Question #2: What strengths do you think will be useful in this type of project?

Gil wants me to say that any project could benefit from any number of individual strengths. I don't disagree. I just think that there's something more going on here. Gil's knee jerk reaction is to focus on the word “strength.” That's typical of him. I'll focus on the phrase “this type of project” instead. I find myself falling into the assumption that this type of project—meaning, I presume, a service-learning project—will be like all other projects. If learning will occur through this project because of this service element, which is naturally the distinguishing characteristic of service-learning, it behooves me to think about service a little bit. Like I said in my response to Question #1, the genius of service-learning is that it as the audience is broadened so does the accountability for completing the project well. The underlying assumption here is that people care about other people. Back to Gil's point about strength. I think that the most useful type of strength in a service-learning type of project is not much of a strength at all in traditional terms. Compassion is strength when the goal is service. Since Question #2 actually uses the plural of strength, to stay true to the question I'll conclude that strengths similar to compassion are going to be the most useful. That is this compassionate type of strength can overcome weaknesses . A compassionate group will, I think, do the most good. Gil disagrees with part of this argument. He thinks that I'm putting the cart before the horse. He says that a compassionate group has already learned from service. It is untenable to hold the position that the useful type of strength in service-learning is a desired outcome of the service-learning process itself. He insists that I return to his safe and secure comment that any project could benefit from any number of individual strengths.