Abstract
This chapter provides a detailed exploration of how a long-standing University classification approach developed in the United States focuses on university-community engagement and the effects that this has on management approaches taken the university. This chapter reports findings from a study of the elective Carnegie Community Engagement Classification. This elective classification is a voluntary activity allowing universities to self assess and be given credit for things they do well given their overall mission and profile. Since 2004, this classification provides protocol for the accreditation of university engagement activity that goes beyond the standard kinds of service learning which we commonly find in universities, and attempts to go deeper to the institutionalization efforts of engagement across the entire university. Based on institutional studies and questionnaires, this chapter explores the extent to which something similar to a Carnegie classification can help to support universities in their efforts to make engagement more central to their mission, already identified by a number of contributors in this book as a vital antecedent condition for successful engagement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
As noted later in this chapter, there are language variations when talking about the work of community engagement.
References
American Association of State Colleges and Universities. (2002). Stepping forward as stewards of place: A guide for leading public engagement at state colleges and universities. Washington: American Association of State Colleges and Universities.
Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Boyer, E. (1996). The scholarship of engagement. The Journal of Public Service and Community Outreach, 1(1), 11–20.
Brint, S., & Levy, C. S. (1999). Professions and civic engagement: Trends in rhetoric and practice 1875–1995. In T. Skocpol & M. P. Fiorina (Eds.), Civic engagement in American democracy (pp. 163–211). Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
Brukardt, M. J., Holland, B., Percy, S., & Zimpher, N. (2004). Calling the question: Is higher education ready to commit to community engagement. A Wingspread statement.
Burack, C., & Saltmarsh, J. (2006). Assessing the institutionalization of civic engagement. Boston: University of Massachusetts.
Campus Compact. (2000).Presidents’ declaration on the civic responsibility of higher education. Providence: Campus Compact.
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/.
Colbeck, C., & Wharton-Michael, P. (2006). Framework for researching influences on faculty scholarship. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 105, 17–26.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, N. S. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Driscoll, A. (2008). Carnegie foundation for the advancement of teaching. http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/. Accessed 22 Jan. 2008.
Driscoll, A., & Lynton, E. (1999). Making outreach visible: A guide to documenting professional service and outreach. Washington: American Association for Higher Education.
Eckel, P., Hill, B., & Green, M. (1998). On change: En route to transformation. Washington: American Council on Education.
Ehrlich, T. (Ed.). (2000). Civic responsibility and higher education. Westport: American Council on Education, Series on Higher Education, Oryx Press.
Ehrlich, T., & Holland, E. (1999). Presidents’ declaration on the civic responsibility of higher education. Campus Compact. http://www.compact.org/resources/declaration/Declaration_2007.pdf.
Furco, A. (2009). Issues in benchmarking and assessing institutional engagement. In L. Sandmann, C. Thornton, & A. Jaeger (Eds.), Institutionalizing community engagement in higher education: The first wave of Carnegie classified institutions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass (New Directions for Higher Education, 147, 47–54).
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.
Giles, D. E. (2008). Understanding an emerging field of scholarship: Toward a research agenda for engaged, public scholarship. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 12(2), 97–106.
Giles, D., Saltmarsh, J., Ward, E., & Buglione, S. (2008). An analysis of faculty reward policies for engaged scholarship at Carnegie classified community engaged institutions. Paper presented at the Annual Association for the Study of Higher Education, Jacksonville, Florida.
Holland, B. A. (2001). A comprehensive model for assessing service-learning and community-university partnerships. New Directions for Higher Education, 114, 51–60.
Hollander, E., Saltmarsh, J., & Zlotkowski, E. (2002). Indicators of engagement. In L. A. Simon, K. M. Brabeck, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Learning to serve: Promoting civil society through service-learning. Norwell: Kluwer Academic.
Kellogg Commission. (2001). The future of state and land-grant universities. Returning to our roots: Executive summaries of the reports of the Kellogg Commission on the future of state and land-grant universities. New York: NASULGC.
Langseth, M., & Plater, W. M. (Eds.). (2004). Public work and the academy: An academic administrator’s guide to civic engagement and service learning. Bolton: Anker.
Lynton, E. (1995b). Making the case for professional service. Washington: American Association for Higher Education.
Lynton, E., & Elman, S. E. (1987). New priorities for the university. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
McCormick, A. C., & Zhao, C. (2005). Rethinking and reframing the Carnegie classification. Change, 37(5), 50–57.
O’Meara, K. (2008). Motivation for faculty community engagement: Learning from exemplars. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 12(1), 7–29.
O’Meara, K. (2012). Because I can: Exploring faculty civic agency (Kettering Foundation Working Paper 2012–1). Dayton: Kettering Foundation.
O’Meara, K., & Rice, R. E. (2005). Faculty priorities reconsidered: Rewarding multiple forms of scholarship. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Plater, W. M. (2004). Civic engagement, service-learning, and intentional leadership. In M. Langseth & W. M. Plater (Eds.), Public work and the academy: An academic administrator’s guide to civic engagement and service learning (pp. 1–23). Bolton: Anker.
Rhoades, G. (2009). Carnegie, DuPont circle, and the AAUP: (Re)shaping a cosmopolitan, locally engaged professoriate. Change, 41(1), 8–15.
Saltmarsh, J. (2011). Engagement and epistemology. In J. Saltmarsh & E. Zlotkowski (Eds.), Higher education and democracy: Essays on service-learning and civic engagement. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Saltmarsh, J., & Hartley, M. (Eds.). (2011). ‘To serve a larger purpose’: Engagement for democracy and the transformation of higher education. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Saltmarsh, J., Hartley, M., & Clayton, P. H. (2009a). Democratic engagement white paper. Boston: New England Resource Center for Higher Education.
Saltmarsh, J., Giles, D., Ward, E., & Buglione, S. (2009b). An analysis of faculty reward policies for engaged scholarship at Carnegie classified community engaged institutions. In L. Sandmann, C. Thornton, & A. Jaeger (Eds.), Institutionlizing community engagement in higher education: The first wave of Carnegie classified institutions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass (New Directions for Higher Education, 147, 25–35).
Saltmarsh, J., Giles, D. E., O’Meara, K., Sandmann, L., Ward, E., & Buglione, S. (2009c). Community engagement and the institutional culture of higher education: An Investigation of faculty reward policies at engaged campuses. Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.
Sandmann, L. (2008). Conceptualization of the scholarship of engagement in higher education: A strategic review, 1996–2006. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 12(1), 91–104.
Sandmann, L., Saltmarsh, J., & O’Meara, K. (2008). An integrated model for advancing the scholarship of engagement: Creating academic homes for the engaged scholar. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 12(1), 47–63.
Schön, D. (1995). The new scholarship requires a new epistemology. Change, 27(6), 9, 26.
Skocpol, T., & Fiorina, M. P. (1999). Civic engagement in American democracy (pp. 163–211). Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
Ward, E. (2010). Women’s ways of engagement: And exploration of gender, the scholarship of engagement and institutional reward policy and practice. Boston: University of Massachusetts.
Ward, E., Piskadlo, K., Buglione, S., Giles, D., & Saltmarsh, J. (2011, November 16). Leading community-engaged change on American campuses: Lessons from chief academic officers. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education. Charlotte, NC.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix A
Appendix A
There are many organizations involved in promoting civic engagement in the American higher education landscape . These include at the time of writing:
-
The American Association of State Colleges and Universities (2002)—AASCU (http://www.aascu.org/) and its American Democracy Project (ADP) (http://www.aascu.org/programs/adp/about.htm).
-
The American Association of Colleges and Universities (AACU) (http://www.aacu.org/).
-
The Coalition of Urban and Metropolitan Universities (CUMU) (http://www.cumuonline.org/) and the Campus Compact (2000) (http://www.compact.org/).
At regional and institutional levels there are also a number of entities that are responsible for advancing the engagement mandate. For example:
-
The University of Washington’s community-campus partners for health (http://www.ccph.info/);
-
The New England Resource Center for Higher Education (NERCHE) (http://www.nerche.org/);
-
Syracuse University’s Imagining America (http://www.imaginingamerica.org/index.html);
-
Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis’s Center for Service Learning (http://csl.iupui.edu/); and
-
The International Association for Research on Service-learning and Community Engagement (http://www.researchslce.org/).
This list is in no way exhaustive, but paints a picture of the levels and layers of civic and community-engagement activity in the United States at the moment as well as identifies who the key researchers are in framing the conversation and research agenda for the field.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ward, E., Buglione, S., Giles Jr., D., Saltmarsh, J. (2013). The Carnegie Classification for Community Engagement. In: Benneworth, P. (eds) University Engagement With Socially Excluded Communities. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4875-0_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4875-0_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-4874-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-4875-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)