections as a source of moral obligation” (p. xv). As such, empathetic accountability is as much an affective experience (insofar that it elicits feelings of empathy) as it is an ethical one (insofar that it elicits a sense of accountability). Finally, motivated action refers to “the capacity to act, motivated by carefill deliberation, a consciousness of social location, and empathetic connections across boundaries of difference” (p. xv). Motivated action can thus be seen as the logical outcome of the three preceding capacities. In one sense, it is what one does in practice once new paths are set forth in theory. At the same time, motivated action also colors and shapes one’s future engagement with theory, as the theorypractice relationship is always a mutually-sustaining and continuously spiraling process.

In this chapter we explore how one Religious Dimensions course attempted to foster capacities such as these through a set of half-day, participant observation immersion experiences that were facilitated by a community-engaged partnership with the Interfaith Community for Detained Immigrants (ICDI). We first provide some background on DePaul’s institutional mission, which is rooted in service to those who are economically

Faith in Action and Community Engagement 143 and socially marginalized. We also provide additional background on the community partnership that has been forged with the ICDI. We then describe how one Religious Dimensions course incorporates communitybased immersion experiences, and we share the results from a qualitative analysis of students’ written reflections about these experiences. After discussing the findings, we reflect on some of the opportunities and challenges that have arisen in our community-engaged partnership. We conclude with a broader consideration of how immersion experiences such as the ones described here may provide fertile opportunities for students and the institution alike to engage in meaningful forms of faith in action.