slide1 l.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Building Engagement Across the Campus: Creating Engaged Departments AAC&U Pedagogies of Engagement Conference April PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Building Engagement Across the Campus: Creating Engaged Departments AAC&U Pedagogies of Engagement Conference April

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 67
Download Presentation

Building Engagement Across the Campus: Creating Engaged Departments AAC&U Pedagogies of Engagement Conference April - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Download Presentation

Building Engagement Across the Campus: Creating Engaged Departments AAC&U Pedagogies of Engagement Conference April

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Building Engagement Across the Campus: Creating Engaged DepartmentsAAC&U Pedagogies of Engagement ConferenceApril 14 – 16, 2005Bethesda, Maryland John Saltmarsh, Project Director Integrating Service Academic Study National Campus Compact Kevin Kecskes, Director Community-University Partnerships for Learning Portland State University StevenJones, Coordinator Office of Service Learning, Center for Service and Learning, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis

  2. Workshop Goals • Investigate motivation for engagement • Place departmental engagement in disciplinary and institutional contexts • Discuss multiple approaches to civic engagement including service-learning. • Present institution-wide programmatic models • Discuss strategies for departmental engagement • Share lessons learned • Consider the engagement of departments at your campus

  3. Agenda • Explore an Engaged Department Framework • Engaged Departments as a key component of an engaged campus (IUPUI) • Engaged Departments in action (PSU) • Lessons Learned • Resources

  4. An Engaged Department When we talk about an “engaged department,” what do we mean by “engagement”?

  5. Engagement “Civic engagement means working to make a difference in the civic life of our communities and developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values and motivation to make that difference.”Thomas Ehrlich, et. al., Civic Responsibility and Higher Education (2000)

  6. Engagement An essential point made by Russ Edgerton and Lee Schulman in a critique of the 2002 NSSE results is relevant here: “We know, for instance, that students can be engaged in a range of effective practices and still not be learning with understanding; we know that students can be learning with understanding and still not be acquiring the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that are related to effective citizenship.”

  7. Engagement “Complementary learning opportunities inside and outside the classroom augment the academic program…service-learning provides students with opportunities to synthesize, integrate, and apply their knowledge. Such experiences make learning more meaningful, and ultimately more useful because what students know becomes a part of who they are.” (2002 NSSE Annual Report)

  8. Engagement Civic engagement means creating opportunities for civic learning that are rooted in respect for community-based knowledge, experiential and reflective modes of teaching and learning, active participation in American democracy, institutional renewal that supports these elements.

  9. What is the Compelling Interest in Engagement? • The Civic Purpose of Higher Education (the mission imperative) • Improved Teaching and Learning (the pedagogical imperative) • Creating New Knowledge (the epistemological imperative)

  10. The Civic Purpose of Higher Education (the mission imperative) "Unless education has some frame of reference it is bound to be aimless, lacking a unified objective. The necessity for a frame of reference must be admitted. There exists in this country such a unified frame. It is called democracy." John Dewey (1937)

  11. Improved Teaching and Learning (the pedagogical imperative) “People worldwide need a whole series of new competencies...But I doubt that such abilities can be taught solely in the classroom, or be developed solely by teachers. Higher order thinking and problem solving skills grow out of direct experience, not simply teaching; they require more than a classroom activity. They develop through active involvement and real life experiences in workplaces and the community.” John Abbott, Director of Britain’s Education 2000 Trust, Interview with Ted Marchese, AAHE Bulletin, 1996

  12. Creating New Knowledge (the epistemological imperative) • “The epistemology appropriate to [engaged teaching and scholarship] must make room for the practitioner’s reflection in and on action. It must account for and legitimize not only the use of knowledge produced in the academy, but the practitioner’s generation of actionable knowledge.” Donald Schon, The New Scholarship Requires a New Epistemology, Change, 1995 • “Knowledge - particularly useful knowledge that can be applied in the economy and society – is something more than highly intellectualized, analytical, and symbolic material. It includes working knowledge, a component of experience, of hands-on practice knowledge.” Mary Walshok, Knowledge Without Boundaries. 1995

  13. What is YourPrimaryInterest in Engagement? • The Civic Purpose of Higher Education (the mission imperative) • Improved Teaching and Learning (the pedagogical imperative) • Creating New Knowledge (the epistemological imperative) • Another interest….

  14. Why The Department? “Departments are the units in which the institution’s strategy for academic development is formulated in practice.”Donald Kennedy “The department is arguably the definitive locus of faculty culture, especially departments that gain their definition by being their campus’s embodiment of distinguished and hallowed disciplines…. we could have expected that reformers would have placed departmental reform at the core of their agenda; yet just the opposite has occurred. There has been a noticeable lack of discussion of – or even new ideas about – departments’ role in reform.” Edwards, Richard. 1999. The Academic Department: How does it Fit Into the University Reform Agenda? Change, September/October, p. 17-27.

  15. The Engaged Department An Educational Reform Agenda • Improved learning 2. Scholarship reconsidered 3. Public relevance - “socially responsive knowledge”

  16. Key Features of an Engaged Department • The work of the department is collaborative: Shift from “my work” to “our work” • Public dialogue about the values, interests, and goals of the department. • Engagement as community-based public problem solving.

  17. An Engaged Department Agenda • Unit responsibility for Engagement Related Activities. • Departmental Agreement on the concepts and terminology that allow faculty to explore the dimensions of engaged work most effectively. • Departmental agreement on how best to document, evaluate, and communicate the significance of engaged work. • Strategies for deepening the department’s community partnerships.

  18. Addressing Departmental Engagement • Defining Civic Engagement. • Effective Departmental Collaboration. • Community Partnerships. • Evolving Faculty Roles and Rewards. • Assessment Principles and Strategies. • Creating an Action Plan.

  19. Why Be a More Engaged DepartmentMetropolitan State University: Communications, Writing,and the Arts • Promote cultural diversity initiatives • Promote critical inquiry & thinking • Understand points of commonality (shared purposes and goals) • Promote dialogue and commonality among our programs and communities • Connects reflection with action • Collective responsibility to bridge town/gown • A shared understanding of how the department adds value to the community

  20. Placing Departmental Engagement Within an Institutional Context

  21. An Integrated Approach Institutional Engagement Faculty/Staff Engagement Departmental Engagement Student Engagement

  22. Economic Development Lifelong Learning Extended Programs Cultural Programs Faculty Outreach Other Internships/Coop Co-Curricular Service-Learning • Community-based • Research Curricular Service-Learning CIRCLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION ENGAGEMENT INITIATIVES

  23. Civic Engagement in Higher Education:Expanding our Understanding Service- Learning (curricular and co-curricular) • Other pedagogies, mechanisms, strategies: • _______ • _______ • _______ • _______ Community-Based Research • Associated civic skills, attitudes, attributes, and behaviors to be developed • ___________ • ___________ • ___________ • ___________

  24. Descriptions and Definitions: Pedagogies for Civic Engagement

  25. PSU Developmental Model Faculty Development Approaches Individual Faculty Engagement Scholarship of Engagement Service- Learning Community- Based Learning Departmental Level Engagement Community- Based Research Community Service Institutional Level Engagement Civic Engagement

  26. IUPUI’s Mission IUPUI Mission Statement The MISSION of IUPUI is to provide for its constituents excellence in * Teaching and Learning * Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activity * Civic Engagement, Locally, Nationally, and Globally with each of these core activities characterized by * Collaboration within and across disciplines and with the community, * A commitment to ensuring diversity, and * Pursuit of best practices

  27. IUPUI’s Vision Statement • IUPUI’s vision is to be “an engaged institution that stands as a model for effective, mutually beneficial collaborations of students, faculty, staff and community.”

  28. Institutional Portfolio on Civic Engagement/Civic Engagement Task Force’s Goals • Enhance capacity for civic engagement. • Enhance civic activities, partnerships, and patient and client services. • Intensify commitment and accountability to Indianapolis, central Indiana, and the state.

  29. Strategic Goals of the Center for Service and Learning 1. Support the development of service learning classes. 2. Increase campus participation in community service activities. 3. Strengthen campus-community partnerships. 4. Advance the scholarship of service. 5. Promote civic engagement in higher education.

  30. Overview of Commitment to Excellence Funds General Goals 1. Create new models for undergraduate student learning and civic engagement. • Increase opportunities for undergraduate students to participate in meaningful experiential education • Increase the number of undergraduate students involved in multiple community-based learning experiences • Create new models for student learning through civic engagement that have both vertical and horizontal distribution

  31. Overview of Commitment to Excellence Funds General Goals, continued 2. Develop staff infrastructure with academic units. • Be accountable to good practice and to internal and external constituencies through systematic assessment and reporting of student learning outcomes and campus performance indicators for service learning and civic engagement. • Engage in collaborative work with community partners to address complex community issues.

  32. Overview of Commitment to Excellence Funds Specific Goals Interdisciplinary Community Partnerships • Develop interdisciplinary campus-community partnerships (horizontal focus). Engaged Department/School Initiatives • Assist schools and departments to develop strategies to (a) include community-based work in both teaching and research (including student research), (b) include community-based experiences as a standard expectation for majors, and (c) develop a level of coherence within the unit that will allow them to model successful civic engagement and progressive change at the departmental and/or school level (vertical focus).

  33. Criteria for Proposals-Engaged Departments/Schools Student learning 1. Involves undergraduate students in civic engagement activities that include teaching, research, and service, preferably in ways that integrate across those activities 2. Involves large numbers of undergraduate students in multiple ways, include service-learning classes, internships, independent readings and research, etc. 3. Involves entering undergraduate students and structured developmental sequences of curricular and co-curricular activities that contribute to student learning and development.

  34. Criteria for Proposals-Engaged Departments/Schools, continued Community partnerships 1. Focuses on community issues in central Indiana in ways that engage the campus and communities in activities that are academically meaningful and worthwhile to the communities. 2. Demonstrates community input in the development of the proposal, if feasible. 3. Demonstrates a plan for shared decision making with community partners over time. 4. Demonstrates a plan for continued community connections and community input during program implementation, monitoring, and evaluation.

  35. Criteria forProposals-Engaged Departments/Schools, continued Internal Collaboration 1. Collaborates with other IUPUI partners to leverage additional campus resources. 2. Identifies roles of faculty and staff with project responsibilities within academic units that are involved. 3. Advances the mission of the department and/or school in important ways around civic engagement. Project management 1. Structures faculty leadership with clear commitment to the success of the proposed activities and provides a timeline for organizing the project operations under faculty and staff leadership. 2. Identifies plans for matching funds from department/school and external sources to support the initiative and has plans for securing additional external support. Departmental or school matching funds are required, and although no proportion is specified, those with higher levels of matching funds will be favorably reviewed. 3. Identifies ways in which Commitment to Excellence funds support will be phased out and other forms of support will ensure continuation of project activities.

  36. Criteria forProposals-Engaged Departments/Institutes, continued Assessment and evaluation 1. Provides an assessment plan that will document impact on student learning, contribution to departmental/school goals, and campus mission and goals. 2. Establishes how the proposed activities will be successful in terms of IUPUI’s Civic Engagement Performance Indicators, with particular regard for those indicators focused on Principles of Undergraduate Learning. 3. Establishes how the proposed activities will contribute to academic work including securing external support and creating academic products. 4. Provides an assessment plan for documenting the community impact of the work (e.g., health indicators, policy, quality of life.) 5. Establishes some procedures for oversight and evaluation that are relatively independent of the established infrastructure and incorporates community participation in these functions. Dissemination 1. Develops plans for disseminating information and publications in ways appropriate to a variety of local and national audiences.

  37. Results of Engaged Department Initiative To Date • 2003 • 3 proposals, 1 funded (funding was discontinued after 1st year of grant) • 2004 • 4 proposals, 2 funded • 2005 • Campus-wide Engaged Department Institute—15 departments represented • 7 proposals, 3 funded • 1st Annual Civic Engagement Showcase will be held April 22, 2005

  38. Why Work with Departments?An Integrated Approach Institutional Engagement Faculty/Staff Engagement Departmental Engagement Student Engagement

  39. Why work with Academic Departments? PSU’s Response • Faculty generally find their intellectual and professional home in the department. • Nationally, work is being done to educate discipline associations and articulate connections to engagement. • Student experiences with community-based work can be fragmented when coordinated largely at the individual faculty level • There are several potential benefits for students, faculty, and community partners

  40. The Engaged Department Program at Portland State • Uses community-based learning to facilitate the integration of community-based work and reflection into academic study • Encourages the scholarship of engagement • Collaborative activities that directly support the university mission, “Let knowledge serve the city.”

  41. PSU’s Programmatic Process • Campus wide distribution of request for proposals • Competitive, peer-reviewed selection process • Development of interdisciplinary faculty “learning community” featuring monthly group discussion sessions with identified topics • Material resources provided • Campus-wide dissemination and celebration of outcomes at the end of the year

  42. PSU discussion topics for monthly group meetings • Modified planning document used by Campus Compact for the national institutes • Discussion/clarification of terms • Strategizing barriers and facilitators for engagement • Curricular change related to engagement • Engaging others in the department • Assessment • Related scholarship (of teaching and of community engagement)

  43. Working with Departments – PSU’s History • Engaged Department Institute offered by Campus Compact, June 2001 • Team of 6 participate in a 4-day institute to explore the concepts of “the department as a unit of engagement and change.” • 7 departments participated in year-long program, 2001-2002 • 12 units in 2002-2003 • 12 units in 2003-2005 (06)

  44. PSU Model of Working with Departments – Four year Journey • 7 department participated in year-long program, 2001-2002: • School of Business Administration • School of Community Health • Department ofEnglish • Department of Mathematical Sciences • Department of Psychology • University Studies, university-wide general education program • School ofUrban Studies and Planning

  45. PSU Model of Working with Departments – Four year Journey • 12 units participated in year-long program, 2002-2003 • Department of Applied Linguistics • Department of Architecture • Department of Art • Child and Family Studies Program • Department of Educational Policy, Foundations, and Administrative Studies • Department of English • Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures • Department of Physics • Department of Psychology • Office of University Studies, Freshman Inquiry • School of Urban Studies and Planning • Women’s Studies Program

  46. PSU Model of Working with Departments – Four year Journey • 12 units currently participating in program, 2003-2005 • Center for Science Education • Department of Applied Linguistics • Department of Art • Department of Educational Policy, Foundations, and Administrative Studies • Department of Geology • Department of History • Department of Political Science • Department of Public Administration • School of Urban Studies and Planning • School of Community Health • University Studies Program: Freshman Inquiry – Capstone Program • Women’s Studies Program

  47. Identifying Common Interests and Overlapping Areas of Engagement Survey of… …recent past …current …near future Focus on FACULTY work: - scholarship of engagement, service- and community-based learning and/or research, outreach, partnerships, etc

  48. Course Mapping Activity • Civic Engagement Concept or Skill: • Course Name and Number: • Required/Elective: • Who Teaches?: • Community Partners Involved: • Hours of Student Involvement: • How Often Taught?: • Nature of Experience (thematic focus, team approach, internship, s-l course, comm.-based research, capstone, etc.):

  49. ENGAGED DEPARTMENT Key Mechanisms to Explore Core Concepts, Skills, Attitudes, and Behaviors Faculty work: Community-based courses, applied research, outreach Student Work: Curricular and co-curricular engagement, research activities Service-learning Scholarship of engagement Community Partners’ Roles: Co-instructors, research agenda, other assets and needs Administrative Activities: Leadership- departmental vision and coherence, promotion and tenure support Political advocacy Field research Professional outreach Other Engaged Department – Connective Pathways

  50. Identifying Common Interests and Overlapping Areas of Engagement • Take time to clarify, query, notice… • Celebrate past, present, and future work • Take time to dream (collectively) • Keep an eye on impacts / outcomes…ask for whom? Students, scholarly work, community partners, resource generation, etc. • Who else could be at the table? Why?