Search results

Beginning with a brief overview of education in Australia from both an Aboriginal perspective and that which developed after the arrival of European settlers, this chapter asserts the significance of faith communities in shaping school and teacher education in ways which express their worldviews and moral purpose. Reflecting a Catholic understanding and focusing upon the principles of Catholic Social Teaching, teacher education programs at Australian Catholic University incorporate a holistic approach through their course structures, core curriculum and community engagement experiences. These come together as a pedagogy of promise within community engagement based teacher education. The rationale, examples and model discussed here are presented in ways which show the transformative power of this person- and value-centered pedagogy.

An approach to social responsibility in higher education will be proposed in this chapter and informed by a canon of literature and theorizing on critical pedagogy (Darder, Baltodano, & Torres, 2009; Freire, 1971; Giroux, 2011). Rooted in the work of education theorist Paulo Freire (1971, 1993) critical pedagogy embodies a set of critical dispositions about community, politics and education. Freire (1971, 1993) posited the nature of hope through transformative action in communities in which community empowerment arises from emerging critical consciousness and informed action. In common with the ideals of university–community partnerships critical pedagogy connects both to a community development mission and to an educational mission. However, though these principle philosophies of critical pedagogy may be inferred in the literature on civic universities, on higher education and public engagement and on wider aspects of social responsibility in higher education (Goddard & Kempton, 2016; UPP, 2019; Webster & Dyball, 2010), the chapter will explore how they may be more centrally located in analysis and in practice development.

An increase in community engagement by governments across Australia’s three-tiered federal polity conforms to international trends. It represents a multidimensional institutionalization of participatory democracy designed to involve the public in decision-making. Increasingly, it is a practice which displays the markers of professionalization, including (self-described) professionals, professional associations and a code of ethics. The individuals who design, communicate, and facilitate community engagement are placed in a unique position, whereas most professions claim to serve both their client or employer and a greater public good, community engagement practitioners play these roles while also claiming to serve as “guardians” of democratic processes. Yet the claimed professionalization of community engagement is raising some questions: Is community engagement really a profession – and by what criteria ought this be assessed? What tensions do community engagement practitioners face by “serving multiple masters,” and how do they manage these? More pointedly, how can ethics inform our understanding of community engagement and its professionalization? This chapter examines the case for the practice of community engagement as a profession using Noordegraaf’s (2007) pillars of pure professionalism as a guide. It then explores some practical examples of the tensions practitioners may experience. The chapter concludes by reflecting on the future direction of community engagement given its positioning.

Between 2002 and 2018, at a time when UK universities were being increasingly measured in economic and financial terms, Staffordshire University established a dedicated public engagement unit. Staffed by an experienced team of “pracademics” (Posner, 2009), the Creative Communities Unit (CCU) engaged with community members and voluntary organizations through teaching, research, and consultancy. Underpinning CCU practice was a clear set of principles influenced by those of community development, including participation, inclusion, and action-driven practice. However, despite strong community connections the work of the unit remained isolated with little coordination for public engagement at a strategic level in the university.

This chapter charts the work of the CCU over its lifespan and its influence on a strategically embedded Connected Communities Framework through which civic engagement is supported across the institution. It explores how the alignment of grass roots activity through the CCU, shifts in UK policy and a clear, institutional strategic vision for civic engagement enabled the move from public engagement as a small team activity to an institutional commitment. It concludes with a reflection on the enabling conditions that supported the journey toward a civic university.

There have been great advances in our understanding of how universities effectively undertake community engagement, with research focused upon understanding community partner perspectives and outcomes (see Andrée et al., 2014; Srinivas et al., 2015; Sweatman & Warner, 2020), and democratic civic engagement (see Hall et al., 2013; Saltmarsh et al., 2009). This chapter builds on these studies to critically examine one university’s capacities to coordinate institutional-level change that supports and advances community-engagement scholarship. A small, rural, undergraduate university in Nova Scotia, Canada, called Acadia University was used as the case study site for this examination. Using an action research case study design, we gathered data from multiple sources within and outside of the University over a three-year period. Through this investigation Acadia’s community-engagement ethos was studied to understand if the University has the assets, resources, knowledge and motivation to create, implement and sustain democratic community engagement initiatives with community partners. From this data, key findings were categorized into three major themes: power and positionality of the University, institutional supports and barriers to engagement, and institutional assessment of community engagement initiatives. This chapter discusses these themes in depth using data from this study and current literature to unpack the practicalities and particularities of an institution committing to a deep, pervasive and integrated community engagement culture. Overall, this study found that Acadia’s community engagement ethos, as it moves towards democratic engagement while navigating systematic internal and external constraints, is diverse and complex. This study contributes to the legitimization of community engagement scholarship more broadly.

This study examines the factors that influence the uptake of stakeholder engagement in the sustainability accounting and reporting process. The chapter addresses the scarcity of research in the area of stakeholder engagement by highlighting the factors that accelerate involvement of stakeholders in the sustainability accounting and reporting process. Case study research was used to explore the influences on stakeholder engagement practices of three Australian local councils. Data collection methods included interviews and document analysis.

This research highlights external as well as internal factors that can encourage meaningful stakeholder engagement in the sustainability accounting and reporting process in public sector organisations. The findings of this research recognise government regulations as the key driver behind the uptake of stakeholder engagement policies and practices. However, managerial commitment and professional bodies’ support is observed as necessary to encourage and sustain creative and meaningful engagement. These findings also have implications for stakeholder engagement in the private sector.

This chapter presents a case study of a community engagement project that was established in 2013, between the International Business School of Hanze University of Applied Sciences (UAS), Groningen, the Netherlands, and various communities within Mombasa County, Kenya. From an educational point of view, this engagement helped enrich the curriculum, in terms of learning how business is conducted in a different cultural setting, and how classroom knowledge can be applied within the field. From a community perspective, this engagement acted as a facilitator to knowledge and resource access. The authors highlight aspects that have explicitly added value to the projects, whilst simultaneously presenting engaging dissonance arising from the implementation of the project as well as discussing factors that could be addressed to improve this type of community engagement. The recommendations would be most applicable to projects within similar cultural settings and/or with a similar geographical distance.

Reciprocal partnerships between institutions of higher education (IHEs) and communities provide opportunities for IHEs to fulfill their core mission while at the same time benefiting communities. One model of institutional accountability for this type of partnership is the Elective Carnegie Community Engagement (CE) Classification. As a process is underway to internationalize the US-based classification, this chapter engages with a central guiding question: How can we best adapt the CE classification’s institutionalizing framework for CE – designed in the context of the United States – in a way that upholds the integrity of engagement practices, adheres to effective strategies for organizational change, and is sensitive to national, cultural, economic, political, social, and historical contexts? In addressing this question, the internationalization strategy is focused on careful adaptation of the application framework so that it can be applied in specific national higher education contexts. The adaptation seeks to incorporate nationally and culturally relevant CE approaches that are reflected in organizational strategies at the institutional level, consistent with the internal logic of the CE classification: valuing expertise of others, working against colonial knowledge regimes, and mindfully building toward increased epistemic justice. This strategy can be a model for internationalization of other processes for IHEs.

As academics, quantitative and/or qualitative methods are at the heart of the research we conduct and the insights we seek to share with the world. However, this does not always translate into impactful engagement for the stakeholders and communities we engage with, despite the evidence that indicates the potential to do so. One of the critical ways that academics can generate impact is through community and stakeholder engagement – developing networks and external partnerships that work collaboratively to generate change. Research indicates that more participatory methods of engagement where stakeholders can co-create solutions have the greatest transformational potential for impact. The key to differentiating meaningful and impactful stakeholder engagement from distinct concepts such as communication or consultation is understanding the level of influence the stakeholder will have on the decision. This chapter provides a practical guide for academics to build their practice in impactful engagement throughout their career through eight simple steps. Using the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) spectrum of public participation, an example of how engagement methods can be selected to build impactful engagement skills throughout the academic career is illustrated. Impactful engagement has the capacity to bring diverse voices and perspectives together to shape decisions and change, and in so doing, create greater impact.

Purpose – The present study looks at the dynamic process of Mexican immigrant children and youth's civic engagement through their participation in community and family activities. In particular, it explores how their collaboration in a grassroots, immigrant community-based Centro in New York City allows for civic engagement. We demonstrate how active community participation, in the form of civic engagement, shapes children and youth's citizenship constructions.Methodology – Based on extensive participant observations and focus group interviews, this article demonstrates how children and youth's civic engagement is mediated by their integration and contributions to family and community civic activities and how these activities inform children and youth's knowledge of citizenship discourse. We present evidence that demonstrates that children and youth's involvement and participation in protests, rallies, volunteer activities, as well as the creation of a booklet, associated with immigration, human rights, and social justice, organized through the Centro Guadalupano, facilitated their knowledge about illegality and citizenship issues.Findings – Findings suggest that when indigenous Mexican children and youth are integrated into the important activities of their community, as active and engaged members, they develop a deeper understanding of civic engagement and what it means to be a participatory “citizen.”Research implications – The present study provides a starting point for future research on the importance of and possibilities for child and youth civic engagement in grassroots community organizations. For example, children and youth learn that through active civic participation and community contributions, they are able to challenge dominant discourse on immigration, human rights, and citizenship. This study sheds light on the value of involving children and youth in civic engagement opportunities – a process that can facilitate the construction of citizenship among marginalized groups, particularly undocumented Mexican immigrants from indigenous regions.Value – The findings presented extend broader discourses on the politics of immigration and citizenship, and also challenge, to some extent, mainstream constructions of children and youth. More research in these areas is needed; our paper is a small contribution to the emerging field of indigenous and immigrant children and youth's political socialization and activism.