1 / 50

Agenda

Indicators of Community-Land Grant University Readiness for Engagement from the Community Perspective Dissertation Defense. Candidate Cheryl LeMay Lloyd Committee Dr. Forrest Toms, Chair; Dr. Elizabeth Barber, Dr. Thomas Smith, Dr. James Zuiches,. Agenda. Introduction

darva
Download Presentation

Agenda

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Community-University Readiness for Engagement Indicators of Community-Land Grant University Readiness for Engagement from the Community PerspectiveDissertation Defense Candidate Cheryl LeMay LloydCommittee Dr. Forrest Toms, Chair; Dr. Elizabeth Barber, Dr. Thomas Smith, Dr. James Zuiches,

  2. Agenda • Introduction • Statement of the Problem • Research Questions • Review of Literature • Methodology • Results • Implications & Conclusions Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  3. Statement of the Problem • Societal Change • Perceived Imbalance of Power • Land-Grant University obligations • Interdisciplinary Solutions • Limited Community Perspective Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  4. Purpose & Significance Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  5. The Research Questions • What do community organizations expect from land grant universities as engaged partners? • What do community leaders perceive as indicators of readiness for engaged partnerships? Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  6. The Research Questions • Are the study instruments reliable and valid measures of readiness for community engagement, social capital, and leadership energy? Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  7. Community-University Readiness for Engagement Review of Literature Sociology, Political Science, Public Health, Leadership, Economics, Adult and Higher Education, Indigenous Wisdom

  8. Social Sciences/ Engagement • Civic Engagement • Positively impacts socioeconomic outcomes, democracy, education and health • Social Capital • Social capital and civic engagement are mutually reinforcing. • Civic Engagement & Social Capital are declining Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  9. Social Capital : Influencing Factors • Participation in local community • Value of life • Trust & safety • Family & friend connections • Neighbor connections, • Tolerance of diversity, • Work connections • Proactive social context, Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  10. Land-Grant Universities & Higher Education Community & University Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  11. Higher Education / Engagement • Engagement Scholarship • Academy & Discipline Frameworks • Campus Compact • Housing & Urban Development • Community Campus Partnership for Health • Council of Independent Colleges Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  12. Expectations of Community • Mutually determined goals • Shared vision • Sharing of data, resources, and risk • Strategies based on community needs • Peer relationships recognizing experiential credentials • Benefits sufficient to justify the effort • Systems of accountability • Roles and responsibilities based on capacity & resources (Creighton, 2006; Ferman, 2004; Leiderman et al., 2002; McNall et al., 2009). Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  13. Leadership / Engagement Collaborative/ Integrative • Adaptive capacities • Team capacity • Boundary spanning focus • Peer like relations • Changing outcomes • Individual traits • Leader capacity • Assigned roles • Fixed & specific outcomes Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  14. Readiness ?? • Readiness Foundation Communities prepared to improve networking, leading to effective civic engagement. • Characteristics • Social Capital • Leadership Energy • Community Capacity • Program Specific Factors • Useful service, Access, Equity, Clarity of Expectations, Expertise, Relevant Research, mutually beneficial exchange, Experience Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  15. Community-University Readiness for Engagement Methodology A Mixed Methods Study

  16. Mixed Methods The collection and analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data in a single study in which the data are collected concurrently or sequentially, are given a priority, and involves the integration of the data at one or more stages of the process of research (Creswell, 2008, p 18). Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  17. Mix Method: Sequential Phasing Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  18. The Questions Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  19. The Sample • NC Land Grant University Partners Community Organizational Leaders • N=43 Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  20. Instrumentation & Sample Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  21. Data Analysis Strategy • Phase I Qualitative Analysis • Transcription, • Coding • Identification of Descriptive Statistics & Themes • Phase II Quantitative Analysis • Descriptive Statistics • Bivarient Correlations • Reliability Coefficients Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  22. Community-University Readiness for Engagement Results Sample Demographic Distribution

  23. Study Sample… Educational Attainment Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  24. Study Sample… Educational Attainment Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  25. Study Sample… Race & Ethnic Distribution Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  26. Study Sample… Organizational Roles Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  27. Community-University Readiness for Engagement Results Qualitative

  28. Results: Benefits of Engagement Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  29. Learning in Public Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  30. Results: Readiness for Engagement • Authentic Relationships • Attention to local interest • Mutuality • Collaborative intent • Dedicated effort and resource • Spiritual Capital Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  31. Results: Expectations of University Engagement Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  32. Collaborative Leadership Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  33. Community-University Readiness for Engagement Results Quantitative

  34. CES: Measures of Social Capital Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  35. Reliability: CES • Item removed: • Do you feel safe when walking down the street after dark? Lickert Scale of 20 Items Developed • Cronbach’s Alpha • .718 Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  36. Correlations • Community involvement questions reflected highly significant correlations with the construct of social agency (.01) • Neighborhood connection questions reflected highly significant (.01) correlations with the family and friend orientation construct. • Female responded significantly higher on trust than males. • Directors responded more positively to questions of trust and agency. Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  37. ORS: Perceptions of Readiness Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  38. Reliability: ORS • Items Removed-Community Construct • Members with different backgrounds trust each other. • Community residents are willing to cooperative and work together to solve problems. • Items Removed- University Construct • Students provide labor and expertise that is helpful. • Office contacts at the university are able to link the needs of your organization and the university Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  39. Reliability -- ORS Cronbach’s Alpha • .714 Lickert Scale of 37 Items Developed Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  40. Correlations • CES community involvement reflected highly significant (.01) correlations with the ORS construct of university partner readiness. • CES neighborhood connection reflected highly significant (.01) correlations with the ORS construct of community readiness. Directors responded more positively to • the effectiveness of interaction, • Belief that leadership skills improved as a result of university engagement. Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  41. Community-University Readiness for Engagement Conclusions & Implications

  42. Implications Educational Attainment Gender • Civic Participation • Putman, Emler, Verba, • Leadership • Bunche & Holloway • Years of Service • Trust • Putnam, Woods Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  43. Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  44. Social Capital Organization Capacity • Social Capital Attracts Organizational • Capital Resources, • Human Capital • Leadership Energy • Social Networks Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  45. Implications Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  46. Implications Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  47. Leader Readiness (Spiritual Capital, Learning in Public) Organization Social , Financial and Human Capital Capital Accessibility Social Networks Energetic Leadership Readiness for Engagement

  48. Limitations • Purposeful Sample reflective of Successful experiences with Universities • Time Limitations • Sample Size restrictive • Data reflective of NC publicly funded Land Grant Universities only Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  49. Work to Be Done Recommendations • Validation of Instruments • Exploration of Member perceptions • Expansion of Population and Sample • Validation of Inferred Model: Spiritual capital, learning in public and collaborative leadership as productive & sustainable. Community-University Readiness for Engagement

  50. Questions Community-University Readiness for Engagement

More Related