Sustainable Health Promotion Participation Through Service Learning and Community Engagement In Higher Education: Lessons Learnt from the UKM DrPH Program

PurposeThis paper aims to examine the development and piloting of a novel European framework for community engagement (CE) in higher education, which has been purposefully designed to progress the CE agenda in a European context.Design/methodology/approachThe proposed framework was co-created through the European Union (EU)-funded project towards a European framework for community engagement in higher education (TEFCE). The TEFCE Toolbox is an institutional self-reflection framework that centres on seven thematic dimensions of CE. This paper follows the development of the TEFCE Toolbox through empirical case study analysis of four European universities and their local communities.FindingsThe findings in this paper indicate that the TEFCE Toolbox facilitates context-specific applications in different types of universities and socioeconomic environments. Incorporating insights from engagement practitioners, students and community representatives the TEFCE Toolbox was successfully applied in universities with diverse profiles and missions. The process facilitated the recognition of CE achievements and the identification of potential areas for improvement.Originality/valueDespite a range of international initiatives, there remains an absence of initiatives within the European higher education area that focus on developing tools to comprehensively support CE. The TEFCE Toolbox and case-study analysis presented in this paper address this gap in knowledge. The broader societal contribution and social responsibility of higher education have become increasingly prominent on the European agenda. The TEFCE Toolbox represents an innovative, robust and holistic European framework with the potential to support universities in reflecting upon their pursuit of addressing grand societal challenges, whilst promoting CE.

This conceptual paper provides an overview of community engagement in higher education, highlighting its definition, goals, and various models of engagement. The paper explores the benefits and challenges of community engagement for both higher education institutions and communities, and presents strategies for designing and implementing effective community engagement initiatives. The authors also discuss methods for assessing community engagement outcomes and impact, as well as the challenges and limitations of evaluating community engagement initiatives. The paper concludes with a discussion of future directions and opportunities for community engagement in higher education, and the implications for research and practice. Overall, this paper provides a comprehensive and informative review of community engagement in higher education, serving as a useful resource for academics, practitioners, and researchers interested in this important topic.

The contemporary higher education institution realizes that the process of accomplishing their vision, mission and objectives involves multi-level interactions with diverse stakeholders within their external environment. Universities and other designations of higher education institutions are no longer walled off from society but required to assume a position of relevance to the society in all of their activities related to creation, transformation, transfer and distribution of knowledge. It is in this context that community engagement has emerged as a vehicle to broaden higher education’s direct participation in society’s development. The main roles of higher education institutions are adjudged to be research, teaching and learning, and community engagement. This study focused on community engagement in higher education in South Africa. The purpose of the study was to examine the nature of community engagement and its institutionalization in universities of technology in South Africa. Furthermore, another central purpose of the study was to examine how community engagement initiatives are currently being monitored and evaluated in universities of technology in South Africa. The choice of universities of technology as the focus of the study was to provide an understanding into the development, growth, direction and activities pertaining to community engagement in this typology of higher education institution, and more importantly, the monitoring and evaluation mechanisms used in the process. Guided by a constructivist paradigm, the research study was undertaken using a qualitative methodology, exploratory and multiple case study design. Purposive sampling was applied to select six universities of technology as case studies for the research. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were used to obtain data from key informants in the institutional case studies. Key informants or interviewees were made up of university officials in charge of the institutions’ community engagement portfolio and managers of community engagement projects or initiatives in the institutions. Also, additional data was obtained from university documents. Documentary evidence was critical to this study because university documents supplemented data obtained from the semi-structured interviews. Data analysis was carried out using qualitative thematic content analysis in order to make sense of the qualitative data and make interpretations and inferences. Primary findings from this study showed that the practice of community engagement in universities of technology in South Africa is highly contextual. Each institution undertakes community engagement in their own context and unique positioning influenced by factors such as institutional history, geographical location, institutional definition of community and community engagement, focus area, amongst others. In terms of the particular degree to which community engagement is institutionalized, the study found that community engagement does not receive the same level of emphasis as teaching and learning and research in universities of technology in South Africa. Although organizational structures for the institutionalization of community engagement are in place in most of the universities, the actual practice of community engagement requires improvement in order for it to be deeper in the institutional fabric of the universities of technology. Additional findings indicate that monitoring and evaluation of community engagement initiatives occurs in universities of technology, albeit informally, in most of them with improvised approaches and methodologies which differ among projects and from institution to institution. Hence, monitoring and evaluation is not consistently applied to community engagement projects in the institutions. Such inconsistency was evident in non-enforcement of monitoring and evaluation as a practice in management of community engagement projects, lack of standardized monitoring and evaluation tools in majority of the institutions, and unequal weightings for community engagement in staff performance management. Therefore, the study concludes that monitoring and evaluation of community engagement lacks depth in universities of technology in South Africa. The study’s recommendations were, amongst others, to propose a systems model for the practice of community engagement; a model for the form of community engagement; as well as a model for monitoring and evaluation of community engagement initiatives. The monitoring and evaluation framework emphasizes the integration of community engagement projects into the academic curriculum at every point either through research or through teaching and learning. Universities express community engagement based on their own individual contexts. This research study places institutional context of the university as the platform from and on which the monitoring and evaluation model functions, and uses curriculum integration as the grounding for institutionalization of community engagement in the core of university activities. In addition to providing feedback on project performance, the proposed monitoring and evaluation model focuses on emphasizing engaged scholarship in indicators at each level of the model. This contribution to knowledge provides direction on how to put community engagement projects together in a manner that promotes meaningful and practical scholarship.

In this chapter we examine several community engagement strategies with higher education institutions (HEIs) worldwide. We begin by defining community engagement in higher education. Next, we look at several different levels of community engagement in higher education, recognizing it occurs at many levels, including international, regional, national, provincial/state, and local. We define community engagement in higher education to be sustainable networks, partnerships, communication media, and activities between HEIs and communities at local, national, regional, and international levels. Engagement activities between communities and higher education may be formal or informal. Example engagement initiatives include establishing relationships; collaboration initiatives; business ventures; co-sponsored meetings, conferences, sports events, research projects; and a thousand other activities. Vast online repositories through university libraries and other digital media provide a unique ability for HEIs to share information with communities in ways that were unimaginable prior to the 1990s. There is an inevitable and symbiotic relationship that exists between communities and HEIs. Communities help provide human resources that are necessary for higher education systems to foster and carry out their purposes. HEIs in turn train students who eventually fill job vacancies and establish businesses of

Purpose The purposes of the study are fourfold: (1) to systematically explore the research state on community engagement in higher education, (2) to identify actors – authors and countries – contributing to the field and assess their relative influence, (3) to investigate key themes and research clusters within the field, identify research areas and the research trend, (4) to map out the thematic landscape of community engagement in higher education through co-occurrence analysis, highlighting areas of convergence and divergence in research focus. Design/methodology/approach The study examines 350 publications extracted from the Scopus database from 1971 to 2023 and analyses it with biblioMagika, OpenRefine, VOSviewer and Biblioshiny and with the qualitative validation. Findings It reveals a significant increase in publications since the mid-2000s, peaking around 2020, particularly in the social sciences. Authors are from institutions across Europe, Africa, North America and South Asia. Francesca Spigarelli from Italy, stands out with the highest average citation ratio. Key thematic clusters include community engagement, higher education, partnership, third mission, sustainability and innovation, alongside emerging themes such as disaster management and equity, providing valuable and novel insights into the present and future directions of the field. The USA is the largest contributor, while other countries participate to varying degrees. Research limitations/implications The study is limited by its dependence on a single database (Scopus), which may not include all relevant material. Originality/value This study offers a longitudinal and comprehensive research perspective on community engagement in higher education using advanced bibliometric analysis such as thematic maps.

Institutions of higher education throughout the world have reached con- sensus in terms of their core business, defined through: (1) teaching and learning, (2) research and (3) community engagement. Of these three areas of focus, community engagement has posed serious challenges in terms of clear cut methodologies and measurability. While the ‘why’ question of com- munity engagement may be understood, the ‘how to do it’ questions need attention. This has also raised anxiety amongst staff, who are expected to perform and get rewards for community engagement. It is against this back- ground that this article argues for Participatory Action Research (PAR) as an enabling platform for community engagement in higher education. The argument and assumption is that PAR provides a two-way engagement process that locks in both the researchers and communities they will be reaching, in seeking to solve community problems. PAR moves higher edu- cation from linear-oriented research to web-oriented systematic cycles of inquiry that involve planning, asking questions, taking action, observing, evaluating and critically reflecting, prior to planning the next cycles. Com- munity problems that could be addressed through PAR include those aris- ing from environmental damage (including climate change), HIV and AIDS, lack of service delivery, politics and many more.

In this chapter we examine several community engagement strategies with higher education institutions (HEIs) worldwide. We begin by defining community engagement in higher education. Next, we look at several different levels of community engagement in higher education, recognizing it occurs at many levels, including international, regional, national, provincial/state, and local.

PurposeThis study aims to delve into the evolution, trends and implications of scientific production related to service learning (SL) and community engagement for sustainability in higher education institutions (HEIs). Because HEIs play a crucial role in achieving the sustainable development goals (SDGs), experiential learning approaches are needed to actively involve students in sustainable development.Design/methodology/approachIn total, 869 publications from Web of Science and Scopus databases were analysed using a bibliometric approach that included performance analysis and science mapping. Subsequently, a systematic literature review was conducted on 118 publications, focusing on their contribution to SDGs and alignment with United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation’s fields of expertise.FindingsThe findings reveal two significant trends: a substantial shift from curriculum development (2000–2010) to education for sustainable development (2011–2022), and the effectiveness of experiential learning teaching approaches, such as the integration of SL with community engagement and the use of innovative research methods in promoting the acquisition of sustainable development competencies. Additionally, community-based research, participatory action research and capacity development emerged as the primary topics.Research limitations/implicationsWhile this research is based on publications from two prominent databases, it may not include significant studies published in other databases.Practical implicationsThese findings suggest that stakeholders should incorporate experiential learning activities and innovative research approaches to enhance education in, for and from sustainability.Originality/valueThis study offers a fresh perspective on the intellectual framework of experiential learning teaching approaches concerning sustainability in HEIs.

Globally, higher education institutions are charged with the responsibility to play three roles, which are teaching and learning, research, and community engagement. This chapter focuses on the third mission, community engagement. Reviewed literature has revealed that teaching and learning and research in higher education have had greater attention and support from the government, while community engagement remained at the periphery of this support. The success in teaching and learning and research in higher education in South Africa stems from its astute leadership, whereas the same cannot be said with community engagement. A plethora of literature has revealed that the challenges experienced in community engagement in higher education in South Africa include among others lack of, and leadership, lack and insufficient funding, and lack of outcome evaluation for example. This chapter focuses on the leadership gap in community engagement with specific attention given to four (n = 4) purposively selected institutions of higher education. The main objective was to identify the challenges impacting the successes or lack of it in community engagement efforts in higher education in South Africa. This is desktop qualitative document analysis conducted to analyse the alignment between the strategic plan and the annual reports.

Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) allow universities to learn from past experiences, improve service delivery, plan, and allocate resources and demonstrate results as part of their accountability to stakeholders. M&E also assists in keeping projects on track, providing a basis for reassessing priorities and creating evidence-based data for projects. Considerable scholarship is illuminating insights and sharing experiences of community engagement in higher education. However, the question of M&E remains contestable due to the complexities in implementing community engagement in higher education. This article discusses the (im)possibility of facilitating M&E in higher education community engagement spaces. In 2009, the University of Venda established a directorate for community engagement, which I became its first director. I use the insider lens to reflect on the intersections of concepts and constructs such as knowledge co-production, ecosystems, societal impact, and an M&E framework in higher education. I intend here to bring some problems and contestations in generating a framework for monitoring and reviewing community engagement, arguing that the framework should embrace multiple ontologies and be intentional about robust engagement with epistemological, ontological, and ethical questions around exclusivity and dominance. Hopefully I will add a much-needed dimension acknowledging the complexity of a community engagement discourse – toward an inclusive, participatory-ecosystemic way of self-assessment, monitoring and evaluation.

senior staff members of the Division of Campus and Community Engagement at the University of Texas at Austin were called to brief individual meetings with the vice president of human resources.Some of us were laid off, and many of us were assigned to new units.We were all told, however, that our intellectual, cultural, and emotional home-the Division of Diversity and Community Engagement-would shutter.Despite the heart-rending work of successfully excising issues of diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging from the work of 50 student-facing units focused on that work for over 15 years and continuing to serve the beautiful panoply of students while also being in absolute compliance with anti-diversity/equity/inclusion state legislation, we were out of business.It is in this context that I read a critical new text on our broad field of community engagement, Reframing Community Engagement in Higher Education, edited by Elena Klaw, Andrea Tully, and Elaine K. Ikeda (2024).The context in which they assembled this volume is a different moment of rupture; specifically, the stories of this volume emerge from the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic and the racial reckoning following the murder of George Floyd, along with the resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement.Organized into three parts outlining current contexts of engagement, how to establish infrastructure, and reconceptualizing roles, this volume presents stories of engagement that establish an urgency for engagement work to be nimble and to "never waste a crisis" (p.3).Written by those who bring their whole selves to their work, I was reminded of the service of Santana and colleagues in assembling the practitioner-focused volume, Anti-Racist Community Engagement (Stylus, 2023).As an invited contributor to that volume, my community partner co-authors and I toyed with various written formats until we decided to finally let ourselves speak freely; our resulting chapter (Gururaj et al., 2023) about our Front Porch Gatherings is a series of first-person narratives.The first-person narratives in Reframing heighten the message of asset-based community engagement; in revisioning the potential of community engagement after a time of massive change and crisis, we need to assess the strengths in our growing field.Indebted to Lina D. Dostilio's "competency model for an emerging field", the authors featured in this volume understand themselves to be "change-oriented leaders, using their positions within the middle spaces of their organizations to catalyze change and greater realization of postsecondary education's civic purpose" (Dostilio, 2017, p. 2).Along with cited theoretical frameworks and examples of practice, these chapters include narratives of the positionalities of the authors and the ways they made their way to this

An international comparison of community engagement in higher education

In this study, the researcher interrogated the core fundamental purpose of community engagement (CE) in an attempt to understand the role of higher education institutions in communities. Community engagement as a phenomenon is viewed with much ambiguity, having a very broad and open interpretation and being seen as both positive and negative by others. There is no governing document that mandates how institutions should develop, implement and monitor community engagement. Consequently, each institution has developed their own guiding documents as per their purpose, mission and context. In South Africa, the Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC) focused on community engagement in higher education because it recognized the need for academic reconstruction. Community engagement was seen as a potentially powerful instrument that could be used in the transformation agenda in higher education. To date, this view has not changed. The challenge is to shift the academic perspective from the traditional notion of viewing university community engagement as charity to begin to see it as that of pedagogy. In working with five comprehensive universities and a total of fifty participants ranging from Community Engagement Directors, Managers, Project Leaders, students and community members, the study’s aim was to understand how community engagement is defined with regard to restraints, exclusions and inclusions. The study explores the nature of its definition; its purpose and challenges; utilizing a transformative approach proposes a framework that can be used as a guide to community engagement. The study revealed the need for both universities and communities to break their tangible and intangible boundaries to allow community engagement to be conducted in an effective manner using ubuntu, deep democracy and a scholarship approach that can bring about change and add value for both universities and communities. The study also revealed that the ambiguous contextual nature of community engagement makes it difficult for academics and community members to understand what it is, hence making it open for various universities to develop and implement it according to their own mission and vision. The study therefore recommends that community engagement be approached with a framework of Ubuntu, deep democracy and scholarship. Furthermore, there should be a clear funding model for community engagement or engaged scholarship, along with a monitoring and evaluation framework that measures the community engagement impact.

Although discourse related to the salience of community engagement in higher education has proliferated, little has focussed on the process of institutionalisation of community engagement, in South Africa. This paper presents findings from a national study, which focussed on how community engagement can be institutionalised within higher education institutions locally. A qualitative research approach was used to guide the study and in-depth interviews were conducted with members of executive management, members from the directorate and office of community engagement and academics from six universities nationally. Data revealed that there were eight key factors deserving of consideration, in order to institutionalise community engagement within teaching and research and through student involvement, transforming institutional infrastructure and through community partnerships.

Given the emphasis on community engagement in higher education, academic departments need to become more involved in the community. This paper discusses a number of outreach activities undertaken by the chemistry department at Rhodes University, South Africa. The activities range from service learning to community engagement with teachers and school students in partnership with other interested parties. Teachers who attended workshops reported that their subject knowledge and confidence had increased and they were subsequently doing more practical work in lessons. Practical chemistry demonstrations and workshops afforded opportunities for school students to observe or perform chemical experiments and interact with university students. Undergraduate students directly benefitted from involvement in community engagement through the development and implementation of credit-bearing service learning.