Community Center Experiential Learning

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE

Community Center ExperientialLearning

Partnerships and Practice “As theCenter Turns”

Scott R. Miller5/15/2014

Community Center Experiential Learning 2014

ABSTRACT

Service learning at the Milwaukee LGBT Community Center (LGBT

Center) has allowed an overview of the programs and partnerships

that the LGBT Center offers to its community. For this work the

author will consider collaborations and community engagement with

the Milwaukee LGBT Center, through a lens of service learning,

and its impact on the community. I will also look in depth at the

situational difficulties that caused the LGBT Center serious

1


financial problems that almost caused the LGBT Center to close.

Under the lens of the source material from the course Ed Policy

609, and by applying key concepts of the course, I will finally

extrapolate the parallels through the theoretical framework

covered.

EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING AND THE MILWAUKEE LGBT COMMUNITY CENTER

Collecting data by of observation at the Milwaukee Lesbian,

Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Community Center (LGBT Center), has

allowed me to learn outside of the traditional classroom. Being

an active service learner (Felten, H., & Clayton, 2011), I was

able to take classroom discussions of how partnerships form

develop and are maintained, and reflect them within the service

2


learning site. During this time, I attended staff meetings,

board meetings and one yearly meeting.

I also interviewed the Executive Director and the

supervisory staff to assess the way the LGBT Center views the

community it serves. Careful reflection has been taken to examine

how programing is facilitated and circulated to its members.

As an outside observer the author has been able to

experience the different ways the LGBT Center reaches its

mission, unencumbered by internal politics and external

pressures. As an experiential learner /service learner, I have

been able to analyze the LGBT Center with focus on partnerships

and educational pedagogies covered in the course Ed Policy 609

Community Partnerships. Finally in summary of my experience I

will l discuss opportunities of how the center has taken steps to

broaden its reach and expand its purpose by hiring me as the

Service Advocate for GLBT Elders (SAGE).

SERVICE-LEARNING

Without the experience of experiential learning I would not

be able to focus on the educational pedagogies used in connection

with the partnerships at the LGBT Center. The use of service 3


learning has cemented many of the courses core ideas and has

allowed me to be able to conceptualize and understand the

information outlined in the course on a deeper level. (Weil,

2005) The impact in the service learning environment allowed

significant positive results in self-efficacy and leadership

(Felten, H., & Clayton, 2011). The use of service-learning as a

tool can allow tangible engagement in the community to understand

how “Service-Learning is embraced as both a mechanism for

community engagement and high-impact pedagogy across institution

types and disciplines (p. 76).” This crossing of pedagogy allows

the optimum amount of learning while volunteering at the same

time. By allowing service-learning to exist one can benefit from

an extension of learning beyond the pedagogy itself. “The

interdependence of learning processes and outcomes with community

processes and outcomes … renders service-learning powerful as a

vehicle for learning and social change… community organizations

are not mere learning laboratories but rather realms of

significant problem solving and human interaction (p. 77)”. This

interdependence allows for the participant ability to focus on

the core concepts of the classroom to “become real and not 4


vicarious.” (Bowen, 2007) Where the “intention to equally benefit

both the provider and the recipient of the service as well as to

ensure equal focus on both the service being provided and the

learning that is occurring (p. 5).” Equal benefits are core of

service-learning. Bowen further points out that there are

different aspects to experiential education which include:

volunteerism, community service, field education, internships and

service learning as “a focus primarily on the service being

provided as well as the benefits that the service activities have

on the recipients (p. 5).” By examining the act of service

learning and by (Bowen, 2007) reflecting what one experienced

one can find an understanding of the connections of the pedagogy

of the service-learning itself.

SERVICE-LEARNING CAUTION AND OUTCOMES

With that drama out of the way it would be valuable to

discuss difficulties that arise that would address cultural

incompetency and blatant classism and racism. Due to the

intimate nature of service learning, its connection and

engagement with the service learning site, the individual and

recipient it is important to be cautious. In an article written 5


by (Taboada, 2011), who discusses the outcomes of cultural

competency, critical thinking, and civic engagement. In many

cases “a majority of [white middle class] students have not

experienced racial/ethnic disparities within their families…

these students are less likely to be aware of the link between

race and health outcomes” (p. 377). Service-learning students

may not be aware of their own privilege and power and may not

understand the reason for service-learning as a practice and

educational tool.

The introduction of the white middle class student to

populations and cultures unfamiliar with their own has ways been

part of the design for service learning from its inception. Bowen

represents this eloquently by reminding us of a quote.

“I slept and dreamt that life was joy. I awoke and saw that life was service. I

acted, and behold, service was joy”

- RABINDRANATH TAGORE, BENGALI (INDIAN) CULTURAL ICON (1861-1941)

Experiential learning can show that multicultural

involvement and reflection on culture can allow cultural

competency to grow that is not initially seen. By allowing

experiential learning to take place one can wipe the unseen and 6


wrongly perceived differences away with a glimpse of cultural

competency (Epstein, 2011; Minkler, 2012). There are many issues

that can get in the way to be able to become a shining student-

learner.

A main example is that we often taken for granted that

recipients are expected to accept the student as a gesture of

goodwill; even though the recipient sees glaring class and

privilege of the service learner (2011). I certainly would not

like a person enters into a service-learning agreement at the

LGBT Center to proselytize their religious beliefs indicating

that homosexuality is a sin and therefore I am damned to hell. I

would become infuriated due to the lack of understanding and

cultural incompetence. It is pointed out in the article seen

Careless service learning placements can perpetuate classism and

structural deficits that may not be of the best interest of the

recipients (2012). Careful review and understanding must

accompany a level of trust that must be achieved before entering

into a service site. Dr. Sandy discusses the need to

“participate fully as an entity in community development (Sandy,

2007).” By participating fully the service learner, the recipient7


and the educational facilitator can build a level of trust and

maturity that can carry the partnership during times of

relational fragility. By building trust, level the impact of the

learning can be palpable upon the recipient, educator, and the

service-learner (2007).

Minkler discusses the importance of building trust and

points out a significant roadblock toward authenticity. “Due to

significant levels of mistrust and fear from both sides, engaging

participants’ required considerable time and relationship

building within community groups”(p. 452). The context here is

focused on collaborations and partnerships but I would take the

leap and acknowledge that the same trust building would occur in

a service learning environment. As seen in an article from

(Weil, 2005) who discusses trust building activities of health

care workers through barbershops by creating culturally

appropriate, evidence based safe zones for people to interact (p.

230). By creating safe spaces not only was the line blurred to

be able to interact; the medical communities were also providing

a safe space to have conversations for issues related to social

justice along with health assistance (2005). The main point being8


made here is that for any partnership whether it between a

service-learner and the organization or the institution and

professor, it is necessary to build a level of trust to become

successful service learners.

In order to build trust I had to think about where I was

going to become a service learner. I wanted to impact the site

where I was going to go in a positive way. Questions were asked

based on my desire for enrichment. It was important to look for

sties that I had a similarity with, keeping in line with my own

internal mission statement/moral focus. By focusing on what

interested me I was able to make significant additions to the

service learning site.

PICKING A SERVICE-LEARNING SITE

The reason I chose to do my service-learning at the Milwaukee

LGBT Center was so “I could participate fully as an entity in

community development (Sandy, 2007).” I knew that I wanted to

make a difference and experience the diverse structure and

interconnectedness of the LGBT Center. It was also my desire to

associate and become intrinsically valuable to the LGBT Center

for a potential avenue of employment. Although my initial goal 9


was not employment but was how to understand partnerships,

relationships, and how the LGBT Center functioned. I did a lot of

pre volunteer research by looking at the website, reading the

propaganda and simply then filling out the volunteer application.

I met with the volunteer supervisor and began to observe. I did

this by attending by attending staff meetings, board meetings and

the yearly meeting. I also interviewed the executive director

indirectly and the supervisory staff microscopically to assess

the way the LGBT Center views the community it serves. I also

did some outside observations and interviewed past employees and

past participants of the LGBT Center. Of this I found the most

helpful information which I included in my findings under the

turnaround section of this paper.

THE MILWAUKEE LGBT COMMUNITY CENTER

The desire to connect with the center allowed the author the

ability to be focused and energetic. Taking time to read the

propaganda, look at the website and have conversations with the

members I had a rough overview. There were many questions that

needed to be answered for example; what is the mission statement?

What is the position on values, confidentiality and service? 10


What programs and services does the LGBT Center provide? Who are

the recipients of the services? What partners are associates

with the Milwaukee LGBT Community Center that assist to offer

unique resources for members of the LGBT Community and its

allies? To answer these questions, the author began by looking

at the mission, service, values and confidentiality statements.

Then looked at the different partnerships the center has within

its walls. Finally looked at the different supporters and

collaborative entities that are used to operate and continue the

goals of the center. Below are the four key statements that make

up the core beliefs of the LGBT Community Center.

“MISSIONThe mission of the Milwaukee LGBT Community Center isto further develop our vibrant lesbian, gay, bisexualand transgender community in the greater Milwaukeearea, thus improving the quality of life for all of us.The mission is supported by the Center’s leadership incommunity building, health promotion, advocacy, andcommunications.

SERVICE The Milwaukee LGBT Community Center deliverseducational, health promotion, and community-buildingservices that meet the needs of LGBT youth, adults andtheir allies in the greater Milwaukee area from itsprimary facility and other sites. Center programs aredeveloped with a consideration of community need,diversity and inclusivity, community development,

11


availability of resources, and the Center’s mission andvision.

VALUESThe Milwaukee LGBT Community Center believes in thegoodness of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgenderpeople. As an organization, the Center seeks to fostercommunity development and agency partnerships. TheCenter values leadership, both formal and informal, andit supports responsibility and accountability amongindividuals and organizations. To achieve its mission,the Center acknowledges the value of diversity andinclusion and of proactive and responsivecommunications. The Center knows that the LGBTcommunity’s long-term quality of life requires theCenter to prosper financially and developorganizationally to meet community needs.

CONFIDENTIALITY The Milwaukee LGBT Community Center has a commitment toprotect its client’s rights and privacy. All employees— paid staff, non-paid staff, volunteers, and thosecompensated by other sources — are bound by law(Wisconsin State Mental Health Act, ss. 51.00) as wellas the Milwaukee LGBT Community Center’s policy toprotect the privacy of Center clients. In addition,professional persons are bound by their code of ethicsto develop and exercise sound professional judgment inprotecting client confidentiality.” (Milwaukee, 2014)

By looking at the statements above the LGBT Center have a

very broad range of individuals they serve. The LGBT Center for

the most part serves all people in any stage of their life who

identify as an ally or member of the LGBT demographic. The LGBT

Center provides services by supporting groups under its

12


organization. The information above talks about the mission

statements but I wanted to find out the real meat of the

organization. One can understand by reading but I was a service-

learner I needed to be in contact with the members of the

organization so I began to look at the individual programs to see

how they fit with the above.

PROGRAMS WITHIN THE MILWAUKEE LGBT COMMUNITY CENTER

The groups that are directly supported by the LGBT Center

are; Project 944.20, Project Q, SAGE, and Mental Health/ Anti-

Violence assistance. Smaller groups include; The Gallery, Legal

and Financial assistance, HIV Prevention, Media Art and Library.

Not only does the LGBT Center provide assistance for the LGBT

population it also has other areas of focus that include outreach

and education. What did these organizations mean and how did

they interact with the mission and the scope of the center. I

sat with the employees and had discussions. Simple discussions

of the outlying groups were easy to understand.

OUTLIER GROUPS TO THE MILWAUKEE LGBT COMMUNITY CENTER

There are many different groups that occupy the space of

the LGBT Community center. These include Milwaukee Women’s 13


Chorus, Wisconsin Rainbow Alliance for the Deaf, and Pridefest.

(LGBT, 2014)There is also a large gallery space that displays a

rotation of artwork from community members. They also have board

game night, a lounge for drop-ins, and movie night that is a pot

luck sort of thing once a month. Staff regularly provides

outreach, and education local and governmental municipalities on

LGBT rights and specific needs.

With the brief overview of the different programs and

organizations that use the center as a hub one can see that it is

a very busy place. Hora and Millar (2011) discuss the need to

have people employed at the center offer a wide variety of traits

and are genuinely equipped to be boundary crossers and uniquely

prepared for the different demands (2011). Different educational

demands require a unique perspective which allows for the use of

the space. Many discussions must take place to emphasize that

there is not a one size fits all way for an organization to

approach its partners, and that guidelines and procedures are

custom made for each group and organization affected which allows

for the center to facilitate a full range of activities that

14


serve the larger and somewhat fragmented LGBT population (Butler,

2007).

Because of the fragmentation effect as seen in large groups I

wanted to explore the other programs that had a more significant

relevance. I next examined the offender program that outlines

state statute 944.20. It is not on any propaganda and is not

advertised anywhere. One can’t find it in any literature due to

the nature of the program and when discussing it we talk in

whispers and in very private circles. The nature of the program

is extremely confidential.

WISCONSIN STATUTE 944.20 OFFENDER PROGRAM

Through collaboration with the LGBT Center and Milwaukee

County Sherriff, a program has been developed to lower the

incarceration rates for those who are caught have sexual

relations in public areas. Due to Chapter 944 Section 944.20

(Wisconsin, 2011) of the Wisconsin Statute that prohibits “lewd

and lascivious behavior.” This provision makes it a Class A

misdemeanor to “commit an indecent act of sexual gratification

with another with knowledge that they are in the presence of

others,” and to “publicly and indecently expose genitals or pubic15


area.” (2011) If someone is arrested in a local park because of

the above, instead of becoming a sex offender and jailed.

Milwaukee County offers a program to teach alternative ways of

expression. This program can be very delicate when dealing with

those who don’t identify with the LGBT Community; those who are

closeted (i.e. not externally expressing their sexuality) for

whatever reason. Therefore confidentiality in these matters is

paramount. The program is designed to reduce the public shame for

the perpetrators and intervene by exploring healthy ways to

express sexual desire without having to resort to public

displays. In a theoretical framework I would attribute this to

a freiereian (Minkler, 2012) approach to helping members curb

their behavior by education. The next group I looked at was the

youth. This was an interesting mix of people whom have all had a

lot of instability in their lives.

PROJECT Q

Project Q is an organization that helps youth from the age of

13 through the age of 23 understands aspects of their gender and

sexuality in a safe and nurturing environment. With the use of

education of life skills, Project Q again uses the Freiereian 16


(2012) approach through experiential educational techniques that

are skill building for applications to navigate the diverse

culture and oppression felt as a marginalized individual. These

life skills have an impact on social interaction, outcomes and

continued development of social, spiritual, and educational

outcomes of the youth. Project Q uses microlevel solutions as

found in (Kendall, 2010) to help solve the problems that LGBT

youth face in the culture today. With a one on one approach the

staff “engages in face to face emotion based interactions over

extended periods of time” (p. 376). This approach can breach

issues of sexual relations, drug use, family issues support and

the delicate nature of sexuality and gender issues.

During the last week, the Director of Project Q was walked

out of the building. I did not think this important but once

getting backstory from the staff I understood the implications of

the decision. Project Q, provides, case management, interactive

social enhancement, and the development of social skills. Part of

the grant that is received must include case notes on every

individual that is being seen. These case management notes must

be uploaded to the reporting institution by a specific program. 17


This program oversees the funding and operates on a grant that is

very strict in its reporting. One can see why by looking at

(Israel, Eng, Schulz, & Parker, 2013) who discuss how important

data collection is in chapter 13 and again in chapter 19.

Further study indicates that Project Q staff may not even

understand why the data is being used an independent subcommittee

may be examining the trends and statistics for the people

involved in a confidential manner (2013). The point is that the

notes are a requirement of the grant and without the notes the

grant goes away.

The Program Director was telling the case managers not to

input notes or supply case evaluations to the grant writing

agency and therefore was asked to leave of the building. From

what it looks like the person was sabotaging the work due to an

internal conflict with the Executive Director. To our knowledge

the Program Director was hoping the money would be pulled from

the LGBT Center and appropriated at a different organization with

in the community of which the Program Director had significant

ties. A subordinate of the Program Director decided to bring this

conflict of interest up to the Executive Director whom 18


immediately rectified the situation by removing the Program

Director. She then immediately called the grant company and

discussed the problems and now everyone is backlogging the case

notes for the study. From all indications the Executive Director

did the correct action by being honest and upfront. The

implications for practice here are clear when trust and shared

understanding are violated. When key elements are not implemented

and data is damaged or unavailable one must become available to

become fully engaged into rectifying the situation. (Israel,

Eng, Schulz, & Parker, 2013) It looks favorable that we may be

able to salvage the grant; however it was certainly a close call.

In the above example one shows how the LGBT Center has faced

many internal and external difficulties that not only threaten

the people it serves but the LGBT Center itself. By removing this

player from the employment of the LGBT Center they used the

conflict of the situation as an opportunity for change. Success

can be achieved and positive outcomes can be felt within the

institution. (Hora & Millar, 2011, p. 180) With the use of

communication a successful interaction took place that allows the

19


LGBT Center to grow and prosper. Next, a discussion of SAGE would

be in line with the conflict and resolution theme.

SAGE AND THE NATIONAL RESOURCE ON LGBT AGING

An underserved population includes those who are over the age

of 50. Service and Advocacy for Gay Lesbian Bisexual and

Transgender Elders (SAGE) offers outreach, support and community

building for the LGBT elders in the community. (SAGE, 2014) SAGE

serves over one thousand elders in and around Milwaukee County a

midlevel approach (Kendall, 2010) through a grant initiative

through the Milwaukee County Department of Aging. The National

Resource on LGBT Aging (Services, 2014) supports local SAGE

organizations and provides training, advocacy and assistance for

elders in the LGBT population. SAGE Milwaukee uses micro and

midlevel approaches to solving solutions. (Kendall, 2010) As

indicated above the solutions are many of the times one-on-one

that discuss individual problems and advocacy issues are

developed to maintain individual goals. In the SAGE group

however outreach occurs at the midlevel level which allow for

social movements and organizations that can act collectively to

promote change in the organization. (Kendall, 2010). By 20


conducting outreach and support the more people can be served on

a one on one basis assisting the needs of the elders on a

microlevel.

The Milwaukee branch of Service and Advocacy for GLBT Elders

(SAGE) is the second oldest chapter in the United States and has

been an active group for many years. The program was its own

nonprofit and ended up losing momentum because there was a lot of

mistrust, bad blood, and separatism between Gay men and Lesbian

Women. The inability to maneuver within the emerging LGBT+

community had become too much for its aging membership and the

Board of Directors would not surrender its grip or change with

the times.

The discovery indicated that surveys dated 2010 shows that

SAGE Milwaukee was in trouble. In the book Exploring Leadership

Understanding Change (Komvines, Lucas, & McMahon, 2013, p. 424)

discuss the importance of changing with the times. SAGE

Milwaukee had come to a tipping point and virus of dissemination

had spread which caused irrevocable damage and leadership was

abandoned. SAGE Milwaukee could not find a new Executive

Director that would work under the Board of Directors events 21


happened in one dramatic moment causing the absorption of the

nonprofit into The Cream City Foundation. With SAGE Out of the

picture and the Milwaukee LGBT Center in severe financial

problems the care and outreach for LGBT members in Milwaukee

County seemed bleak. The LGBT Community as a whole did not know

if there would be a LGBT Center and without SAGE many of the

population depended on each other for networking and support and

many just become isolated and are considered lost.

As aforementioned tough questions were not being talked

about and people felt threatened and underserved. This

information is in the records in the new office which I serve

under the LGBT Center. I have sifted through bylaws, letters,

complaints, and evaluations of SAGE and found it lacking. At one

point a group of 35 Lesbians simply walked out and never returned

because of the reckless abandon of the male leader.

Recently I was on Facebook and an old SAGE member reached

out to me. Dated Wednesday May 07th 2010 she said “I'm afraid

you have an uphill battle with older women, Scott. There are

several men in SAGE who are very alienating. I do not need to go

to an informational presentation on the ACA, for example, and get22


lectured about how unfair it is that men have to pay for

maternity care. I went to a change support group that was

shanghaied by a man who thought he was running an AA meeting,

criticizing the women for cross-talking and showing up with food.

We as a group have much better support from LAMM.” (Female

Member, 2014) As the new SAGE Program Coordinator under the LGBT

Center I responded with honesty and care. I realized that it was

my chance to plant a new mental model. (Hora & Millar, 2011)

(SAGE, 2014) By allowing her to be heard, thanking her for her

candor, letting her know that I fully agreed with her, I was able

to plant the seed of change. I settled back and discussed with

her the meaning of SAGE being Service & Advocacy and had nothing

to do with a good old boys club. That hopefully we can make a

sincere effort to allow all members to participate and allow sage

to be the simple act of listening, and inviting her to be of

service for others allowed me the ability to gain a new advocate

and ally that was previously alienated.

LGBT FRAGMENTATION AND INTERNAL PHOBIA

Fragmentation of a population occurs due to the multiplicity

of the individuals served. These individuals although identify 23


with the community as a whole are in many ways limited to small

groups of individuals within the group itself. The center must

deal with fear, rejection, and different types of phobia(s) i.e.,

Trans, homo, gender, marriage etc., most importantly not all

groups get along. Judith Butler discusses that gender and

sexuality seen as the same and binary predominant heterosexual or

in this case hegemonic culture (2007). This is due to “limits

that are set with the hegemonic cultural discourse predicated on

binary structures that appear as the language of universal

rationality” (p. 12). While speaking with the Executive Director

Colleen Carpenter she discussed heteronormative binary (the way

culture views marriage and heterosexual norms as described in

(Butler, 2007)) and understands that even in the diverse

population of the LGBT community phobias occur and at times are

more visceral than outliers (people on the periphery) that don’t

see the nuances of the differences. For example: As Ms.

Carpenter discussed it is perceived that the idea that Bisexuals

can’t be trusted because they can’t commit to a sexual

preference. This can be a misdirected phobia due to another

person’s fixed sexual orientation. This fragmentation can be seen24


as phobia and oppression may occur within the in divergent

culture itself (2007). Another example was while at a monthly

SAGE brunch one of the members who identify as a Gay man

indicated that he just doesn’t get Transgendered individuals,

reckless sentiment that felt closed and matter of fact in its

delivery. With the use of some of the techniques learned in class

for effective group process we as a group discussed this and I

became a boundary spanning leader.

SOLUTION FOR INTERNAL CONFLICT

I became a boundary spanning leader (Hora & Millar, 2011)

which allowed me to establish trustworthy dialogue buy

“establishing effective and respectful communication thus laying

the groundwork for trust to develop (p. 83)” in this case with

the different genders in the group. I was able to have my “feet”

in both sides of the issue and facilitate a dialogue. This in-

depth dialogue that was at times difficult but this author was

able to provide needed education for the members that were at the

brunch. I did this with setting guidelines and boundaries and

succeeded in a small demonstration of the perception of gender.

I asked the members of the group to design a bumper sticker sized25


piece of cardstock that reflected their gender. After everyone

had had a chance to make their ideal quote we went around the

room and discussed it. We made the decision that everyone had the

rite to reflect anything they wished and all of the answers were

correct. Adapted from (Bowen, 2007) we then took the time to

discuss probing questions to what makes a gender and how gender

differs from sexuality. Upon reflection to this exercise we

noted that there were many similarities that included feelings,

fears and misrepresentations not usually discussed. The outcome

was a more clear understanding of a person who identifies as

Transgender. The exercise really emphasized how people are

viewed in our society and showed that identity is a personal

construct based on internal experiences feelings and desires

(2007).

ENGAGEMENT OF ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK AND EVALUATION

In the above analysis of the Transgendered people in our

group allowed for a deeper understanding of the subgroup

containing the T of LGBT for many in the group. By establishing

norms in communication that includes mutual respect, overall

participation of a small art piece and an explanation component, 26


most of the participants made the decision to listen which

allowed everyone ability to agree or disagree internally upon

their own reflection. (Israel, Eng, Schulz, & Parker, 2013) I

was surprised at how many people praised other peoples design but

disparaged their own because of their own perceived inability to

create art. Our group found commonalities not initially seen. My

role as facilitator was to keep the discussion moving and smooth

the rough spots by interjection and positive reiterations of

personal beliefs. When someone would bring up a negative that

could be considered a negative it was my duty to acknowledge the

comment but to give the person speaking respect. This strategy of

influence allowed the group to stay focused on the topic.

REFLECTIVE TECHNIQUES USED IN EVALUATION

Careful reflection has been taken to examine how programing

is facilitated and circulated to its members. The author used

reflective techniques found in (Bowen, 2007) that included art,

and written reflection. The use of techniques like “What Was it

Like?” and “Collage” (p. 73), allowed the author to see a broad

overview of the center itself. Another analysis tool was 27


creating a mind map of the organization. By looking at an

overview of the organization the author was able to become better

aware of the center and its mission. I started to understand the

heartbeat and lifeblood of the organization itself.

INTERVIEW OF CARPENTER

To understand the organization further I met with, Coleen

Carpenter the Executive Director. Colleen and I discussed the

need for individuals that are either volunteers or staff at the

center to use the mission to protect the individual. Carpenter

reported that “The safety and anonymity of the members that use

the space must be maintained to be able to continue the cultural

advancement of our people.” This becomes a challenge to educate,

empower and further equal rights among the people they serve and

maintain privacy. The center itself walks a fine line between

privacy and awareness. There are occasions where lines are

crossed which can lead to heated debates and social challenges

within and outside its community. As (Israel, Eng, Schulz, &

Parker, 2013, p. 73) discusses the importance of equitable

participation and open communication being the one of the most

important factors for facilitating groups to achieve their goals.28


All members must have opportunities to participate openly in

group discussion and action. (Forsyth, 2009) This shows that the

multiplicity of the organization function to facilitate every

member. Further research shows that there is always conflict

within organizations, and without conflict change does not occur,

and is often necessary.

“Discussion of conflict explicitly before it occurs in one

way to encourage group members to see it as a norm in our

work is to “agree to disagree; and conflict that stems from

histories of oppression may benefit from the sharing of

experiences and efforts by all members to understand the

others’ experiences” (Israel, Eng, Schulz, & Parker, 2013, p.

86 - 87). These shared experiences become the bedrock for

future development and trust.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION AND CARPENTER

One of the best ways that conflict resolution occurs is with the

semi-closed, open door policy of the Executive Director. Her

single mission is to keep the LGBT Center solvent and on a

forward momentum that the Board of Directors maintains. With the

use of boundaries, expectations and awareness Ms. Carpenter works29


magic on the many individuals that are employed at the LGBT

Center. A boundary spanning leader (Hora & Millar, 2011), Ms.

Carpenter works tirelessly to engage in the community, interact

with the different bridges formed by the LGBT Center, its allies

and partners and is aware of leaning on staff to improve climate

and culture. (Wheatly, 2002) It was clear that Colleen was a no

nonsense woman who told you what was what. She had no problem

articulating blunt and capable action.

YEARLY STATE OF THE LGBT CENTER MEETING

By attending the yearly I fully understand what Colleen

Carpenter has done for the LGBT Center. In the meeting titled

“2013 at a glance: The Momentum Grows” The author listened to the

information presented, took notes, and examined the direction of

the LGBT Center as a whole and the board. The following are the

milestones captured in 2013. First, SAGE became a program of the

center as before it was its own non-profit and was dangerously

close to folding. Volunteer hours were up %300 totaling 10,274

hours. Over 100 volunteers helped at Pridefest in the Center

Stage area. The center was over $750,000.00 in the rears with

the landlord and the legacy fund, with the support of key friends30


and the negotiation of the space, the LGBT Center paid it off the

money. This savings gave the LGBT Center a chance to continue.

The financials show that the center had a total income of

$700,449.27 with expenses of $647,440.13 which allowed the center

a net income of $53,009.14. Colleen Carpenter was hired during a

nationwide search for a new Executive Director. The LGBT Center

provided counsel to elders in the community and had a successful

anti-violence program which impacted 108 members. Outreach with

partners and collaborators with different community members,

Board of Directors was vital to save the LGBT Center. Proudly the

LGBT Center has come out of the shadows of being closed for good

and is on track to achieve its mission once again.

What the LGBT Center had to do was create a design for

adaptation of the problems that were unique to the LGBT Center.

(Hora & Millar, 2011) The LGBT Center learned that there are no

“one size fits all solution” (p. 21) for the individual

organization and its partnerships. Careful planning and

identifying how to save the center took tireless volunteer work,

commitment from the Board of Directors and a willingness to

succeed played a key role in remaining solvent. By building 31


trust and equity (Israel, Eng, Schulz, & Parker, 2013, p. 561) by

what the text refers to as “ground truthing” Ms. Carpenter under

the Board of Directors has succeeded in bringing what was once

paralyzing inaction into valuable momentum. Referring to ground

truthing (p. 561) is to get the climate on the ground literally,

find out what is happening and what are really the perceptions of

the community by using triangulation techniques (p. 378) problems

that were once uncovered became the third space of indigenous

knowledge (p.52). Surveys ad interaction, in multiple areas of

the LGBT Center were conducted to explore solutions in a more

comprehensive manner in conjunction with the working group which

developed into a valuable and solvent society on which

programming has developed new problem solving partnerships.

During this meeting a few tokens of appreciation were handed out

to signify the gratitude of the LGBT Center. The United Way has

been one of the largest sponsors of the center who believes in

the mission and is a valuable ally for the LGBT Center. This

coordinated partnership has allowed a working group to form and

develop an understanding of the underlying mechanism of what was

needed to survive. (Hora & Millar, 2011, p. 07) . The working 32


group looked at the underlying problems of the center and

reported to the Board of Directors. The working group looked at

key features of the LGBT Center and did analysis based on current

financials, population of the members, activities and overall

soundness of the center. Focus groups were used to indicate how

the members were unhappy or disenfranchised and further

recommendations were made. The financial analysis was done by an

outside entity that partnered with the Board of Directors and an

analysis was done similar to (Israel, Eng, Schulz, & Parker,

2013, p. 447). A strength, weakness, opportunities, and threats

(SWOT) analysis was done which uncovered deficits in programming,

funding, implementations of programming and runaway spending.

Questionnaires were circulated but did not generate much support

due to the long term negative outcomes seen by the active members

of the LGBT Center. (2013)

THE TURNAROUND

The outcome of the working group provided a conceptual

framework to move out of debt by aggressively addressing the

damaging mental models that were present in the sociocultural

environment and remove financial waste. The center was four 33


floors and was being underutilized. These stumbling blocks

present happened because of lack of leadership of the Board of

Directors because of the actions of the previous Executive

Director. Under the direction of the working group the Board of

Directors removed the Executive Director from power and reduced

the space from four floors to two floors in the same building.

Key staff members were removed and replaced. Emphasis was placed

on a more nurturing, accepting cultural model for the space and

the momentum slowly began to improve.

SOCIAL POLITICS AND HUMAN NATURE

The author is fascinated that the bureaucracy that followed

the LGBT Center and SAGE but the transitions of both

organizations have come out of danger of dissolving. With the use

of many of the techniques outlined in the readings of Ed Policy

609 one can directly apply the theory and practice outlined. For

example by using a working group partnership, the group could

step back, take an inventory, and examine the best way to

cultivate and grow the organization. Many leaders of non-profits

often are weary of evaluation (Grobman, 2011). Grobman discussed

that fear of evaluation is often unfounded. (p. 283) Yet on the 34


other hand if one is not committed to the organization, wastes

money and the organization forgets that it is liable to the

community they serve. An evaluation can be disastrous for the

staff. This was the case for the LGBT Center. The working group

looked at the best practice for service which indicated a change

in leadership. The working group was successful to recommend the

need for change. (LGBT, 2014) In connection with communication,

trustworthy behaviors and action these groups foster a better

understanding of the processes and dynamics of the real world

experience seen by service learning. (DiNitto, 2011; Felten, H.,

& Clayton, 2011; Grobman, 2011; Hora & Millar, 2011; Komvines,

Lucas, & McMahon, 2013; Wheatly, 2002) Another example is the

change of the leadership while it is important to negotiate the

tension between self-interest and the interests of the collective

in this case the LGBT Center one must examine the entire

partnership as a whole. The removal of the Program Director from

Project Q was a direct response to the needed leadership the LGBT

Center must have. (Hora & Millar, 2011; Israel, Eng, Schulz, &

Parker, 2013) Further research shows that boundaries must be

determined to allow for clear delineation of partnerships and the35


role each partnership takes. Frequently when organizations get

into trouble either a partnership is not regulated, data

mismanaged for grant initiatives, or the members do not speak the

same language. (Epstein, 2011; Sandy, 2007) Once down the rabbit

hole it is difficult to see one’s way out and the organization

can suffer. This shows why evaluation is paramount for continued

growth and development.

Despite all of the efforts many have been frustrated when

dealing with the bureaucracy of the LGBT Center before the change

of leadership. (DiNitto, 2011, p. 44) This bureaucracy created

tension which unhealthy partnerships and relationships among

acting members. One had to take a holistic perspective of all of

the groups involved the L’s G’s B’s and the T’s, and whoever fit

in the middle of them. One of the main reason of holistic

nurturing of all sub groups is that “culture is too complex and

multifaceted to allow for a labeling of an entire organizational

type of culture” (Hora & Millar, 2011, p. 70) this can complicate

the mission. Even today there is some kickback that the label

misses some of the population it serves.

36


CONCLUSION

By looking at the LGBT’s and other groups involved with the

LGBT Center as a whole I was able to holistically look at the

center as a functioning hub for the assistance of a category of

individuals. I uncovered the difference and the similarities of

the groups provided. As the new SAGE Program Coordinator, I have

the ability to try and mend the fences that have been beaten down

by the differences and focus on the similarities. With the use of

focus groups, surveys, interaction and gentle care I will be able

to function as a liaison for those isolated and oppressed.

Touching on oppression, this work discusses what happened

and why. What steps were taken to overcome challenges through the

framework of the course work in EdPol 609? It has been made clear

that of utmost importance and basic necessity is the ability to

communicate. By using boundary spanning leadership, and

communication techniques found in our source materials one can

facilitate and foster communication. “To foster progressive

communication among group members one must be able to set clear

ground rules for debate and discussion and actively guide cross-

cultural and cross organizational interactions so they can 37


proceed in a progressive manner” (Hora & Millar, 2011, p. 164).

It would be my desire to continue to pursue goals in challenging

cultural foundations of organization to achieve leadership

outcomes based on the wishes of the community to allow for a

different type of guidance. It looks like the staff at the

Milwaukee LGBT Community Center is in the process of that

interactive change that causes synergistic growth.

38


Works Cited

Bowen, G. A. (2007). Reflection methods and activities for service learning a student manual and workbook. Debuque: Kendall/Hunt.

Butler, J. (2007). Gender trouble. New York: Routledge Classics by Routledge.

Carpenter, C. (2014, 03 28). Executive Director Milwaukee LGBT Center. (S. Miller, Interviewer)

Damore, S. J., Kapustka, K. M., & McDevitt, P. (2011). The urban professional development school network: assessing the partnership's impact on initial teacher education. The Teacher Educator, 46:182-207.

D'Emilio, J. (1983). Sexual politics, sexual communities, the making of a homosexual minority in the united states, 1940 - 1970. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

DiNitto, D. M. (2011). Social welfare politics and public policy. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Epstein, J. L. (2011). School, family and community partnerships. Philadelphia: Westview Press.

Felten, P., H., & Clayton, P. (2011). Service learning. New Directons for Teaching and Learning, 128, 75-81.

Fisher, R., Fabricant, R., & Simmons, L. (2004). Understanding contemporary university-community connections: context, practice, and challenges. The Hawthorn Press, 13 -34.

Fluehr-Lobban, C. (2006). Race and racism an introduction. Lanham, MD, USA: AltaMira

Press.

Forsyth, D. R. (2009). Group dynamics. Belmont ,CA: Walworth,Cengage Learning.

39


Grobman, G. M. (2011). The nonprofit handbook (Vol. 6). Harrisburg, PA, USA: White Hat Communnications.

Hora, M., & Millar, S. B. (2011). A guide to building education partnerships: navigating diverse cultural contects to turn challenge into promise.Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC.

Israel, B. A., Eng, E., Schulz, A. J., & Parker, E. A. (2013). Methods for community-based participatory reseach for health (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA, U.S.A: Jossey-Bass.

Johnson, C. (2012). Meeting the ethical challenges of leadership: casting light orshadow. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kendall, D. (2010). Can social problems be solved in social. In D. Dendall, Can social problems be solved (pp. 371-388). Boston: Pearson.

Komvines, S. R., Lucas, N., & McMahon, T. R. (2013). Exploring leadership for college students who want to make a difference (Vol. Three).San Francisco, CA: Joss-Bass.

LGBT, M. C. (2014, 04 01). Sage, discussion groups, library, cybrcenter, project Q. MKE LGBT Community center pamphlet. Milwaukee,WI: LGBT Community center.

Milwaukee, L. (2014, (na) (na)). Milwaukee LGBT community center. Retrieved 04 2014, 2014, from Milwaukee LGBT community center: http://www.mkelgbt.org/

Minkler, M. (2012). Community Organizing and Community Building for Health and Welfare. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

SAGE. (2014, 05 10). Services & Advocacy for GLBT Elders (SAGE). Retrieved 05 10, 2014, from SAGE USA: http://www.sageusa.org/

Sandy, M. (2007). Community voices: a california campus compact study on partnerships. San Francisco: California Campus Compact.

40


Services, U. D. (2014, 05 10). Servie and advocacy for GLBT elders. Retrieved 05 10, 2014, from Service and advocacy for GLBT elders: http://www.lgbtagingcenter.org/index.cfm

Taboada, A. (2011). Privilege, poeer and public health programs: A student perspective on deconstrucitng institutioal racism in community service learning. J Public Healthe Management Practice, 376-380.

Weil, M. (2005). The handbook of community practice. Thouisand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Wheatly, M. (2002). Turning to one another. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishing, Inc.

Wisconsin, S. o. (2011, May). Chapter 944 crimes against sexual morality S.35.18 944.20. State of Wisconsin.

41

Community Center Experiential Learning

Documents

Transcript of Community Center Experiential Learning