AMERICAN DEMOCRACY PROJECT / THE DEMOCRACY COMMITMENT NATIONAL MEETING JUNE 8, 2012 SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS A Crucible Moment: Higher Education and Democratic Engagement

Presenters Gail Robinson, Director of Service Learning American Association of Community Colleges, DC John Saltmarsh, Co-Director New England Resource Center for Higher Education, MA Josh Young, Director Institute for Civic Engagement and Democracy, Miami Dade College, FL

Workshop Outcomes Understand why engagement matters now more than ever Gain greater understanding of the Carnegie Foundation’s Elective Classification on Community Engagement Gain knowledge about how to organize for and complete the application process Increase the number of community colleges successfully achieving the classification

Civic Health Indicators College seniors surveyed in averaged just over 50% in a civic literacy exam 1/3 of college faculty surveyed strongly agreed their campus actively promotes awareness of US or global social, political, and economic issues 1/3 of students strongly agreed that faculty publicly advocate the need for students to become active and involved citizens 1/3 of students strongly agreed that their college education resulted in increased civic capacities (e.g., awareness, skills, commitment)

National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement Commissioned by U.S. Department of Education Led by the Association of American Colleges and Universities 140 people – 5 national roundtables Focus on completion agenda, career preparation, and fostering informed, engaged citizens

Defining Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement “Educational experiences that intentionally prepare students for informed, engaged participation in civic and democratic life by providing opportunities to develop civic knowledge, skills, and dispositions through learning and practice.” U.S. Department of Education, Advancing Civic Learning and Engagement in Democracy: A Road Map and Call to Action (2012)

Civic Learning and What Employers Want from Higher Education

Students Are Urging Higher Education to Embrace Civic Learning

Enlarge the National Narrative: Completion, Careers, and Citizenship It is not either/or: Correlation between service learning and college completion - academic engagement - deepening connections with faculty - higher grade point - higher retention - more likely to complete degrees - career clarification

Where Do Service Learning and Civic Engagement Fit in Institutional Cultures? Academic success  Student learning outcomes, critical thinking, retention Student development  Leadership, moral and ethical behavior, personal growth Community engagement  Civic responsibility, citizenship skills, advocacy Diversity and inclusion  Respect, tolerance/acceptance, democratic process Workforce training / career preparation  Job skills, soft skills, real-world applications

Carnegie Elective Classification – Community Engagement Central definition “Community Engagement describes the collaboration between higher education institutions and their larger communities (local, regional/state, national, global) for the mutually beneficial exchange of knowledge and resources in a context of partnership and reciprocity.”

Partnerships and Reciprocity Engagement “requires going beyond the expert model that often gets in the way of constructive university- community collaboration... calls on faculty to move beyond ‘outreach’... asks scholars to go beyond ‘service,’ with its overtones of noblesse oblige. What it emphasizes is genuine collaboration: that the learning and teaching be multidirectional and the expertise shared. It represents a basic reconceptualization of... community-based work.” O’Meara and Rice, Faculty Priorities Reconsidered (2005)

Reciprocity As a core principle – there is a flow of knowledge, information, and benefits in both directions between the institution and community partners. Reciprocity is what defines and distinguishes engagement: reciprocity = engagement.

A Model of Institutional Change Eckel, P., Hill, B., and Green, M On Change: En Route to Transformation, An Occasional Paper Series of the ACE Project on Leadership and Institutional Transformation. American Council for Education.

Transformational Change (1) Alters the culture of the institution by changing select underlying assumptions and institutional behaviors, processes, and products (2) Is deep and pervasive, affecting the whole institution (3) Is intentional (4) Occurs over time

LowHigh Low Adjustment (1) Isolated Change (2) High Far-Reaching Change (3) Transformational Change (4) Depth Figure 1: Transformational Change Adapted from Eckel, Hill,& Green (1998) Pervasiveness

Where Might Transformation Occur? Connecting institutions to their communities Institutions form intentional linkages with their communities... these connections can contribute to the reshaping of institutional practices and purposes..., they may cause researchers to rethink the types of grants they seek, the ways they disseminate their findings, and the range and types of audiences for their findings.... Faculty may incorporate service and outreach in their classes and curricula, and students may participate in co-curricular activities (such as internships or service learning) that place them in the community where they can apply their learning to solving real-world problems.

Why Apply for the Classification? Legitimacy: credibility, public recognition, and visibility Accountability: mission, stakeholders Catalyst for change: improve teaching and learning via community-based problem solving Institutional identity and market niche: clarify mission and local roles Institutional self-assessment and self-study: promising practices

The Framework: Foundational Indicators Institutional identity and culture  Mission/vision  Recognition  Assessment/data  Marketing materials  Leadership priority Institutional commitment  Infrastructure  Budget/fundraising  Tracking/documentation  Assessment/data  Strategic plan  Professional development  Community voice  Recruitment/promotion  Student leadership

The Framework: Categories of Community Engagement Curricular engagement  Service learning courses and faculty  Institutional/departmental student learning outcomes  Assessment/data  Curricular activities  Faculty scholarship Outreach and partnerships  Community outreach programs  Institutional resources  Mutuality/reciprocity  Feedback and assessment  Faculty scholarship

Your Turn In small groups, review one section of questions  Institutional identity and culture (p. 1)  Institutional commitment (p. 2)  Curricular engagement (p. 4)  Outreach and partnerships (p. 5) What evidence would you provide to demonstrate your college or university has institutionalized community engagement?

Promoting the Carnegie Classification at Miami Dade College

Preparing for the Application Miami Dade College suggestions Begin preparation now Secure buy-in from president Identify key institutional stakeholders (President’s office, Institutional Research, Foundation, Grants/Resource Development, Provost/VP for Academic Affairs, Dean of Students, Human Resources, Strategic Plan representative) Convene meeting, review criteria, identify and address weaknesses Create smaller committee tasked with preparing application Identify point person to lead process and prepare application

Impact of the Application and Classification Provides a framework for understanding all service learning and civic engagement activities/initiatives on campus Legitimizes activities related to service learning and civic engagement and demonstrates the institution’s accountability to these efforts Articulates how a service learning program should be assessed

Impact of the Application and Classification Helps to ensure the development of sustained, high- quality partnerships Produces evidence that can lead to greater faculty participation Increases visibility and accountability for external funding Facilitates the gathering of essential knowledge for strategic planning

Changes to the 2015 Framework Questions on faculty rewards and changes in promotion guidelines will be moved out of the “supplemental questions” into the standard questions in the framework. Faculty rewards/promotion will now be considered as more significant. How can community colleges best address these topics, particularly without tenure policies?

Recommended Application Do’s and Don’ts Write coherently and cohesively.  Don’t have different people write different sections in different styles – it looks disorganized to reviewers. Don’t leave any section blank.  If something doesn’t exist, address how you plan to remedy it. Write up to the maximum character count, but don’t be redundant. Fill empty space if you have something to say. Reviewers may not be familiar with community colleges, so spell out and define particular programs and courses. Describe who your students are. If you can’t get past the initial sections, don’t apply now, but use the application to plan for 2020.

President’s Higher Education Community Service Honor Roll Stepping stone to Carnegie classification Annual application process Builds on Carnegie framework by focusing on institutional culture, commitment to service, and community impact 2012 guidelines emphasized program quality rather than quantity of participants, hours, etc. “Service as a solution”

Questions? Application process announced: January 2013 Registration deadline: May 1, 2013 Application released: September 9, 2013 Applications due: April 15, 2014 Classification results announced: January 2015 Carnegie classification contacts:  John Saltmarsh, NERCHE,  Amy Driscoll, CFAT,   engagement-classification/

Contact Us Gail Robinson, AACC  202/ John Saltmarsh, NERCHE  617/ Josh Young, Miami Dade College  305/