The Wisdom of Community-Campus Partnerships Barbara A. Holland Senior Scholar, IUPUI Director, National Service-Learning Clearinghouse

The State of Engagement Lots going on; hard to get a grasp on quantity, quality, logic, impact of partnerships Growing institutional differentiation Over-reliance on soft money Growing academic legitimacy; e.g., accreditation standards; Carnegie classifications plateau of faculty participation and interest

State of Engagement #2 We understand partnership characteristics; questions remain about reciprocity, power, shared resources Infrastructure, curriculum and partnerships are fundamental to institutionalization Engagement as response to current fiscal crisis Academic culture changing globally – engagement is core to the future

Community College Challenges Growing enrollment Declining funding Renewing mission and identity in increasingly diverse communities Development of new leadership Retention/completion/transfer success Responding to changing student needs AAHE, 2005

Can a greater commitment to engagement and service-learning help address these challenges? To what degree should service-learning be part of the experience of our students?

Education for civic responsibility, development of job skills, and preparation for transfer to a four- year institution are not mutually exclusive outcomes. Louis Albert, 2005 In combination, these outcomes strengthen the college and community as well as the student. Barbara Holland, today.

Partnership Wisdom Effective campus-community partnerships can transform students, institutional quality and spirit, and community capacity. Partnerships are fundamental to successful engagement and service- learning. Truth-telling: Partnerships are high effort/high benefit!

Effective Partnerships (HUD) Joint exploration of goals and interests and limitations Creation of a mutually rewarding agenda Operational design that supports shared leadership, decision-making, conflict resolution, resources Clear benefits and roles for each partner Identification of opportunities for early successes for all; shared celebration of progress Focus on knowledge exchange, shared learning and capacity-building Attention to communications patterns, cultivation of trust Commitment to continuous assessment of the partnership itself, as well as outcomes

CCPH Partnership Principles Mission, values, goals, outcomes Trust, respect, commitment Focus: strengths, assets, areas for improvement Balanced power, shared resources Clear, open communication Roles, norms, processes (mutually designed) Feedback for continuous improvement Shared credit for accomplishments Investment of time needed to develop and evolve

CIC Core Elements of Partnerships Mutually-determined goals and processes Shared resources, rewards, risks Roles reflect partner capacities and resources Respect for expertise of each partner Sufficient benefits to justify cost/effort/risk Shared vision/excitement/passion Accountability for carrying out plans Commitment to benefits for all partners

Partnership Types Service relationship – fixed time, fixed task Exchange relationship – exchange info 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

“Partnerships, at any level, have to be seen first and foremost as moral frames within which individuals meet, work, and establish common purposes, not as pragmatic political treaties between institutions.” Hugh Sockett, 1998

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 assessment and documentation –To experiment; to fail; to try again – To Trust!

Partner Perspectives Motivations –Teaching students about CBO world and the issue-at-hand –Inspiring an activist spirit –Keeping students in the community –Positive impact on clientele, especially youth –Access to special expertise; capacity/skills not otherwise available

Partnership Perspectives Partners want to: –Ensure student meet learning objectives Distinguish SL from other experiential forms –Align activity with student ability –Collaborate with faculty –Contribute to student evaluation –Understand their roles/responsibilities –Enhance impact on their mission –Meet other partners

Benefits to Institution In ways aligning with current challenges Resonates with adult and first-gen students – active learning with consequences Greater and more diverse local enrollment Retention Career/major choice Connects student, faculty and community in work toward a common good Strengthens public support – postsecondary education as a public good

Current Core Challenges? Greater attention to reciprocity Power,Culture/Race Resources: sources and distribution Evaluation/documentation strategies Visibility for this work: internal and external Institutionalization – Leadership commitment, faculty development, hard-funded infrastructure, curricular connections

Ways to Move Ahead Increase visibility-internally & externally –Assess, document, publicize Recruit allies – PR, development, IR, alumni, community leaders Celebrate successes- Let partners and students tell their stories Be political – searches, curricular reform, accreditation, strategic planning Link to learning goals & faculty development Link to public support - demonstrate education’s role in creating public good

Contact Information Barbara A. Holland, Ph.D. Director, National Service-Learning Clearinghouse And Senior Scholar Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis Phone: