Winding Pathways to Engagement: Creating a Front Door

Lori E. Kniffin, T. Shaffer, M. Tolar
{"title":"Winding Pathways to Engagement: Creating a Front Door","authors":"Lori E. Kniffin, T. Shaffer, M. Tolar","doi":"10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0023.109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Service-learning and community engagement (SLCE) practitioner-scholars--meaning all who do the work of SLCE with a commitment to integrating practice and study--find avenues to this work in a variety of ways. Many of the thought leaders in this movement started as traditional scholars in their disciplines and, only in their later careers, focused on creating and enhancing SLCE on their own campuses and across the academy. Others first learned about SLCE as an epistemological framework and a pedagogy in graduate programs such as Curriculum and Instruction or Higher Education Leadership. Others came across it during their academic careers somewhat randomly in conversations with colleagues, at conferences, or in the literature. And still others began their journey to SLCE by working in the public sector (as did co-author Mary Tolar) with community organizations, as community organizers, or as social justice advocates. Members of a younger generation of practitioner-scholars have now experienced SLCE in undergraduate or graduate education and seek ways to integrate it into their academic or professional lives from the very beginning. The edited volume Publicly Engaged Scholars: Next Generation Engagement and the Future of Higher Education (Post, Ward, Longo, & Saltmarsh, 2016) highlights the emergence of this \"next generation\" of SLCE practitioner-scholars. It offers an intriguing contrast to the question raised twenty years ago by Edward Zlotkowski (1995) of whether SLCE had a future and, if so, what it would need to flourish. Looking back to that moment twenty years ago in his 2015 framing essay for the Service-Learning and Community Engagement Future Directions Project (SLCE-FDP), Zlotkowski notes that it was \"a good time to dream of a new era\" (p. 82); and he ponders what the forces currently shaping the academy and democracy in the U.S. mean for the SLCE movement. Publicly Engaged Scholars strongly suggests there is currently considerable momentum and excitement around a reimagined future for SLCE. The narratives of 22 engaged scholars from both the academy and the broader community (including co-author Timothy Shaffer) make clear the progress of SLCE in recent decades. And yet, they also reveal dissatisfaction with where we are today and call for continued evolution of the movement. The stories of these next generation practitioner-scholars, including their winding paths into SLCE, suggest to us the importance of supporting the ongoing development of the SLCE movement through more explicit, direct, formalized, and institutionalized points of entry into the work. Many of them went through the academy as graduate students and now work either on campuses or in communities across wide ranging professions. Indeed, graduate-level education is an increasingly common component of such journeys. It is not, however, an unambiguous point of entry to SLCE-related careers. Therefore, in this essay we call for increased attention to the potential of graduate education to serve as a doorway into SLCE. And we suggest the importance of designing graduate-level study with an eye to shaping how incoming SLCE practitioner-scholars understand and undertake the work (e.g., with an asset-based rather than a deficit-based orientation; as an integrated part of their lives rather than an add-on to other responsibilities). Co-author Lori Kniffin's own journey provides an example of the presently common winding path into SLCE taken by members of the next generation of practitioner-scholars: I experienced SLCE first as an undergraduate student in an introductory course in a leadership studies program. When I later joined the same department as a staff member and then as an instructor while completing my master's degree, I learned that the kind of SLCE I had experienced had a lot of room for improvement. I started participating in conversations to improve that course using best practices in the SLCE literature. …","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"89 1","pages":"91-95"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan journal of community service learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0023.109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Service-learning and community engagement (SLCE) practitioner-scholars--meaning all who do the work of SLCE with a commitment to integrating practice and study--find avenues to this work in a variety of ways. Many of the thought leaders in this movement started as traditional scholars in their disciplines and, only in their later careers, focused on creating and enhancing SLCE on their own campuses and across the academy. Others first learned about SLCE as an epistemological framework and a pedagogy in graduate programs such as Curriculum and Instruction or Higher Education Leadership. Others came across it during their academic careers somewhat randomly in conversations with colleagues, at conferences, or in the literature. And still others began their journey to SLCE by working in the public sector (as did co-author Mary Tolar) with community organizations, as community organizers, or as social justice advocates. Members of a younger generation of practitioner-scholars have now experienced SLCE in undergraduate or graduate education and seek ways to integrate it into their academic or professional lives from the very beginning. The edited volume Publicly Engaged Scholars: Next Generation Engagement and the Future of Higher Education (Post, Ward, Longo, & Saltmarsh, 2016) highlights the emergence of this "next generation" of SLCE practitioner-scholars. It offers an intriguing contrast to the question raised twenty years ago by Edward Zlotkowski (1995) of whether SLCE had a future and, if so, what it would need to flourish. Looking back to that moment twenty years ago in his 2015 framing essay for the Service-Learning and Community Engagement Future Directions Project (SLCE-FDP), Zlotkowski notes that it was "a good time to dream of a new era" (p. 82); and he ponders what the forces currently shaping the academy and democracy in the U.S. mean for the SLCE movement. Publicly Engaged Scholars strongly suggests there is currently considerable momentum and excitement around a reimagined future for SLCE. The narratives of 22 engaged scholars from both the academy and the broader community (including co-author Timothy Shaffer) make clear the progress of SLCE in recent decades. And yet, they also reveal dissatisfaction with where we are today and call for continued evolution of the movement. The stories of these next generation practitioner-scholars, including their winding paths into SLCE, suggest to us the importance of supporting the ongoing development of the SLCE movement through more explicit, direct, formalized, and institutionalized points of entry into the work. Many of them went through the academy as graduate students and now work either on campuses or in communities across wide ranging professions. Indeed, graduate-level education is an increasingly common component of such journeys. It is not, however, an unambiguous point of entry to SLCE-related careers. Therefore, in this essay we call for increased attention to the potential of graduate education to serve as a doorway into SLCE. And we suggest the importance of designing graduate-level study with an eye to shaping how incoming SLCE practitioner-scholars understand and undertake the work (e.g., with an asset-based rather than a deficit-based orientation; as an integrated part of their lives rather than an add-on to other responsibilities). Co-author Lori Kniffin's own journey provides an example of the presently common winding path into SLCE taken by members of the next generation of practitioner-scholars: I experienced SLCE first as an undergraduate student in an introductory course in a leadership studies program. When I later joined the same department as a staff member and then as an instructor while completing my master's degree, I learned that the kind of SLCE I had experienced had a lot of room for improvement. I started participating in conversations to improve that course using best practices in the SLCE literature. …
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
曲折的参与之路:创造一个前门
服务学习和社区参与(SLCE)从业者学者-意味着所有从事SLCE工作并致力于整合实践和研究的人-以各种方式找到这项工作的途径。这场运动中的许多思想领袖一开始都是各自学科的传统学者,只是在他们后来的职业生涯中,才专注于在自己的校园和整个学术界创造和加强SLCE。另一些人则是在课程与教学或高等教育领导等研究生课程中作为认识论框架和教学法首次了解到语言语言教学的。另一些人则是在学术生涯中,在与同事的交谈中、在会议上或在文献中偶然遇到的。还有一些人通过在公共部门(如合著者玛丽·托拉尔)与社区组织合作,作为社区组织者或社会正义倡导者,开始了他们的SLCE之旅。现在,年轻一代的从业者学者已经在本科或研究生教育中经历了SLCE,并从一开始就寻求将其融入学术或职业生活的方法。编辑的《公共参与学者:下一代参与和高等教育的未来》(Post, Ward, Longo, & Saltmarsh, 2016)强调了“下一代”SLCE从业者学者的出现。这与20年前爱德华·兹洛特科夫斯基(Edward Zlotkowski, 1995)提出的SLCE是否有未来,如果有,它需要什么才能蓬勃发展的问题形成了有趣的对比。回顾20年前的那个时刻,兹洛科夫斯基在2015年为“服务学习和社区参与未来方向项目”(SLCE-FDP)撰写的框架文章中指出,那是“梦想一个新时代的好时机”(第82页);他还思考了目前影响美国学术界和民主的力量对SLCE运动意味着什么。公共参与学者强烈建议,目前有相当大的动力和兴奋围绕着一个重新设想的未来SLCE。来自学术界和更广泛的社区的22位学者(包括合著者Timothy Shaffer)的叙述清楚了近几十年来SLCE的进展。然而,它们也揭示了我们对今天的现状的不满,并呼吁继续发展运动。这些下一代从业者学者的故事,包括他们进入SLCE的曲折道路,向我们表明了通过更明确、直接、正式和制度化的切入点来支持SLCE运动持续发展的重要性。他们中的许多人都是作为研究生毕业的,现在要么在校园工作,要么在各行各业的社区工作。事实上,研究生水平的教育是这种旅程中越来越普遍的组成部分。然而,它并不是进入slce相关职业的明确切入点。因此,在本文中,我们呼吁更多地关注研究生教育作为进入SLCE门户的潜力。我们建议设计研究生水平的学习,着眼于塑造即将到来的SLCE从业者-学者如何理解和承担工作(例如,以资产为基础而不是以赤字为基础的方向;作为他们生活中不可或缺的一部分,而不是其他责任的附加)。合著者Lori Kniffin自己的经历提供了一个例子,说明了下一代实践型学者进入SLCE的常见曲折之路:我第一次体验SLCE是在一个领导力研究项目的入门课程的本科阶段。当我后来作为一名职员加入了同一部门,然后在完成我的硕士学位时成为一名讲师时,我了解到我所经历的那种SLCE还有很大的改进空间。我开始参与对话,利用SLCE文献中的最佳实践来改进这门课程。…
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Title Pending 5477 Daniels, R., Shreve, G., & Spector, P. (2021). What Universities Owe Democracy. John Hopkins University Press. List of Reviewers Reviewers - Volume 27.2 Validation of S-LOMS and Comparison Between Hong Kong and Singapore of Student Developmental Outcomes After Service-Learning Experience
×
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