Building on the Opportunities Created by the Irish Charter

1. Building on the Opportunities Created by the Irish Charter Barbara Holland June 2014

2. The Irish Charter for Civic and Community Engagement • An action of national and global importance! • The fates of the economy, our communities, and our educational institutions are deeply intertwined • HEIs must rapidly adapt to profound changes in approaches to research, teaching and learning • Partnerships between HEIs and communities will help both adapt and progress successfully!

3. My Advice to Presidents! • Community Engagement is a method of teaching, learning and research; not a form of service • As a method, it can be recognized and assessed as a form of teaching, learning and research. Invest in staff development • CE requires infrastructure and resources to manage logistical aspects • They need to integrate CE expectations into hiring, rewards, recognition; create rewards for partners

4. The Engagement Advantage • Community Engagement is increasingly seen as a: • Valuable tool for institutional development and progress • A way to attract & retain students and new faculty & staff • A way to renew mission and internal campus spirit • A way to create a vibrant campus and community relationship • A way to transform student understanding of the value of their education

5. From the Margin to the Core Community Engagement Strategies– Partnerships for teaching, learning and research are proving to be a powerful response to current change trends in higher education And A powerful response to local and global challenges and opportunities.

6. Community Engagement must be part of every institution’s response to current trends and challenges. Engagement is more strategically important and relevant than ever. Success depends on the strength of alignment between institutional goals and the focus of community engaged actions.

7. Trends in Engagement • Focus on a few “Big Questions” - local, state, national or int’l • Move the needle; create real change • Integrate engaged teaching and research • International Engagement • Engaged global experiences (local/int’l) for students and faculty, linked to learning & research • Targeted, long term comprehensive partnership with specific HEIs/regions • Enhance community voice and influence • All supported by Monitoring & Measuring activity and impacts

8. Promising Strategies • Connect community engaged teaching/learning to specific student outcomes/goals • Identify 1-2 key community issues, and 1-2 specific learning objectives • Convene internal/external voices to develop themed actions and strategies for engaged teaching and research • This creates a framework for • measuring ouputs and outcomes (descriptive and analytical) • Publishing/ celebrating impacts/outcomes • Raising funds to sustain/expand work • Recruit and hire new staff with expectations of engaged scholarship

9. Increasing Impact • Are we ready to commit to this agenda as a core strategic goal and intellectual value of our institution as a whole? • Challenge our students – • Stretch them to become change makers • Strive to engaged the unengaged students • Deepen partner involvement • Involve partners authentically from design to eval • Measure partner perspective on impacts, cost/benefit • Are we “visiting”communities? Or working at their side to create real impacts and sustained change?

10. Defining CommunityCCPH board of directors, 2005 Defining “community” in community-HEI partnerships is more about the process of asking questions than about a strict definition of who “is” community or “represents” community: • Are those most affected by the topic or issue being addressed at the table? • Are those who have a stake in the topic or issue being addressed at the table? • Do they play decision making roles?

11. The Centrality of Partnerships The essence of Community Engagement is interacting with “others” outside the academy with an intent that our interactions are of mutual benefit: • Better teaching, learning, research outcomes • Greater community capacity and improved quality of life; better community outcomes

12. The Centrality of Partnerships If partnerships are so important to quality engagement, are we doing all we should to: • Recruit and orient partners that fit our goals for exchange of knowledge • Involve partners in goal setting, activity design, expected benefits, assessment • Use participatory research methods as appropriate • Recognize partner role and contribution • Monitor cost-benefit to partner • Gather feedback regarding satisfaction/improvement

13. What one or two factors do you see as being most important to building authentic, mutually beneficial partnerships between a higher education institution and a community person or entity??

14. Collective Impact • Much of community engagement work is driven by individuals or specific projects • Large-scale social change requires collaboration • Monitoring & measuring increases our ability to connect related or complementary projects • To increase the results of CE, we need to seek opportunities for COLLECTIVE work and thus collective IMPACT

15. What is Collective Impact? The commitment of a group of important actors from different sectors or organizations to a common agenda for solving a specific problem. Collective impact is different from collaboration! Collective impact requires a structured process and leadership that binds all participants to work together on a complex issue. (Kania & Kramer, 2011)

16. Collective Impact Requires • Common Agenda – Shared view of: • The problem – Change goal – The Joint approach • Shared Measurement – consistent data ensures efforts remain aligned/accountable • Mutually Reinforcing Activities – Different but complementary through a shared action plan • Continuous Communication • Backbone support – Dedicated infrastructure (Hanleybrown, Kania, Kramer, 2012)

17. Partnerships are Contextual Are you partnering with: • Education • Government • Business/industry • Non-governmental/community-based organizations • Neighborhoods or individuals • Local, remote, international • Formal organizations or informal groups/coalitions • Large, medium, small • Mature? Or recently formed? See Sockett’s “Typology of Partnerships” (1998)

18. Sockett’s Partnership Types • Service relationship – fixed time, fixed task • Exchange relationship – exchange info, get access for mutual benefit, specific project • Cooperative relationship – joint planning and shared responsibilities, long-term, multiple projects • System and Transformative relationship – shared decision-making/operations/evaluation intended to transform each organization Hugh Sockett, 1998

19. Democratic Partnerships • Asset –based • Relational and contextual • Co-creation of knowledge • Academic institution as ‘part of the landscape’ of community problem solving rather than exerting primacy of academic knowledge • Multidirectional flow of knowledge • Evidence of community benefit from the work Jameson, J., Clayton, P., & Jaeger, A. 2010

20. Current Core Challenges? • Curse of the advisory committee model • Power distribution • Cultural competence • Language differences • Resource distribution • Evaluation strategies and their uses • Commitment: individual/institutional • Leadership challenges: transitions, renewal, longevity • Visibility of the work: internal and external • Policy barriers: internal and external

21. Program Modification Summative Assessment Program Evolution Learning & Planning Capacity Building Project Implementation Shared Agenda Funding Secured Project Proposals HEI/Community Partnerships Institutional Capacity, Goals and Interests Assessment Feedback Loop Community Capacity, Goals and Interests Barbara A. Holland 2003

22. Learning is the Connection Learning: • About each other’s capacity and limitations • About each other’s goals, culture, expectations • To develop students as active citizens • To exchange expertise, ideas, fears, concerns • To share control and direction • To adapt based on evaluation and documentation • To experiment; to fail; to try again – To Trust!

23. Today is Tomorrow The work we do today to deepen partnerships across education and community sectors is the foundation that will support a growing variety of collaborative endeavours. All will benefit from understanding that knowledge, innovation and progress are the products of collective action in a context of equity and respect for all sources of wisdom.

24. Research on Partner Motivations • “Our common ground is a profound commitment to students” • Partners want to understand the learning goals for students • They also want to help students understand how their organization works – culture and context; and • Help students understand how communities work • Deep understanding of academic institution’s goals • Partners value the relationship with the institution but also with specific people • Hope for access to additional services Sandy and Holland, 2006

25. Partner-Reported Benefits • Interactions with students and staff improve processes and outcomes • Enhanced organizational capacity • Students inspire and energize other workers; fresh energy and new ideas • Access to academic expertise • Leverage financial and human resources • Identify future employees • Build new networks Sandy and Holland, 2006

26. Partner Ideas for Improvement • Partnerships are personal relationships; meetings are valued • Partners want direct involvement in planning and goal-setting • Offer recognition and celebration of our role • Concern about “fairness”…who gets to be a partner – how are choices made? • Hours are a meaningless measure • Partners want some involvement in evaluation and feedback • Drink more coffee! Sandy and Holland, 2006