Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
  • Like
Sobrero, north carolina state u
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Now you can save presentations on your phone or tablet

Available for both IPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Sobrero, north carolina state u

  • 116 views
Published

 

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
116
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Strengthening the Scholarship of Engagement by Focusing on Faculty, Departments, and Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Decision Making Processes November 4, 2010 North Carolina State University Dr. Pat Sobrero, Associate Vice Chancellor, Extension, Engagement, and Economic Development, and Professor Dr. Ellis Cowling, University Distinguished Professor At-Large Emeritus
  • 2. 2 Agenda for Presentation • Study of the History and Culture of the Institution and Community • Using Democratic Methods to Include a Broad Range of Faculty, Staff, Students, and Stakeholders. • Share Recommendations through University Wide Symposia, Forums, and with Small Faculty Groups, Administrators, and Leaders. (Face-to-Face & Online) • Implement Recommendations from Reports to Strengthen the Integration of Learning, Discovery, and Engagement.
  • 3. 3 Engagement Movement • 1995 Dillman Study • 1995 North Carolina Progress Board • 1999 W. K. Kellogg Commission ØEngaged University ØEnvisioned reciprocal partnerships that were defined by mutual respect and mutual learning among collaborating partners. ØSeven Part Test of Engagement
  • 4. 4 Engagement Movement at NC State 1999 - “Commission of the Future of NC State” 2000 - Six Realms of Faculty Responsibility – Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure 2001 – Vice Chancellor for Extension, Engagement, and Economic Development 2006 – Carnegie Classification for both “Community Engagement” and “Outreach and Partnerships” by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching 2008 Community Engagement Classification2008 Community Engagement Classification
  • 5. UNC Tomorrow Report
  • 6. 6 Seven Goals of the UNC Tomorrow Initiative 1. Increase global readiness and competitiveness. 2. Improve access to higher education, especially for underserved populations and regions. 3. Help solve North Carolina’s continuing public educational challenges. 4. Enhance economic and community development everywhere in North Carolina. 5. Improve public health, wellness, and well being 6. Provide leadership in energy and environment. 7. Become more directly engaged and connected with the people of North Carolina.
  • 7. 7 Get On With It! - BEDI Benchmarking Economic Development Impacts January 2008 report See: http://www.ncsu.edu/extension/events/ documents/IES_Benchmark_FINAL.pdf
  • 8. 8 Essential Parts of the Logic Model INPUTS ACTIVITIES OUTPUTS SHORT-TERM OUTCOMES * LONG-TERM OUTCOMES IMPACT • Economic • Infrastructure • Resources • Empowerment • Enhanced Quality of Life
  • 9. 9 Engagement Program Categories • Logic models are useful in all categories • On what outcomes & societal impacts would you and your group like to be evaluated? Tech Transfer & Commercialization INPUTS ACTIVITIES OUTPUTS OUTCOMES IMPACTS Knowledge Creation/Transfer Discovery Classes & Programs Clinical & Testing Services Engagement Learning Co-Curricular Service Learning Technical & Expert Assistance University & Industry Cooperative Research Public Events & Understanding
  • 10. 10 BEDI-II BEDI-II Expanded the Scope to Include Non-monetary Quality of Life Impacts January 2010 report See: http://www.ncsu.edu/extension/events/ documents/Impact_2_fulldraft_1.pdf
  • 11. 11 “Community Capitals: A Tool for Evaluating Strategic Interventions and Projects” Cornelia Butler Flora, Mary Emery, Susan Fey and Carry Bregendahl North Central Regional Center for Rural Development Iowa State University
  • 12. Integrating Learning, Discovery, and Engagement through the Scholarship of Engagement • Task Force Co-Chaired by Natural Resource Scientist and Social Scientist (Cowling and Pennell) • Multi-disciplinary team with representation from NC State’s10 colleges & EEED units Colleges: § Agriculture and Life Sciences § Design § Education § Engineering § Humanities and Social Sciences § Management § Natural Resources § Physical and Mathematical Sciences § Textiles § Veterinary Medicine EEED Units: § Cooperative Extension § Economic Development Partnership Program § General Henry Hugh Shelton Leadership Initiative § Industrial Extension Service § McKimmon Center for Extension & Continuing Education § Small Business and Technology Development Center
  • 13. 13 Task Force Charge 1 Develop recommendations regarding Evidence of the Scholarship of Engagement that can be included in documentation developed for Faculty Annual Performance Reviews and for Decisions about Faculty Reappointments, Promotions, and Conferral of Tenure.
  • 14. 14 Task Force Charge 2 Develop recommendations regarding Institutional Performance Indicators that can be used to record and evaluate accomplishments in the scholarship of engagement across the various colleges, departments, and other units with NC State University.
  • 15. 15 Task Force Charge 3 Review and develop recommendations regarding the language currently being used to track engagement (integration of learning, discovery & engagement) and the language that should be used in the future to track engagement within NC State University’s Institutional research offices and budget offices.
  • 16. 16 Definition of Scholarship of Engagement The scholarship of engagement is the collaborative generation, refinement, conservation, and exchange of mutually beneficial and societally relevant knowledge that is communicated to and validated by peers in academe and the community.
  • 17. 17 What are Attitudes in Your Department toward Engagement? • Supportive – Very positive attitude but need to broaden understanding of engagement – Very positive. Need though to translate into scholarship and research • Variable Support – Treats engagement as a potential income stream [but] for P&T and faculty evaluation we mostly ignore engagement, treat it as a distraction from the real important business of research – Continuum from NO knowledge or respect for the work . . . to total respect for the scholarship of engagement • Unsupportive – Frustrated that it is so hard to make the case successfully – Need for shared discourse
  • 18. 18 Widening Concept of Scholarship • Challenging narrow definitions of academic scholarship, • Going beyond products of discipline-based research, • Identifying how the integrated scholarship creates a uniquely valuable intellectual environment. • Developing new knowledge through integration of learning, discovery and engagement.
  • 19. 19 Importance of “Values” and “Measures” Every truly outstanding university must “Measure what it values”, rather than “Value what it can readily measure”. Provost Kermit Hall, 1999
  • 20. 20 Values N.C. State Holds Dear “Above all, North Carolina State University values excellence and distinction in creative scholarship that facilitates the increase and diffusion of knowledge, wisdom, and the moral dimension of intelligence.” This statement now provides the foundation and definition for: Ø “Six Realms of Faculty Responsibility”, and Ø Individual Faculty “Statements of Mutual Expectations”
  • 21. 21 Six Realms of Faculty Responsibility 1. Teaching and Mentoring of Undergraduate and Graduate Students 2. Discovery of Knowledge Through Discipline-Guided Inquiring 3. Creative Artistry and Literature 4. Technological and Managerial Innovation 5. Extension and Engagement with Constituencies Outside the University 6. Service in Professional Societies and Service and Engagement Within the University Itself
  • 22. 22 Statement of Mutual Expectations Beginning in 2000-2003, individual faculty members worked with department heads to develop “Statements of Mutual Expectations” (SMEs) that: ØOutline mutually agreed upon aspirations of the faculty member and expected contributions to goals of the department, ØInclude approximate distribution-of-effort among one or more of “Realms of Faculty Responsibility,” ØAre used as part of criteria for decisions about salary increments, promotion, and conferral of tenure.
  • 23. 23 Integrating Learning, Discovery, and Engagement through the Scholarship of Engagement Report on the Scholarship Of Engagement Task Force See: http://www.ncsu.edu/exten sion/documents/SET2010. pdf
  • 24. 24 Recommendations Guidelines for Evaluation the Quality of Scholarship •The National Review Board Standards, p. 19 Scholarship of Engagement Criteria • Recommendation 1.d., page 20, and Appendix D., Page 36 (Glassick Standards) Institutional Performance Indicators • Pages 22-24, Appendix C, pages 32-33.
  • 25. 25 Recommendations Dossier Template • Appendix F, Pages 39-40. Language & Evaluation • Implement BEDI I & II Recommendations Scholarship of Engagement Exemplars • Appendix B., Pages 28-32.
  • 26. 26 Conclusions & Questions If we Integrate Learning, Discovery, and Engagement: • What are the next steps for each institution to continue to strengthen engagement and address the critical needs and issues of the people in society? • How do we strengthen multi-institution best practices, learning, and think-tank recommendations to address major societal issues? ØA National Academy of Community Engaged Scholarship?
  • 27. 27 For Continued Dialogue, Learning, and Collaboration: Contact: • Ellis Cowling, Co-Chair - ellis_cowling@ncsu.edu • Pat Sobrero - pat_sobrero@ncsu.edu
  • 28. 28 Eight Categories of Engagement Curricular in Classes and Programs • Courses and instructional programs that offer student academic credit hours, certificates of completion or continuing education units, or meet requirements of occupational licensure. • These classes have an outreach component if they are designed and marketed specifically to serve those who are neither traditional campus degree seekers nor campus staff. • It also includes civic or community service that students perform in conjunction with an academic course or program that incorporates frequent, structured, and disciplined reflection on the linkages between the activity and the content of the academic experience. • Other forms of experiential learning may include career-oriented practical and internships, or volunteer community service.
  • 29. 29 Eight Categories of Engagement Co-curricular Service Activities • Organized, extra-curricular civic or community service that NCSU students perform in addition to academic coursework or programs. (Examples: Student Affairs, University Scholars Program, Study Abroad) Knowledge Creation and Diffusion • Activities that develop, share, analyze, test and demonstrate new knowledge. Such activities are considered engagement when they are conducted in collaboration or partnership with external constituents. (Examples: Wood Science, Forestry Tree Improvement Cooperative, Center for Innovation Management Studies)
  • 30. 30 Eight Categories of Engagement Technology Transfer and Commercialization • Activities include applied research, capacity building, evaluation studies, policy analysis, demonstration projects, technology commercialization and technology transfer embedded in Intellectual Property. Such activities are considered engagement when they are conducted in collaboration or partnership with schools, health organizations, nonprofit organizations, businesses, industries, government agencies, and other external constituents. Most generally they are intended to directly impact external entities or constituents while developing new knowledge and commercial enterprises. (Examples: Office of Technology Transfer, Management, Innovation & Entrepreneurship, Networking Technology Institute)
  • 31. 31 Eight Categories of Engagement Clinical /Diagnostic and Testing Services • All client and patient (human and animal) care provided by university faculty through unit-sponsored group practice or as part of clinical instruction and by medical and graduate students as part of their professional education. For example, this may include medical/veterinary clinical practice, counseling or crisis center services, and tax or legal clinic services. University / Industry Research Programs • All collaborative and cooperative activities whereby university and multiple industries resources are pooled for shared results such as membership consortia and resource centers. Activities include applied research, capacity building, evaluation studies, policy analysis, demonstration projects, technology commercialization and techno
  • 32. 32 Logic Models • The task force employed logic models to determine outcomes leading to societal impacts. • Logic models are analytical tools widely used in many fields to envision the relationships between planned work and expected outcomes (changed societal behavior). • The WK Kellogg Foundation recommends the use of logic models to provide a visual roadmap so that stakeholders can fully participate in planning and evaluating programs. • Building logic models became a core function of engagement programs across the university.
  • 33. 33 Recommendations from our Faculty Task Force on the Scholarship of Engagement • Recommendation 1.a. -- Develop Statements of Mutual Expectations in the six realms of faculty responsibility that are relevant to: -- the Goals of the UNC Tomorrow Initiative, -- N.C. State University’s response to this Initiative, and -- N.C. State University’s current priorities.
  • 34. 34 Recommendations from our Faculty Task Force on the Scholarship of Engagement Recommendation 1.b. Connect the faculty’s Statements of Mutual Expectations to the departmental rules for reappointment, promotion, and tenure. Recommendation 1.c. Use the published (2002) criteria developed by the National Review Board for the Scholarship of Engagement in evaluating scholarly achievements in any discipline.
  • 35. 35 Recommendations from our Faculty Task Force on the Scholarship of Engagement • Recommendation 1.e. Create guidance for documenting extension and engagement program accomplishments in the RPT dossiers. • Recommendation 1.f. Promote faculty, staff, and students professional development in the scholarship of engagement. • Recommendation 1 g. Support faculty, staff, and student mentoring programs in the scholarship of engagement.
  • 36. 36 Recommendations from our Faculty Task Force on the Scholarship of Engagement • Recommendation 3. a. Recognize the importance of both economic and noneconomic social engagement impacts of university outreach, extension, and engagement programs. • Recommendation 3.g. Increase transparency regarding budget allocations and accounting procedures to support achievements in the scholarship of engagement.