Community-Engaged Research Knowledge Hub

What is Community Engaged Research? 

We define the Community Engaged Scholarship (CES) as the creation and dissemination of new knowledge to address social issues through collaborative relationships and shared activity between those in the university and those outside the university that are grounded in qualities of reciprocity, mutual respect, shared authority, and co-creation.  

Knowledge, in this sense, is conceived of as transdisciplinary (transcending the disciplines and the college or university) and asset-based (where the strengths, skills, and knowledges of those in the community are validated and legitimized). 

One important manifestation of CES is community-engaged research. While such research falls under a broader category of public scholarship (often framed as scholarly and creative activities that are public-facing and oriented toward problem-solving), CES is further defined by its essential grounding in relationships of shared knowledge production with those outside the university and its emphasis on qualities of reciprocity, mutual respect, shared authority, and co-creation.  In this sense, CES is not simply “applied research” where knowledge is generated within the college or university and applied externally to a community. Instead, the collaborative and transdisciplinary orientation of CES brings together academic knowledge and community-based knowledge to generate new knowledge and address social issues in communities.

As with all research, CES requires rigorous evaluation to assess quality. This includes review by knowledge experts. However, with CES, the peer review processes is often reframed due to the recognition that, in certain circumstances, experts will include community collaborators who may or may not have extensive academic credentials. 

Finally, CES aims for impact beyond publication in specialized academic journals and the number of citations in faculty publications. Research that is community engaged aims for the advancement and utilization of knowledge with societally-relevant outcomes and therefore is inclusive of a range of products that have value and relevance to public audiences. 

While research is an important feature of CES, it should not be considered synonymous with it. Faculty take part in a broader range of creative intellectual work in the name of community engagement, collaborating with community partners outside the campus for the purposes of addressing community issues, improving teaching and learning, creating new and relevant knowledge, and developing civic learning opportunities associated with the public relevance of disciplines. Indeed, these scholarly activities connect the core functions of higher education – the generation and dissemination of knowledge – to the needs of the public. In this sense community engagement can be clearly articulated, and should be valued and rewarded, in all areas of faculty scholarly work, including teaching, research and creative activity, and service.

Key Readings in Community-Engaged Research

• Andrews, J.O., Cox, M.J., Newman, S.D., & Meadows, O. (2011). Development and evaluation of a toolkit to assess partnership readiness for community-based participatory research. Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action, 5(2), 183-188.
• Beckman, M. & J. F. Long (2016). Community-Based Research: Teaching for Community Impact. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
• Beckman, M., Penney, N., & Cockburn, B. (2011). Maximizing the impact of community-based research. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 15(2), 83-103.
• Bonner Wiki. Community -based Research - Guides.
• Bordeaux, B. C., Wiley, C., Tandon, S. D., & Horowitz, C. R. (2007). Guidelines for writing manuscripts about community-based participatory research for peer-reviewed journals. Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action 1(3), 281-288.
• Campus Compact (2013). Ethics in Community Engaged Research and Working with Institutional Review Boards (IRBs): An Annotated Collection. 
• Campus Compact (2022). Community-based Research: Selected Readings. Hurd, C.A., curator. 
• Chen, P. et al. (2010). “Dissemination of results in community-based participatory research.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 39(4): 372-378.
• Community Based Research Collaborative (2021). In it together: Community-based research guidelines for communities and higher education. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah.
• Cornish, F., Breton, N., Moreno-Tabarez, U. et al. (2023). Participatory action research. Nat Rev Methods Primers 3, 34 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-023-00214-1
• D’Alonzo KT (2010). Getting started in CBPR: lessons in building community partnerships for new researchers. Nurs Inq. 2010 Dec;17(4):282-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1800.2010.00510.x. PMID: 21059145; PMCID: PMC3203531.
• Fitzgerald, H.E., Burack, C., & Seifer (2010). Handbook of Engaged Scholarship, Volume 1: Institutional Change. Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.
• Forchuk, C., & Meier, A. (2014). The article idea chart: A participatory action research tool to aid involvement in dissemination. Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement 7(1), 157-163.
• Kindon, S., Pain, R., and Kresby, M. (2007). “Participatory action research: origins, approaches and methods.” In Participatory action research approaches and methods: Connecting people, participation and place. New York: Routledge, pp. 9-18.)
• McDavitt B, Bogart LM, Mutchler MG, Wagner GJ, Green HD Jr, Lawrence SJ, et al. Dissemination as Dialogue: Building Trust and Sharing Research Findings Through Community Engagement. Prev Chronic Dis 2016;13:150473.
• Minkler, M. (2005). Community-based research partnerships: Challenges and opportunities. J Urban Health. 2005 Jun; 82(Suppl 2): ii3–ii12. 
• Minkley, M., Garcia, A. P., Ruben, V., & Wallerstin, N. (2012). Community-Based Participatory Research: A Strategy for Building Healthy Communities and Promoting Health through Policy Change. PolicyLink.
• Minkler, M. & Wallerstein, N., eds. (2008).  Community-based Participatory Research for Health: From Process to Outcomes. 2nd Edition. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Publishers.
• Saltmarsh, J and Harley, M. (2016). “The Inheritance of Next-Generation Scholars.” In Publicly Engaged Scholars: Next Generation Engagement and the Future of Higher Education.
• Shirk, J. L., H. L. Ballard, C. C. Wilderman, T. Phillips, A. Wiggins, R. Jordan, E. McCallie, M.Minarchek, B. V. Lewenstein, M. E. Krasny, and R. Bonney (2012).  Public participation in scientific research: a framework for deliberate design. Ecology and Society 17(2): 29. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-04705-170229
• Silka, L (2006) [Ed.].  Scholarship in action: Applied research and community change. US Department of Housing and Urban Development.
• Silverman, R. M. & Patterson, K. L. (2015). Qualitative Research Methods for Community Development. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Smith, L., Rosenzweig, L., & Schmidt, M. (2010). Best practices in the reporting of participatory action research: Embracing both the forest and the trees. The Counseling Psychologist 38(8), 1115–1138.
• Strand, K. et al. (2003). Principles of Best Practice for Community-Based Research. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning Spring 2003, pp. 5-15
• Stoecker, R. (2006).  Research methods for community change: A project-based approach. 2nd edition. Los Angeles.
• Wallerstein, N. & Duran, B. (2010). Community-Based Participatory Research Contributions to Intervention Research: The Intersection of Science and Practice to Improve Health Equity. Am J Public Health. 2010 April; 100(Suppl 1): S40–S46.
• Wilson, S. (2008). Research is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods. Fernwood Publishing. 

Select Case Studies in CBR

• Armer, T.; McCoy, K.; Verrett, B.; Williams, A.; Menson, K.; and Lima, M. (2020) “Telling Our Stories Together: How Universities and Community Partners Co-create Engaged Scholarship.” Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship: 13(1).
• Dyrness, Andrea (2008). Research for change versus research as change: Lessons from a mujerista participatory research team. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 39(1), 23–44
• Hale, Charles (2006). Activist research v. cultural critique: Indigenous land rights and the contradictions of politically-engaged anthropology. Cultural Anthropology, 21(1): 96–120.
• Holkup, P. A. et al. (2004). Community-based Participatory Research: An Approach to Intervention Research With a Native American Community. ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 2004 Jul–Sep; 27(3): 162–175.
• Roe, K., Minkler, M., and Saunders, F. (1995). Combining research, advocacy, and education: The methods of the grandparent caregiver study. Health Education Quarterly, 22(4): 458-475.
• William T. Grant Foundation (2021). Responding to Complexity: Co-producing Knowledge and Interventions to Improve the Well-being of Youth and Families.  Accessed July 28, 2021.