Campus-community Partnerships Research Articles

Should Universities partner with NGOs? A Case Study of a University of Technology and a Coding School for Refugees

This paper explores the advantages of a University-NGO Partnership between the Faculty of Informatics at Vienna University of Technology (TU Vienna) and the NGO „refugees{code}―, a coding school for refugees in Vienna, Austria. The goal of this collaboration is twofold: Firstly, to help students apply coding skills practically and enhance their proficiency through teaching experiences with underrepresented groups; and secondly, to provide refugees with meaningful activities that match their profession, education, and personal interests, which might have been interrupted in their home countries. The study evaluates the perspectives of the stakeholders involved. To do so, written surveys and interviews with computer science students, refugees and team members of the NGO were conducted. The results indicate that meaningful educational benefits for computer science students can be created within such partnerships, such as enhanced teaching abilities, dispelled prejudices, insights into the factors affecting refugees' educational and career trajectories, as well as improved communication and empathy skills. However, challenges for such partnerships also exist, including giving student teachers more time for meetings and discussions, empowering them to make decisions, providing access to counseling psychologists and interpreters, and offering support in managing participants' expectations. The findings shed light on the potential benefits from participating in campus-community partnerships and suggest several measures to improve them, such as providing additional ECTS credits, intensifying promotional activities to encourage greater student participation, providing alumni support, and issuing official certificates.

Review: Engaging Place, Engaging Practices: Urban History and Campus-Community Partnerships, edited by Robin F. Bachin and Amy L. Howard

Review: <i>Engaging Place, Engaging Practices: Urban History and Campus-Community Partnerships</i>, edited by Robin F. Bachin and Amy L. Howard

From nonprofits to neighbors: Exploring the locus of campus-community partnerships

Service learning and community engagement (SLCE) have become near ubiquitous across U.S. higher education. While much scholarship has demonstrated positive student learning outcomes of SLCE, there has been unequal consideration towards understanding the experiences of communities involved. Because community voices and perspectives have been largely missing from literature, this paper, drawing on a community-based case study, and neoliberalism as a theoretical framework, uniquely explores the significance of SLCE at one institution from the vantage point of community members, notably local residents. As a result of the community contributions shared, this paper offers a way of thinking about SLCE &amp;ldquo;from nonprofits to neighbors&amp;rdquo; with an aim of (re)imagining SLCE with those who have often been left out of research.

Toward a Research and Practice Agenda for Evaluation in Community-Campus Partnerships

The challenge: Evaluation of community-campus partnerships is a contested topic and, in many ways, still at an early stage of development. With growing momentum behind community-university collaboration and increased pressure to document the positive impact of universities, there is a pressing need for research and innovation in this area.&#x0D; Potential consequences: Many community engagement professionals are looking for new and creative approaches to evaluating partnership work — approaches that capture the depth, complexity, and values of the work, and that can be used to foster learning, community accountability, collaboration, and systems change.&#x0D; Description/analysis/methods: This article proposes six promising directions for research and practice related to evaluating campus-community partnerships: They emerged as themes from an interactive session of CUMU’s Community Engagement Evaluation Huddle at the annual CUMU conference.&#x0D; Rationale/reflection/replication: Drawing on the collective knowledge of Huddle participants, we identified the following directions: 1) evaluating systemic racism, 2) community-driven evaluation, 3) community impact and benefit, 4) evaluating relationships, 5) alignment of stakeholders, and 6) blended approaches. We offer these directions, along with key questions and examples from the field, as a first step toward a field-wide agenda for advancing evaluation in a critical, participatory, community-based spirit.

MPH Capstone experiences: promising practices and lessons learned.

To ensure workforce readiness, graduate-level public health training programs must prepare students to collaborate with communities on improving public health practice and tools. The Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH) requires Master of Public Health (MPH) students to complete an Integrative Learning Experience (ILE) at the end of their program of study that yields a high-quality written product demonstrating synthesis of competencies. CEPH suggests written products ideally be "developed and delivered in a manner that is useful to external stakeholders, such as non-profit or governmental organizations." However, there are limited examples of the ILE pedagogies and practices most likely to yield mutual benefit for students and community partners. To address this gap, we describe a community-led, year-long, group-based ILE for MPH students, called Capstone. This service-learning course aims to (1) increase capacity of students and partner organizations to address public health issues and promote health equity; (2) create new or improved public health resources, programs, services, and policies that promote health equity; (3) enhance student preparedness and marketability for careers in public health; and (4) strengthen campus-community partnerships. Since 2009, 127 Capstone teams affiliated with the Department of Health Behavior at the Gillings School of Global Public Health at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill have worked with seventy-nine partner organizations to provide over 103,000 h of in-kind service and produce 635 unique products or "deliverables." This paper describes key promising practices of Capstone, specifically its staffing model; approach to project recruitment, selection, and matching; course format; and assignments. Using course evaluation data, we summarize student and community partner outcomes. Next, we share lessons learned from 13 years of program implementation and future directions for continuing to maximize student and community partner benefits. Finally, we provide recommendations for other programs interested in replicating the Capstone model.

134 Comparing Real-World Impacts of Cohorts using the Translational Science Benefits Model

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM), developed at Washington University in St. Louis, was used to create a survey to collect group-level data on the real-world impacts of research. It was used with two cohorts of CTSA-supported pilot studies to compare the benefits of campus-community partnerships to campus-only projects. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Investigators from two funding streams were surveyed: a campus-based cohort (n=31), and a campus-community partnership cohort (n=6). All studies were related to COVID-19. The Translational Benefits Survey collected quantitative and qualitative data for each of the 30 TSBM benefits, in 4 benefit categories: clinical, community, economic and policy. Text provided by investigators to support each reported benefit was evaluated by two coders through a process that required coder consensus to verify a benefit as realized. Verified benefits were aggregated for each cohort, and the percentage of projects per cohort with realized clinical, community, economic and policy benefits were calculated. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Campus-community partnerships did not realize any clinical benefits, whereas 26% of campus-based projects realized at least one clinical benefit. In contrast, campus-community partnerships were more likely to realize community health benefits (17% vs 10% of campus projects) and economic benefits (17% vs 13% of campus projects). We identified a substantial amount of self-reported benefits (64% across all categories) that were unable to be confirmed as realized using the provided text, which either described activities not relevant to the selected benefit, or lacked critical details needed to verify that the benefit was realized. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This project demonstrates that the TSBM can be utilized to collect group-level data and to compare cohorts’real-world benefits. It also illuminates the need to improve the process for verifying self-reported benefits. Sharing data on these real-world impacts has the potential to convey the strengths of translational science to the public.

A Framework for Justice-Centering Relationships: Implications for Impact in Place-Based Community Engagement

Community engagement in higher education has been promoted as critical to fulfilling higher education’s responsibility to the public good through teaching, learning, and knowledge generation. Reciprocity and mutual benefit are key principles of community engagement that connote a two-way exchange of knowledge and outcomes. However, it is not clear from existing literature whether community engagement impacts communities in positive ways. &#x0D; The problem addressed through this study was how campus-community partnership stakeholders define impact. Using grounded theory, the ways community and campus partners defined, measured, and understood community impact in a diverse set of campus-community partnerships at two U.S. urban, Jesuit universities that employ place-based approach to community engagement were explored. Relationships as facilitators of impact and as impacts in and of themselves emerged as central themes. Themes from the data led to the development of the Justice-Centering Relationships Framework which includes two paradigms for understanding community impact in higher education community engagement – Plug-and-Play and Justice-Centering Relationships – that are bridged by a Reframing process. The Framework contributes to and informs the “how” of taking a place-based community engagement approach that leads to positive benefits for community impact, student learning and formation, and institutional change.

Book Review: Engaging Place, Engaging Practices: Urban History and Campus-Community Partnerships by Bachin, Robin F. and Howard, Amy L. (eds)

Book Review: <i>Engaging Place, Engaging Practices: Urban History and Campus-Community Partnerships</i> by Bachin, Robin F. and Howard, Amy L. (eds)

Resilience in Nonprofit and Public Organizations: A Case Study on Mutually Beneficial Community Engagement

Campus-community partnerships afford college and university faculty, as well as administrators, the ability to partner in meaningful ways. At a minimum, they allow key stakeholders to place a value and priority on relationships; participate in ongoing conversations about program and research development, implementation and evaluation; engage faculty in direct ways to work alongside community members; and position colleges and universities in building local social capital. In this manuscript we describe a partnership between two entities: a university Center for Social Impact (CSI) and a community-placed Resiliency Task Force. The CSI is an interdisciplinary research center that investigates community-defined research questions and produces actionable insights for policymakers and practitioners in our region. The Task Force is a collective of 500+ members with the vision to “build a resilient and compassionate community.” Together, these entities surveyed members to assess barriers to sustaining long-term trauma and resiliency community efforts. Our manuscript offers guidance for organizations seeking to partner with college and university members, as well as a blueprint for community-based resiliency and trauma work.

Community engagement as community development: Making the case for multilateral, collaborative, equity-focused campus-community partnerships

ABSTRACT In this essay, we offer a framework for a community development-focused, multilateral, sustainable justice-oriented service-learning and community engagement (SLCE); exploring what it is, why it is needed, how it looks different from other existing and emerging trends in SLCE, and how we believe it would transform the ways in which institutions of higher education (IHEs) think about and approach both community partnership-building and student learning in community contexts. To this end, we draw out the dimensions of a transformed practice of multilateral partnership and demonstrate how it would deeply challenge both foundational understandings and current models. Finally, we discuss how a transformed partnership framework would necessarily alter the way we conceptualize student learning – and the benefits of students’ learning – in community contexts.

Relationship, leadership, action: Evaluating the framework of a sustainable campus-community partnership

ABSTRACT Campus-community partnerships are a beneficial service learning staple for students, communities, and nonprofit partners. Although many such partnerships are established, it is less likely that the connection weathers student turnover, leadership changes, and misalignments in process or purpose. The Nonprofit Excellence and Transformation (NExT) Program at the Siena College Center for Academic Community Engagement pairs interdisciplinary teams with local nonprofit partners to work on organization-specific projects. The Wildwood Programs project, conducted by a NExT team from 2019–2021, is an ideal template for a long-term, student-led partnership. Themes from community development literature were identified and compared to student experiences to establish reasons for the partnership’s success and sustainability. Best practices found through this study aligned with the three main pillars of the NExT Program: Relationship, Leadership, and Action. This categorical framework can be adapted by scholars, students, and practitioners to improve longevity and quality of future campus-community partnerships in higher education.

Learn, Engage, and Act to Advance Age Inclusivity in Higher Education

Shifting age demographics are reshaping our social structures with far-reaching implications for higher education. Aging populations mean more older adults are looking to higher education to meet their professional needs and personal interests, and the longevity economy is calling for a trained workforce to provide services to support the health and functioning of individuals as they age. As well, there is a need to improve students’ aging literacy, along with developing synergistic age-friendly campus-community partnerships to address aging issues. How can institutions explore, create, develop, and sustain more age-friendly programs, practices, and partnerships? This presentation will introduce the toolkit specially designed by the GSA-AGHE Workgroup for use by faculty, students, administrators, and other campus leaders, and will provide an overview of the Age-Friendly University (AFU) initiative and its 10 guiding principles for creating more age-inclusive campuses.

Age-Friendly Universities (AFU): Necessary Partners for Age-Friendly Communities

The pioneering Age-Friendly University (AFU) initiative, endorsed in 2016 by GSA’s Academy for Gerontology in Higher Education (AGHE), calls for institutions of higher education to respond to shifting demographics and the needs of aging populations through more age-friendly campus programs, practices, and partnerships. The case will be made that AFU institutions can also play vital roles in helping neighboring communities develop, launch, assess, and sustain their age-friendly efforts through research and related endeavors that engage students and faculty. In addition, AFU campus-community partnerships can play a critical role in breaking down age-segregation that fuels ageism, building intergenerational connections, and increasing aging literacy among rising community members - all of which are necessary steps for building age-friendly communities.

Japantown Prepared And Organizational Studies: Campus-Community Partnerships For Disaster Preparedness

Abstract Universities and community-based organizations partner to provide benefits to students and to communities where universities are situated. We examine the core elements of a successful partnership in a case study of an ongoing collaboration between San José State University (SJSU) and Japantown Prepared, a community-based organization whose mission is to advance disaster preparedness at the household and community level within San José, California’s, historic Japantown. We demonstrate these core elements of success through a discussion of the development and execution of several projects designed to build capacity within Japantown Prepared and provide real-world experience for Organizational Studies students at SJSU. We conclude that the relationship between SJSU and Japantown Prepared meets the core elements of a successful partnership and provide further suggestions for its continued success.

Navigating inclusion and legitimacy in campus-community environmental partnerships to advance urban social-ecological resilience

Campus-community partnerships can play a vital role in environmental education by providing universities opportunities to engage diverse communities, but challenges often emerge when research centers leverage their legitimacy as a purveyor of expertise while embracing inclusive engagement practices. While previous campus-community partnership studies have treated inclusion and legitimacy separately, we developed the Legitimacy-Inclusion Engagement Gradient (LIEG) framework, based on a year of participant observations of meetings and workshops of a university urban ecology center and 38 interviews with center members and partners, to investigate the opportunities and tensions that emerge when a center utilizes more inclusive engagement narratives. We observed universities are more adept at enacting legitimacy and that inclusive partnership practices vary substantially. We provide insights into how inclusion and legitimacy can be navigated to advance urban social-ecological resilience. Findings have implications for universities seeking to build campus-community partnership during a pandemic-induced economic downturn and anti-racist social movements.

Community-based climate action planning as an act of advocacy: a case study of liberal arts education in a rural community

The current lack of comprehensive federal climate policy highlights the critical need for effective subnational climate policy and programs. We describe our efforts to create and cultivate a community-based multi-stakeholder group centered around local climate change planning and advocacy in a small, rural New York municipality. The literature on sustainability planning emphasizes the importance of collaborative work to build new capacities, develop knowledge, and create community commitment over the long term to advocate for municipal policies that prioritize climate change mitigation and resilience. However, case studies of rural community contexts are lacking in the literature, and rural communities may not have the planning and other resources found in the municipal offices of larger, urban communities. We argue that higher education institutions, especially those situated in small rural communities, have a vital role in supporting the climate strategies of local actors and can develop productive partnerships through research and co-curricular education. We discuss several challenges to effective campus-community partnerships, including the need to balance student engagement in community-based research with the traditional liberal arts model of education, engaging and sustaining the participation of community partners, and differential access to resources in rural spaces.

Bridging the Gap Between Researchers and Wider Audiences: Navigating A Community Literacy Collaboration In Real-Time

While campus-community partnerships are common, such engaged scholarship efforts often lead university researchers to community-centered presentations and publications; however, this type of scholarship and especially the venues in which it is often disseminated are of questionable value within the academy’s tenure and promotion process. Three literacy scholars who were invited to study the impact of community-wide Imagination Library implementation share challenges they encountered related to collaboration, communication, and dissemination of findings during the first two years of a five-year early literacy community partnership. Selected outcomes and implications for other community-engaged scholars include (a) investing in true multi-directional consistent collaboration and communication and (b) leveraging user-friendly technology tools and platforms to archive and share project work. The authors call for continued efforts to communicate beyond the academy with the audiences targeted for ultimate impact and continued advocacy for valuing non-traditional publications within the academy.

Campus-Community Partnerships in Health and Wellness

Successful campus-community partnerships provide universities enhanced visibility in the community, and offer university students opportunities to engage in real-world educational experiences through service learning and internships. In addition, the participating community agency/program benefits from an infusion of ambitious students that can help the agency/program further its mission, and increase its visibility and reach. Within the areas of health promotion and wellness, campus-community partnerships have become an essential component in the delivery of prevention services and the development of public health infrastructure. The purpose of this paper is to share the experiences of two universities in their development of campus-community partnerships in the areas of health and wellness.

Establishing Partnerships for Effective Academic Programs

As undergraduate students prepare to enter the workforce and become engaged members in their communities, it is necessary for universities to provide students with opportunities and resources to develop the knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed to be successful in their professional, personal, and social pursuits. Experiential learning is one approach that may be used to facilitate and strengthen the learning process for undergraduate students. Grounded in experiential learning, Kinesiology-specific service learning and internship programs can help students develop the skillset needed to be successful in their major and future careers. To best facilitate students’ learning, it is imperative that such academic programs build collaborative, sustainable and genuine campus-community partnerships. This paper presents a series of practical and successful partnership-building strategies from three unique institutions.

Enriching Service-Learning by Developing e-Tutoring in Foster Homes

In view of the learning divide between the children in ordinary families and those in foster homes, online one-to-one tutoring has been provided by university students as a service-learning option. Through the synchronous e-tutoring system platform, the goal of this study is to develop a service learning mode for creating campus-community partnerships and mutual learning experiences. Thus the study applies Ramsden’s theory of university teaching (2003) into an action research project for investigating (i) how e-tutoring can solve the problems occurring in face-to-face tutoring in foster homes; (ii) the effects of e-tutoring; (iii) the new issues identified; and (iv) new strategies for future iterations of the program. For explaining a social phenomenon through a theoretical framework, grounded theory analysis was applied and eight themes were identified in the qualitative data of 10 observation reports, 28 interviews, and 140 weekly journals from both ends of two foster homes and one university. Eight subcategories (content and learning, practical learning, tutoring concerns, knowledge gains, competency gains, adult guidance, e-tutoring approaches, and transformative development) are categorized along with Ramsden’s hierarchy theory—teaching as telling or transmission, teaching as organizing student activity, and teaching as making learning possible. With transformative development of the campus-community partnership the consensus goal among university faculty, directors of foster homes and relevant personnel of e-tutoring (Enos and Morton 2003), the study discussed future improvements for the e-tutoring program. The action research strongly suggests that e-tutoring should emphasize more reflective listening rather than subject-mattered achievement and turn service-learning into an opportunity of achieving the sustainable integration of community resources and social welfare institutions.