The Irish Carnegie Community Engagement Classification Pilot: A critical analysis on culture and context from a community of practice approach

IF 0.9 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Gateways-International Journal of Community Research and Engagement Pub Date : 2021-05-18 DOI:10.5130/IJCRE.V14I1.7343
Lorraine McIlrath, Céire Broderick, Mary McDonnell Naughton, M. Kelly
{"title":"The Irish Carnegie Community Engagement Classification Pilot: A critical analysis on culture and context from a community of practice approach","authors":"Lorraine McIlrath, Céire Broderick, Mary McDonnell Naughton, M. Kelly","doi":"10.5130/IJCRE.V14I1.7343","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article provides a reflective critique of the process undertaken to pilot the Carnegie Community Engagement Framework in Ireland between 2015 and 2016. Of particular interest to the authors is the cultural specificity of employing a US-centric selfassessment data capturing tool in a heterogeneous Irish context. Taking the reader through from conception of the idea to its execution and post-pilot reflections, we examine the cultural appropriateness and translatability of the tool to Irish higher education. To frame the discussion of the process, we employ the concept of a community of practice, as defined by Wenger (1998). This was adopted to promote a culture of collaboration in an ever-growing neoliberal system that promotes competition between institutions, rather than facilitating their co-construction of knowledge. In the analysis, we demonstrate how forming this community of practice allowed for a cohesive assessment of the challenges and opportunities that arose through the pilot process. This was particularly important since each participating institution had different motivations for engaging with the pilot. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTING INTEREST The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. FUNDING The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. 1 Reflecting with some distance, we consider the value that comes from operating as a community of practice, as well as some shortcomings that we identified as specific to this pilot.","PeriodicalId":53967,"journal":{"name":"Gateways-International Journal of Community Research and Engagement","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gateways-International Journal of Community Research and Engagement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5130/IJCRE.V14I1.7343","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This article provides a reflective critique of the process undertaken to pilot the Carnegie Community Engagement Framework in Ireland between 2015 and 2016. Of particular interest to the authors is the cultural specificity of employing a US-centric selfassessment data capturing tool in a heterogeneous Irish context. Taking the reader through from conception of the idea to its execution and post-pilot reflections, we examine the cultural appropriateness and translatability of the tool to Irish higher education. To frame the discussion of the process, we employ the concept of a community of practice, as defined by Wenger (1998). This was adopted to promote a culture of collaboration in an ever-growing neoliberal system that promotes competition between institutions, rather than facilitating their co-construction of knowledge. In the analysis, we demonstrate how forming this community of practice allowed for a cohesive assessment of the challenges and opportunities that arose through the pilot process. This was particularly important since each participating institution had different motivations for engaging with the pilot. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTING INTEREST The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. FUNDING The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. 1 Reflecting with some distance, we consider the value that comes from operating as a community of practice, as well as some shortcomings that we identified as specific to this pilot.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
爱尔兰卡内基社区参与分类试点:从实践社区的角度对文化和背景进行批判性分析
本文对2015年至2016年在爱尔兰试行卡内基社区参与框架的过程进行了反思。作者特别感兴趣的是在异质爱尔兰背景下采用以美国为中心的自我评估数据捕获工具的文化特殊性。我们将带领读者从概念到执行和试点后的反思,考察该工具在爱尔兰高等教育中的文化适当性和可译性。为了构建这个过程的讨论框架,我们采用了温格(1998)定义的实践社区的概念。这是为了在一个不断发展的新自由主义体系中促进合作文化,这种体系促进了机构之间的竞争,而不是促进它们共同构建知识。在分析中,我们演示了如何形成这个实践社区,以便对试点过程中出现的挑战和机遇进行有凝聚力的评估。这一点尤其重要,因为每个参与机构参与试点的动机不同。利益冲突声明作者声明在本文的研究、作者身份和/或发表方面没有潜在的利益冲突。作者在研究、撰写和/或发表本文时未获得任何经济支持。1经过一定距离的反思,我们考虑了作为一个实践社区运作所带来的价值,以及我们认为该试点特有的一些缺点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
28.60%
发文量
5
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊最新文献
Stroke Community Rehabilitation Centre (SCORE): A community transformation program Oral health education for school children and capacity building of local community health workers in cleft care: An experience of student-led community service in a West Java village Voice, Choice and Power: Using co-production to develop a community engagement strategy for an ethnically diverse community Gardening education in early childhood: Important factors supporting the success of implementing it Re-imagining the research article: Social-semiotic signposts and the potential for radical co-presence in the scholarly literature
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1