A Snapshot of Engaged Scholarship at the University of Memphis: 2012 Survey Results from the Engaged...

A Snapshot of Engaged Scholarship at the University of Memphis:2012 Survey Results from the Engaged Scholarship Faculty Committee

Study Goals1. To learn more about the scope and

reach of community involvement by faculty members at the University of Memphis.

2. To generate short and long term recommendations for advancing Engaged Scholarship at the University of Memphis.

Survey Administration and Sample Size A Qualtrics survey, designed by the Engaged

Scholarship Faculty Committee, was sent by the Provost’s office to all U of M faculty.

390 individuals responded; 248 surveys were completed in full.

This presentation reports data from the 248 completed surveys.

Sample Demographics: Gender

44%

54%

2%

FemaleMaleOther

Sample Demographics: Ethnicity

79%

9%

1%

5%6%

White

Black, not Hispanic

Hispanic

Did not identify

Years of Employment

44%

13%

21%

23%10+7 to 103 to 6Under 3

Academic Rank

26%

23%18%

16%

10%8%

ProfessorAssistant ProfessorAssociate ProfessorInstructorAdjunctOther

18% of respondents held administrative positions

Colleges & Schools Represented in Sample

College of Arts and Sciences 42%

College of Communications and Fine Arts 18%College of Education, Health, and Human Sciences 14%

Fogelman College of Business and Economics 11%

Herff College of Engineering 4%

Lowenberg School of Nursing 3%

University Libraries 2%

School of Communication Sciences and Disorders 2%University College 2%

Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law 1%

School of Public Health 1%

Tenure Status of Respondents

Not on Tenure-track42%

Tenured40%

On Tenure-track/untenured 18%

The Nature of Community Involvement

My Community Involvement Involves:

Outreach

Volunteerism

Reciprocal relationship between UofM and broader community

Community-based research

Applied research

Capacity-building among community members

Shared ownership of research process with community members

Community-university partnership that led to peer-reviewed publications, impact, or external

funding

67%

57%

71%

44%

43%

64%

26%

37%

What Issues Do You Work On In Your Community-Based Research?

Other

Transportation

Public Safety

Public Policy

Poverty

Parks and Recreation

Neighborhood Development

Minority Issues

Legal

Labor

Housing

Health and Well-being

Faith-based

Environment and Conservation

Empowerment

Education

Economic Development

Cultural Heritage

City Planning

Children and Youth

Art

Architecture and Design

Aging

19%

7%

9%

9%

14%

13%

16%

23%

5%

5%

10%

31%

14%

15%

17%

45%

15%

16%

10%

3%

9%

6%

6%

Respondent Examples of Community Involvement

Demonstrating U of M Faculty Collaboration, Applied Research, Capacity-Building, External Funding, Reciprocity, and Shared Ownership of Results

Example of Community Involvement“I have worked on the Living Wage Campaign, drafted a non-discrimination ordinance for County and City employees, and drafted an Anti-bullying bill for the TNGA.”

Example of Community Involvement“As part of NIH grant (2004-2011) and a grant from the TBR Diversity Office, we worked with Memphis City Schools in neighborhoods with large Hispanic populations. We conducted longitudinal research in elementary schools. Currently, as part of a US Dept. of Education grant, we have developed a clinic with onsite Spanish-English interpreters to better serve the Hispanic community. As part of this grant, we have reached out to area clinics, physicians, churches, and Latino Memphis, to make the community aware of the services we are now able to provide. The response has been very positive…”

Example of Community Involvement

“Held, along with students of architecture at the U of M, design charettes with members of communities to allow citizens the opportunity to make suggestions, offer solutions, and generate buy-in in the design of their community. Furthermore, work with other civic groups to determine the best ways to plug citizen groups into the fulfillment of the community masterplan.”

Examples of Community Partners AmeriCorps ArtsMemphis Baptist Hospice BRIDGES USA Central Arkansas Water City of West Memphis Friends of T.O. Fuller Germantown Performing Arts Centre

Youth Symphony Orchestra Livable Memphis Make a Splash Mid-South Swimming

Program The Med Memphis Advisory Council for the

Hearing Impaired Memphis Area Legal Services Memphis Arts Festival Memphis Grizzlies

Memphis Police Department Blue C.R.U.S.H

Methodist Hospitals Mid-South Reads Pink Palace Shelby County Government Shelby Farms Park Conservancy St. Jude Research Hospital Memphis City Schools TN Parks and Greenways Tipton County Schools Urban Land Institute U.S. Attorney’s Project Safe

Neighborhoods Westwood Neighborhood Association Workers Interfaith Network Youth Villages

Developing Civically Engaged Students

Providing Service-Learning Opportunities for Students

49% of faculty incorporate, or have incorporated, service-learning within their classes.

84% of instructors who include service-learning do so at least once a year.

Mentoring Students in Community-Based Work 49% of faculty have mentored students

in completion of community-based internships or practica.

Undergraduate and graduate students are pursuing these experiences at a similar rate.

Example of Service-Learning

“…I took my students to their neighborhood clean ups to do service and related it to urban sociology and Broken Windows theory.”

Example of Collaborative Research

“[I] involved students in [an] urban policy course in [the] analysis of policy issues in housing, homelessness, [and] health access in partnership with neighborhood associations and nonprofit agencies.”

Examples of Mentoring

“...All funded students must plan and conduct some sort of community outreach …that involves issues pertaining to cultural and linguistic diversity.”

“Students teach art in community settings as part of course requirements. We meet as a team with community representatives and plan appropriately.”

Respondent Views on the University’s Commitment to Engaged Scholarship

Engaged Scholarship at U of M: Involves academic projects that engage faculty members

and students in a collaborative and sustained manner with community groups.

Connects university outreach endeavors with community organizational goals.

Furthers reciprocal relationships between the University and the community.

Entails shared authority in the research process from design to implementation.

Results in excellence through such products as peer-reviewed publications, peer-reviewed collaborative reports, documentation of impact, and external funding.

57% of respondents currently participate in engaged scholarship, or have in the past

Another 30% would like to do so in the future

Faculty’s first exposure to the principles of Engaged Scholarship?

36% at the University of Memphis

20% as a graduate student at another institution

12% as an undergraduate student at another institution

Does the U of M indicate a commitment to community engagement as a priority in its mission statement or vision?

60% Responded YES

Does the U of M Administration Value and Reward Engaged Scholarship?

35% said YES

24% said to Some Extent

Does the U of M formally recognize community engagement through awards and celebrations?

40%

23%18%

28%

YesNoDon't knowTo some extent

Does the U of M have mechanisms in place to assess community perceptions of U of M community engagement?

11%

19%

63%

7%

YesNoDon't KnowTo some extent

Does the U of M have a campus-wide coordinating infrastructure to support and advance engaged scholarship?

11%

15%

58%

16%YesNoDon't knowTo some extent

Assessment of Engaged Scholarship at U of M Most faculty know that engaged

scholarship is part of the university mission (60%)

Many faculty are either conducting (57%) or would like to conduct engaged scholarship(additional 30%)

Further Assessment of Engaged Scholarship at U of M The majority of respondents are involved

in community partnerships (65-68%).

However, fewer meet all the criteria of the U of M definition of engaged scholarship, especially with respect to shared authority and the production of peer-reviewed publications, policy change, or external funding.

Perceptions of U of M Support for Engaged Scholarship Most faculty do not feel engaged scholarship is

widely rewarded on campus (only 35% feel that it is).

Most faculty do not believe engaged scholarship is supported through on-campus infrastructure (only 11% report infrastructure exists).

Most faculty do not believe engaged scholarship is assessed for its value in the wider community (only 11% believe assessment procedures are in place).

RecommendationsTop Priorities of Survey Respondents

Respondent Priorities

Establishing a campus-wide Center for Community Engagement was a top priority for Survey respondents (57%).

Other Respondent Recommendations: Highlight ES in recruitment and fundraising

materials Provide ES mentors for less experienced faculty Provide a variety of financial incentives Make ES a priority in faculty hiring Develop an institutional strategy for tracking for

ES

Recommendations by Engaged Scholarship Faculty CommitteeShort Term (9-12 months)

Centralization/Coordination

Shore up infrastructure and build future capacity through Provost-level support for:

Recurring funds to support faculty component of Strengthening Communities Initiative

Graduate Assistantship dedicated to ESFC

Campus visits by nationally-recognized ES leaders to share best practices to enhance ES at the U of M

Faculty Development

Increase awareness of engaged scholarship:

Develop a “brief” for ES website as a reference for faculty and community partners

Undertake meetings with departments and/or small groups of faculty to advance understanding of engaged scholarship

Institutional Tracking

Establish baseline understanding of faculty and student involvement in ES:

Identify institutional resources where data can be tracked to generate annualized reports of service learning and engaged scholarship

Recommendations by Engaged Scholarship Faculty CommitteeMid-Term (within 24 months)

Centralization/Coordination

Establish an Office/Center for Community Engagement

Faculty DevelopmentGrow number of faculty conducting engaged scholarship:

Develop ES faculty mentoring program Provide small financial incentives for

faculty doing service learning related to ES

Institutional Tracking Institutionalize tracking mechanisms for

student and faculty doing service learning and/or ES

Designation of service learning courses in course catalogue

Recommendations by Engaged Scholarship Faculty CommitteeLong Term (2-5 years)

Centralization/Coordination

Ensure Office/Center is staffed and funded in a sustainable and integrated way

Faculty Development Broaden involvement of faculty across

all Colleges and Schools

Institutional Tracking

Formalize and standardize tracking of ES across all Colleges and Schools

ESFC Survey Team Keri Brondo Katherine Lambert-Pennington Linda Bennett Michael Hagge Robert Connolly

Questions? Contact: kbrondo@memphis.edu or almbrtpn@memphis.edu