- Wenger, L., Linda, H., & Seifer, S.D. (2012). Community-engaged scholarship: Critical junctures in research, practice, and policy. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 16(1), 171-181. http://openjournals.libs.uga.edu/index.php/jheoe/article/view/754
- In November 2010, the University of Guelph and Community-Campus Partnerships for Health brought together national and international leaders from diverse academic and organizational backgrounds to discuss community-engaged scholarship in higher education and its implications for future research, practice, and policy. Attendees identified con-ceptual challenges, values and tensions, opportunities for action, and resources to support community-engaged scholarship. This resource reports on the lessons learned and provides two articles developed from panel presentations at the conference.
- Salsberg, J., Seller, R., Shea, L., & Macaulay, A.C. (2012). A needs assessment informs development of a participatory research faculty development workshop. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 16(1), 183- 193. http://openjournals.libs.uga.edu/index.php/jheoe/article/view/755
- University-based researchers need new sets of skills to collaborate meaningfully with non-academic research partners and to obtain funding that requires community and end-user partnerships. This paper describes the design, implementation and findings of a needs assessment survey used to inform a participatory research faculty development workshop at McGill University in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. The design process of the faculty development workshop and the impact of the workshop on faculty capacity are discussed.
- Jaeger, A.J., Jameson, J.K., & Clayton, P. (2012). Institutionalization of community-engaged scholarship at institutions that are both land-grant and research universities. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 16(1), 149-167.http://openjournals.libs.uga.edu/index.php/jheoe/article/view/753
- This article reports on North Carolina State University’s community-engaged scholarship faculty development program established in 2009–2010. Literature that grounded the development of the program is first presented, followed by sections on program design, implementation, and products produced by the participants. The authors reflect on how institutional identity as both a land-grant and research university leads to four main tensions: funding support, reappoint¬ment, promotion, and tenure policies, and faculty commitment. In conclusion, the article asserts that this dual-identity creates a contradiction that challenges the institutionalization of engaged scholarship.
- Hamel-Lambert, J.M., Millesen, J.L., Harter, L.M. & Slovak, K. (2012). Reflections on community-engaged scholarship faculty development and institutional identity at Ohio University. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 16(1), 129-147. http://openjournals.libs.uga.edu/index.php/jheoe/article/view/752
- Ohio University was funded by the Faculty for the Engaged Campus initiative to design and implement a faculty development program comprised of three major components to increase faculty competency in engaged scholarship: (1) a Faculty Fellowship in Engaged Scholarship, (2) the Community-Based Participatory Research Learning Community, and (3) the co-editing of a book, Participatory Partnerships for Social Action and Research. This paper explores the implementation of the faculty development program and concludes with a discussion on two lessons learned.
- Greenwood, D.J. (2012). Doing and learning action research in the neo-liberal world of contemporary higher education. Action Research, 10(2), 115-132. http://intl-arj.sagepub.com/content/10/2/115.abstract
- Understanding how action research can be practiced, taught, and learned in contemporary universities requires understanding the dominant structures that organize higher education in the 21st century. This article presents the neo-liberal and Taylorist structures affecting higher education and then places the practice and study of action research in this context to outline ways action research could contribute to an improved future for higher education. (Greenwood, 2012, p. 115)
- Gelmon, S., Ryan, K., Blanchard, L. & Seifer, S.D. (2012). Building capacity for community-engaged scholarship: Evaluation of the faculty development component of the Faculty for the Engaged Campus Initiative. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 16(1), 21-45. http://openjournals.libs.uga.edu/index.php/jheoe/article/view/748
- This paper reports the results of the faculty development program of the Faculty for Engaged Campus Initiative of Community-Campus Partnerships for Health (CCPH). The authors provide background on the objectives of the Initiative and outline various components of their Community-Engaged Scholarship Faculty Development charrette: selection process, self-assessment tools, curriculum, and strategies for faculty development, and development of team action plans. The evaluation findings are then examined, suggesting that “external funding, ongoing support beyond a one-time charrette, and a set of standard curricular tools can help institutions implement community-engaged scholarship faculty development programs on their campuses” (Gelmon et al, 2012, p. 21).
- Blanchard, L.W., Strauss, R.P., & Webb, L. (2012). Engaged scholarship at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: Campus integration and faculty development. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 16(1), 97- 127. http://openjournals.libs.uga.edu/index.php/jheoe/article/view/751
- This article describes UNC Chapel Hill’s community-engaged scholarship faculty development activities and the impact of the activities on promotion and tenure initiatives and the university’s new academic plan. The authors describe the activities and report two main lessons learned: incorporation of these activities into existing university programs helps institutionalize them, and implementation of these activities into broader university programs widens the forum for the promotion of community engaged scholarship.
- Jordan, C. Doherty, W.J., Jones-Webb, R., Cook, N., Dubrow, G., & Mendenhall, T.J. (2012). Competency-based faculty development in community-engaged scholarship. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 16(1), 65-95. http://openjournals.libs.uga.edu/index.php/jheoe/article/view/750
- The Faculty for the Engaged Campus initiative (FEC) of Community-Campus Partnerships for Health (CCPH) developed a one-year competency-based faculty development pilot program designed to achieve two objectives: increase competencies in community engagement and community engaged scholarship and encourage participants to serve as ambassadors of engaged scholarship. This article describes the components of the pilot-program, and analyzes its impact and effectiveness by examining participant surveys and interviews. Findings, critical program features, and lessons learned are explored.
- Jaeger, A.J., Sandmann, L.R., & Kim, J. (2011). Advising graduate students doing community-engaged dissertation research: The advisor-advisee relationship. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 15(4), 5-25. http://openjournals.libs.uga.edu/index.php/jheoe/article/view/626
- This qualitative study examines the relationship between doctoral students doing community-engaged dissertation research and faculty advisors, providing literary background and a descriptive outline of the study’s participants, methods, data collection/analysis, and limitations. The findings reveal five characteristics of such relationships: (1) background and experience matter; (2) faculty advisors and advisees are co-learners; (3) the advisor-advisee relationship can approach a synergistic state; (4) faculty advisors often serve as interpreters and interveners; and (5) community-engaged dissertation studies often lack “struc¬tural” support. The authors conclude with two practical steps for faculty to serve as effective mentors: (1) be sensitive to, and learn from, the community experience of one’s advisees, and (2) intentionally model mutuality and reciprocity.
- Masuda, J.R. et al. (2011) Building capacity for community-based participatory research for health disparities in Canada: The Case of ”Partnerships in Community Health Research”. Health Promotion Practice, 12(2), 280-292.
- Despite increasing support for community-based participatory research (CBPR) to reduce health disparities, challenges at the individual and institutional levels have restricted its adoption. One such challenge is the lack of in-depth and experiential training opportunities for CBPR practitioners – both academic and community-based. This article describes Partnerships in Community Health Research (PCHR), a program centered at the University of British Columbia, which was designed to provide an integrated, multiyear program for both graduate students and community members to develop knowledge, skills, and experience to engage collaboratively in CBPR. PCHR is a unique training program in that the researchers and community members enter as “equal learners”, community members identify the research projects, and partnerships are sustained beyond one group of learners. To assess the PCHR model, the article outlines two dimensions (learner readiness to engage in CBPR; the extent to which actual projects meet established CPBR criteria for success), and two PCHR learner projects as case studies to portray both achievements and lessons learned.
- Nicotera, N., Cutforth, N., Fretz, E., & Thompson, S.S. (2011). Dedication to community engagement: A higher education conundrum? Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, 4(1), 37-49. https://portfolio.du.edu/portfolio/getportfoliofile?uid=190826
- This qualitative study reports on the impact of institutional funding for community engagement on faculty and staff’s professional role and practice of community engaged work. The results demonstrate ways that institutional funds impact faculty and staff’s perceptions of community partner capacity, effects on student learning, their own professional roles, and the value of their community engaged work. While many results were positive, such as relevance of academic work in communities and the creation of university-community partnerships, a conundrum was also revealed—a tension between the University’s public articulation of the significance of community engagement and faculty concerns that the traditional research reward structure could undermine their long-term commitment to engaged scholarship. The authors provide many quotes from the focus group interviews, and offer a framework to help institutions deal with this conundrum.
- Witmer, A., Ogden, L., Lawton, J., Sturner, P., Groffman, P.M. …Killilea, M. (2010). The engaged university: providing a platform for research that transforms society. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 8(6), 314- 321. http://www.esajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1890/090241
- Despite a growing recognition that the solutions to current environmental problems will be developed through collaborations between scientists and stakeholders, substantial challenges stifle such cooperation and slow the transfer of knowledge. Challenges occur at several levels, including individual, disciplinary, and institutional. All of these have implications for scholars working at academic and research institutions. Fortunately, creative ideas and tested models exist that provide opportunities for conversation and serious consideration about how such institutions can facilitate the dialogue between scientists and society. (Witmer et al, 2010, p. 314)
- Walsh, C.A., Rutherford, G.E., & Sears, A.E. (2010). Fostering inclusivity through teaching and learning action research. Action Research, 8(2), 191-209. http://arj.sagepub.com/content/early/2010/02/04/1476750309351360
- This resource synthesizes the existing literature on designing and implementing courses on alternative research paradigms to analyze the design and implementation of an undergraduate community based research course conducted in a local homeless shelter. The course incorporated students, staff members from the shelter, and individuals from the homeless community. The authors explore the difficulties and successes of this course model, and suggest practices for individuals involved in teaching courses in participatory action research.
- O’Meara, K., Sandmann, L.R., Saltmarsh, J., & Giles, D.E. (2010). Studying the professional lives and work of faculty. Innovative Higher Education, 36, 83-96. http://www.uaa.alaska.edu/engage/funding/Faculty_Resources/upload/FacultyCommunityEngagement-O-Meara.pdf
- Community engagement is one of the major innovations that has occurred in higher education over the last 20 years. At the center of this innovation are faculty members because of their intimate ties to the academic mission. This article examines the progress that has been made in understanding this critical area of faculty work. It builds on past research to consider how the conceptualization of faculty community engagement influences the kinds of questions we ask about it and the kinds of recruitment, support, and professional growth we provide. Implications of the study and for the practice of faculty community engagement are provided for researchers, administrators, and faculty members. (O’Meara et al, 2010, p. 83).
- Krisel, C. (2010). Terms of engagement: Community engagement structures and policies on UNC Campuses. (Masters thesis). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina. http://www.mpa.unc.edu/sites/www.mpa.unc.edu/files/CarolineKrisel.pdf
- Although community engagement is increasingly recognized as a core value of universities, much is unknown about how universities institutionalize community engagement into the identity and culture of a campus. The author uses the Carnegie Foundation engagement designation to examine how engagement structures and policies vary within ten University of North Carolina campuses. Variations in engagements strategies are identified and discussed.
- Moore, T.L., & Ward, K. (2010) Institutionalizing faculty engagement through research, teaching, and service at research universities. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, Fall 2010, 44-58. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/mjcsl/3239521.0017.104?view=image
- This paper presents a study in which 20 faculty members at 15 research institutions in the United States were interviewed to investigate their motivations and accomplishments in pursuing engaged scholarship. The authors report on the support received and the barriers encountered by the faculty in their engaged scholarship endeavors; this data is then linked to a discussion on how structures and leadership need to change for institutional policies and practices to effectively integrate engagement activities.
- Marullo, S., Moayedi, R., & Cooke, D. (2009). C. Wright Mill’s friendly critique of service learning and an innovative response: Cross-institutional collaborations for community-based research. Teaching Sociology, 37(1), 61-75. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/20491290?uid=3739256&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21101115426687
- C. Wright Mills would be a “friendly critic” of service learning, acknowledging benefits while being critical of ways that particular practices can perpetuate institutional power inequalities. The authors discuss Mills’ stance and use CBPR projects undertaken together by students from an elite university and a smaller minority-serving university as a case study to determine practices for effective collaboration between diverse institutions.
- Griffith, Derek M. et al. (2009). The origins and overview of the W. K. Kellogg Community Health Scholars Program. Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action, 3(4), 335-348.
- This paper describes the history, components and evaluations of the W. K. Kellogg Community Health Scholars Program (CHSP). From 1998 to 2007, CHSP trained 46 postdoctoral fellows to develop and enhance skills in working with communities and engage in community-based participatory research (CBPR). Its design and implementation exemplified the partnership principles at the core of the training it provided. Evaluations have shown that CHSP has had substantial impact not only on its participants, but also on academic institutions, community-based organizations (CBOs), policies relating to research funding and implementation, and professional organizations. A key element in this impact has been the continued interaction of CHSP alumni and their academic and community mentors and partners. Key lessons learned from the evaluations are explored.
- Sandmann, L., Saltmarsh, J. & O’Meara, K. (2008). An integrated model for advancing the scholarship of engagement: Creating academic homes for the engaged scholar. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement,12(1), 47-64.
- A integrated model is offered for the preparation of future faculty that addresses the transformation of institutions of higher education into supportive environments for the next generation of engaged scholars. Drawing on the knowledge bases of the scholarship of engagement, institutional change, preparing future faculty, the role of disciplinary associations, and promising practice for institutional engagement, the model provides a framework for approaches that would prepare individuals (primarily doctoral students and early career faculty) as learners of engagement while instigating and catalyzing institutions as learning organizations (Sandmann, Saltmarsh & O’Meara, 47). This model has implications for determining how the scholarship of engagement has transformed institutional culture and identity of universities, and whether this change truly signifies a shift in the dominant culture of higher education.
- Rosner-Salazar, T.A. (2003). Multicultural service-learning and community-based research as a model approach to promote social justice. Social Justice, 30(4), 64-76. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/29768224?uid=3739256&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21101115426687
- Social justice and multicultural awareness are inextricably linked (Rosner-Salazar, 64). This article calls for the use of multicultural service-learning and community-based research in curricula to train students as future “service-providers” in diverse, disenfranchised communities. To support this argument, the author highlights the importance of community-academic partnerships, describing how they promote cultural competency and create opportunities for students to apply methods and theory. The author provides examples of courses that empowered students and community members and concludes with recommendations for scholars, evaluators, educators, and activists on how to engage in communities and promote social justice.
Home > Initiatives > The Research University Civic Engagement Network (TRUCEN)
Civic Engagement at Research Universities > Research University Engaged Scholarship Toolkit > Developing and Sustaining Scholars and Practitioners of Engaged Scholarship
Developing and Sustaining Scholars and Practitioners of Engaged Scholarship
I have always had a drive to serve others and work for the common good. But I never fully realized that I could go beyond volunteerism--that my opinion and hard work could influence policy decisions. My views changed when I sat in the office of one of my legislators in Washington, DC.
-Amanda Coffin, University of Maine at Farmington, Campus Compact student leader