Search results

The purpose of this study to investigate the relationships between South Africa (SA) universities and universities surrounding communities (USC) for preserving community histories and serve the universities’ mandate to support their local communities and support universities’ teaching and scholarship.

The study used a multiple case study approach through interviews. The population of the study comprised representatives from selected universities and their USC.

The findings revealed a lack of effective relationships between universities and USC to preserve communities’ histories. Hence, the communities’ archives are tools for teaching and scholarship. Relations between universities and USC are to be built on trust. Accountability and transparency are to be considered by both parties.

The research is limited to selected SA universities, namely, University of Venda, Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, Pretoria and SA and USC. The findings are applicable to all SA universities and USC.

The relationship between universities and USC has a practical impact on the National archives of South Africa (NARSSA) to collect communities archives because it is in conflict with the mandate of NARSSA. The National Archives’ Act 43 of 1996 obliged NARSSA to collect and preserve communities’ archives on behalf of societies.

Lack of universities and USC can lead to the loss of communities histories or archives.

This paper appears to be the first to research the relationship between SA universities and USC.

The purpose of this empirical research paper is to investigate the self-perceived role of the community partner of a higher education service-learning and community engagement module.

A qualitative approach was followed by distributing a questionnaire to the community partners of a community engagement module and coding the responses using ATLAS.ti. A total of 36 responses were received from community partners who work with students enrolled in a compulsory undergraduate community-based project module at the University of Pretoria's Faculty of Engineering, Built Environment and Information Technology.

The community partners share a common interest in the students' education. They are experts in their fields and can share their knowledge with the students and the university. Through these partnerships, long-term reciprocal relationships can develop. Community partners can become co-educators and partners in education. The pragmatist representations of community partners can be challenged when they understand their own stakes in service-learning or community engagement projects. This better aids higher education institutes in the management and evaluation of service-learning and community engagement pedagogies and curricula.

Two main limitations underlie this study. Firstly, this research is based on data from one community module at a single university. Although a large number of students are registered in the module, the study would be improved by conducting it at more than one university countrywide. Secondly, the study was performed during the first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown the country experienced. This was a completely unexpected event for which everyone was totally unprepared. Many of the community partners lacked the resources to receive or respond to an online questionnaire. The nature of the lockdown prevented the researchers from reaching these community partners for a face-to-face interview. The voice of these community partners is, therefore, silent.

The community partners reiterated their need to be seen as equal partners in the module and appreciated being part of a group of non-profit enterprises working together with a university to pursue a set of common goals. However, their status as peers depends on their willingness and ability to contribute sufficiently to the structure and demands of the service-learning module. The community partners who were able and willing to orientate each group of students to their organisation's mission and objectives, and who executed their roles according to the course requirements, experienced the greatest success in terms of project effectiveness and efficiency, and also in terms of future benefits when students returned to volunteer or provide donations. Given time, these community partners grew into an equal partner with the university's stakeholders, where both their own needs and those of the students were met during the various service-learning projects.

Since all respondents in this study are non-profit organisations, the financial assistance and free labour afforded to them by the students are of paramount importance. The community partners also understand the longer-term value implications of successful student projects, as some students return of their free will to volunteer their services when gainfully employed after graduation.

Community engagement projects are rarely investigated from the community partner's point of view. This paper elicited their responses and examined them through the lens of Fraser's theory of social justice (Fraser, 2009).

This paper explores the dynamics and issues associated with system change oriented at developing collaboration with local communities within a university. The effort involves attempts to integrate theory, research, and practice across multiple disciplines, professional training initiatives that bring multiple disciplines into conversations on problems in the lives of children, families, and communities, and outreach to develop significant external community‐university collaboration. All five of the university's professional schools plus the graduate and undergraduate College of Arts and Sciences are involved in this discipline to develop communities of practice and inquiry around resolving complex social problems. The opportunities and hurdles faced in developing the initiative are discussed.

Posits that most contemporary interest in the university‐industry linkages stems from a concern to increase the birth rate of new technology‐based firms and/or the velocity with which indigenous scientific capability is translated into commercial technologies. Notes that many analysts of science parks and silicon valleys argue that this kind of knowledge‐based innovation requires cosmopolitan economic and social milieux with good communication links, easy access to air transport, highly educated workers and sophisticated cultural amenities. Argues that on the receiving end of contemporary innovation systems are indigenous and other disempowered groups and economically depleted communities with little stake in scientific and technical advancement and virtually no involvement in the policy or social networks set up to steer the knowledge system. Describes an experiment to discover processes by which marginalized, economically distressed communities can use institutions of the “knowledge economy” to foster the social and technological innovation necessary for their survival. Joins the University College of Cape Breton with universities in Mexico to form structured relationships with communities on Cape Breton Island and with a Mayan community on the Yucatán Peninsula. Bases techniques on searching for economic opportunities, construction of community business organizations, training, community development and supportive aftercare services to provide the three components of community economic regeneration: finance, technology and formation. Works to find ways to use the dynamics of triple helix innovation to construct knowledge systems that work in favour of the peripheral communities threatened by trade liberalization and the decline of resource regions. Specifically asks how can the institutions of the “knowledge economy” contribute to the development of a local sub‐economy that supports local businesses? Employs a social economy approach to the establishment of community businesses, differing from others in the community business movement in the belief that the “knowledge economy” can provide resources and eventual economic and social survivability to distressed regions. Argues that economic regeneration among marginal groups requires: access to improved production and organizational technologies; that universities can provide this access, especially in distressed communities; a transfer system usually has to be established; specific steps must be taken to establish new community businesses; and a maintenance system with specific characteristics must be established.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to describe a new conceptual model integrating research, university-community partnerships, and an innovative undergraduate team approach to more effectively and efficiently address social problems while enhancing university-community relations and providing valuable learning experiences for students.

The paper describes the rationale for, and the key components, steps, and activities involved in piloting the conceptual model of university-community engagement. The model integrates research, community engagement, and undergraduate development and education along with ongoing evaluation by the relevant stakeholders.

As illustrated in a brief case study presentation, the model has significant promise in meeting several university and community objectives simultaneously. Specifically, it focusses on community needs by addressing a mutually agreed upon social issue, it builds and strengthens university-community relationships as a partnership of equals, and it promotes undergraduate development and learning in a way that integrates knowledge and service to society. Specific outcomes in each area are summarized.

This approach is a viable option for university and college professors interested in synthesizing several important foci: research, developing and sustaining university-community partnerships, and undergraduate development and learning.

The initial experience with the model indicates that it is an efficient and effective means for colleges and universities to simultaneously meet the goals of education, individual and collective citizenship, community engagement, and research productivity.

The phenomenon of globalization is a popular and controversial issue that has many facets. According to Lee and Vivarelli 2006), most conversations around globalization tend to describe it in terms of increase in trade and liberalization policies and reduction in transportation costs and technology transfer. Heine and Thakur (2011) opine on globalization as follows:

Many regard globalization as both a desirable and an irreversible engine of commerce that will underpin growing prosperity and a higher standard of living throughout the world. Others recoil from it as the soft underbelly of corporate imperialism that plunders and profiteers on the basis of unrestrained consumerism. (p. 2)

Many regard globalization as both a desirable and an irreversible engine of commerce that will underpin growing prosperity and a higher standard of living throughout the world. Others recoil from it as the soft underbelly of corporate imperialism that plunders and profiteers on the basis of unrestrained consumerism. (p. 2)

The Brundtland Report (1987) was put together in response to agitations over such loses/discontents. This report gave birth to what unarguably is the most popular concept in sustainable development. The Report features the integration of the concerns about strands of development as experienced and as projected across divides, as well as concerns about their interrelationship, and effects on people and the environment. It seeks to reconcile the future with current developments. The recommendations of the report in the end materialized into the millennium development goals (MDGs) in January 2000, which in turn metamorphosed into the sustainable development goals (SDGs) in January 2016. The bulk of the SDGs are to be achieved in the global-south as countries within this categorization including Nigeria have more to do within their territories in order to ensure its actualization. One of the major challenges facing the SDGs in Nigeria is institutionalizing mobilization for the actualization of the goals. Against this backdrop, the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) was launched to bring on board academic institutions, civil societies, non-governmental organizations, and businesses, and mobilize their activities into fewer but more efficient units.

This chapter contextually explores the purpose and roles of the SDSN in Nigeria, and conceptualizes how it will play out for both sustainable development and qualitative participation in globalization. It identified and explored the interface between the three variables of universities: cooperativism, cooperatives, cooperation, and solidarity economics; communities as integral to the actualization of the SDGs; and proportionate participation in globalization. Deficiencies were identified, and remedial actions proffered.

This chapter examines the key characteristics of success of the university-wide entrepreneurial ecosystem at Syracuse University. From 2007 to 2012, Syracuse University developed an academic signature in entrepreneurship, innovation, and community engagement resulting from 165 programs that linked the campus and the community. Nine critical factors of success for individual programs were observed. This chapter provides recommendations for establishing an experientially focused university-wide entrepreneurship education program and suggestions on mistakes to avoid.

Purpose – In an era of increased public accountability, higher education institutions are expected to make greater contributions to local and regional economic development. First, this essay aims to provide a conceptual overview of the conventional approaches to economic development employed by research universities and community colleges. Second, a proposition for a novel approach to economic development that centers on direct collaboration between research universities and community colleges is introduced.

Method/approach – The first section of the essay relies on a critical overview of the scholarly literature that addresses the contributions of research universities and community colleges to local and regional economic development initiatives. The critique draws attention to the counter-productivity of institutional focus on national and global trends and dependency on existing business and industry. The second section includes a proposition for an alternate higher education vision for economic development that builds on the strengths and accounts for the weaknesses of current models as identified in the literature review.

Practical implications – The chapter introduces an alternate higher education vision for higher education that will be valuable to scholars and institutional leaders interested in examining and enhancing the capacities of research universities and community college to contribute to the vibrancy of local and regional economies.

Originality/value of paper – The primary contributions of the chapter are the overview of the higher education literature specific to local and regional economic development and the proposal of a novel economic development vision for higher education that involves institutional collaboration and local and regional positioning and strengthening.

This paper describes a set of recommendations that will aid universities planning to create sustainability education programs. These recommendations are not specific to curriculum or programs but are instead recommendations for academic institutions considering a shift towards “sustainability education” in the broadest sense. The purpose of this research was to consider the possible directions for the future of sustainability education at the university level.

Through a series of workshops using a “value focused thinking” framework, a small team of researchers engaged a large number of stakeholders in a dialogue about sustainability education at the University of British Columbia (UBC), Vancouver, Canada. Recommendations were compiled from workshop data as well as data from 30 interviews of participants connected with decision‐making and sustainability at UBC.

The recommendations include infusing sustainability into all university decisions, promoting and practicing collaboration and transdisciplinarity and focusing on personal and social sustainability. Other recommendations included an integration of university plans, decision‐making structures and evaluative measures and the integration of the research, service and teaching components of the university. There is a need for members of the university community to create space for reflection and pedagogical transformation.

The intention of the paper is to outline the details of a participatory workshop that uses value‐focused thinking in order to engage university faculty and administration in a dialogue about sustainability education. Students, faculty and staff working towards sustainability education will be able to adapt the workshop to their own institutions.