Search results

Proponents of community engagement to promote social change advocate bringing together researchers, practitioners, politicians, business leaders, advocates and other relevant stakeholders to identify and solve community problems and issues. This chapter will describe the need for academic and community partnerships, how academic institutions can develop priorities, governance and financial structures that facilitate stronger, more effective community relationships and make contributions to the resolution of social ills. The current literature on community engagement, community-based participatory research, community action research, community-engaged scholarship and service-learning are reviewed. The principles and tenets of engaged scholarship are reviewed, barriers to implementation are discussed and examples provided. Academic institutions can play an important role in social change if they are willing to embrace community engagement. A key to success is building trust, sharing power, fostering co-learning, enhancing strengths and resources, building capacity, and addressing community-identified needs. Academic participation requires institutional and faculty commitment to engagement principles, flexible and inclusive governance structures and strategies to educate community members. The development of the relationships and structures required for successful community engagement can be inhibited by imbalances in power and knowledge that often exist among practitioners, researchers, and community members. This review may assist academic institutions to examine implementation of tenure and promotion policies, oversight strategies and structures that assure community development and benefit, as well as opportunities for faculty, staff and student training on principles and best practices of community-engaged research.

In a highly globalized, interconnected and interdependent world, universities can no longer survive in isolation. The educational, research and social actions have an impact on the community where the university works as a change agent to promote society’s fundamental values of democratic participation and social justice. Sustainability education and awareness about social responsibility (SR) are becoming crucial mainly for students, so that they are aware of concepts such as economic prosperity, resource equity, energy sustainability and environmental health concerns (Sengupta, Blessinger, & Yamin, 2019). The SR of a university is to strengthen its ties with the community through promotion of active citizenship, volunteerism and developing a sense of civic and ethical responsibility among students and staff. Universities can have a great influence on achieving social and economic progress of a country as well as protecting the environment and addressing complex issues that plague society. The role of universities is not only restricted to exchange of knowledge but also in playing a leading role as an active member of society. Universities have come out of their isolation to accommodate and be a part of social change by actively engaging in community life and not being confined to only classroom and laboratory activities (Sengupta et al., 2019). This book provides empirical evidence on how universities have considered SRs as their prime focus and have engaged with civil society to enhance their values. Case studies from Indonesia to the United Kingdom enrich the book through their experience, interventions and narrations, which can be replicated in other parts of the world to create a better society and a more sustainable planet.

This chapter describes two courses in which university students were involved with community partners, in one case a local school system and in the other, a local nonformal educational institution. The authors begin with a discussion of the benefits of civic engagement through service learning in an academic setting and describe the integration of socio-scientific issues of local importance and a service-learning aspect into the courses. The authors follow with a discussion of the impacts the project has had on each of the partners involved in the collaboration. The authors conclude with lessons learned as a result of the project and future plans for the partnership.

This chapter adopts an international perspective and discusses the policies and activities that the universities both in Finland and in Australia have undertaken in order to strengthen and develop the prosperity for achieving a better and more sustainable future for all. Social responsibility is approached from the broad-based perspectives – especially how research and development (R&D) activities of universities can be seen as platforms for university–community partnerships. This chapter first opens up the driving forces behind the universities’ social responsibility. The second section portrays how social responsibility is implemented in the Finnish and Australian universities. The following section addresses the significance of universities’ R&D activities in promoting social responsibility. Finally, the chapter ends with the discussion on the action models, which supports the social responsibility in university–community partnership.

This chapter focuses on the importance of collaboration between university laboratory schools and community partners. The why, what, and how of collaboration within higher education contexts are reviewed, with a focus on the steps required for successful collaboration. The University of Rhode Island Child Development Centers’ collaborative efforts are used to illustrate potential ways collaboration can occur through statewide professional development activities, relationships with state and local public school systems, and relationships with various community groups and agencies. The conclusion is that through collaboration, lab schools can enhance their potential to fulfill their three-part mission of teaching, research, and service, and can strengthen the interconnections among the missions, bridging the gap between theory, research, and practice.

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.

This chapter points out that many higher education institutions (HEIs) have responded to daunting sustainability challenges by (1) infusing sustainability into the curriculum; (2) becoming engaged with the United Nations (UN) sustainable development goals (SDGs); and (3) building on Boyer’s scholarship of engagement, developing partnerships for sustainability with various sectors of society through service–learning (SL). Perhaps our most daunting sustainability challenge is climate change, with its accompanying catastrophic biodiversity loss and widespread human misery from rising oceans, flooding, drought, wildfires, and extreme weather events. It has been shown that the food sector, or agriculture, has a great impact on climate change. For that reason the non-governmental organization (NGO) Intervale Center (IC), a recognized leader in sustainable agriculture, was selected as a partner for a University of Vermont (UVM) SL course in environmental interpretation (EI). IC and its programs are presented, followed by an explanation of EI. A case study of a university partnership for sustainability – a linkage between IC and the EI course – is then shared. The mechanics of that partnership are offered, and the resulting student creations. Finally, conclusions are drawn, especially the importance of HEIs networking with other sectors to work toward sustainable futures.

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.

Institutions of learning are charged with the social responsibility to prepare future professionals for the ever-changing demands of modern society. Universities should provide expanded opportunities for learning and may choose to do so in many ways. Service learning is one approach designed to provide an educational experience that fosters a deeper community investment through involvement and outreach. Service learning engages students in the community in order to help meet the needs of that community (Osteen & Perry, 2012). Universities have begun to use this as an experiential learning approach to prepare professionals to better address the needs of the local communities. Instructors can integrate these opportunities into coursework. As universities respond to societal changes, the infusion of service learning may be the method to do so. While providing benefits to the local community, students also experience growth through the use of these practices. Specifically, service learning activities serve to improve critical thinking skills and improve multicultural competency (Coffey, 2010). This chapter will explore opportunities for universities to integrate social responsibility into the curriculum. Case examples will be provided to showcase possible strategies designed to foster engagement. These examples highlight educational experiences, while also demonstrating contributions that universities can make to the neighboring community.

Purpose – The chapter explores the methodological challenges in doing community-based participatory research (CBPR) in social science investigations with immigrant women experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV) in Canada.

Methodology/approach – The methodological comments, observations, and challenges discussed in this chapter result from research funded by the Social Science and Humanities Council, a branch of the Canadian Federal Tri-Council. The research that the authors conducted was both quantitative and qualitative in nature. The sample consisted of three groups of women: (1) immigrant women in Canada >10 years, (2) immigrant women in Canada <10 years, and (3) visible minority women born in Canada.

Findings – The chapter highlights some of the lessons learned in conducting CBPR research in the context of immigrant survivors of IPV. This discussion can be relevant to both academics and non-profit/advocacy agencies interested in pursuing community partnership research on interpersonal violence.

Originality/value – There is a paucity of writings on CBPR research in the social science and the challenges. This chapter reveals the methodological challenges that the researchers experienced in doing CBPR with racialized immigrant women who are survivors of IPV. This discussion can be relevant to both academics and non-profit/advocacy agencies interested in pursuing community partnership research on interpersonal violence.