质疑影响的影响:评估基于情境、关系和过程的社区-校园参与

Charles Z. Levkoe, Lauren Kepkiewicz
{"title":"质疑影响的影响:评估基于情境、关系和过程的社区-校园参与","authors":"Charles Z. Levkoe, Lauren Kepkiewicz","doi":"10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0026.113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As community- campus engagement (CCE) continues to gain momentum, impact has increasingly been evaluated through qualitative measurements rooted in community- based perspectives. However, for CCE to have meaningful impact, it must challenge dominant power structures and work to create equitable relationships. This article explores efforts to better understand and evaluate the impacts of CCE. Based in our research on 12 place- based CCE projects that aimed to support food sovereignty in Canada, the findings highlight how evaluating impact needs to be contextual, relational, and process- based with a focus on how CCE contributes to or hinders broader social change. Two additional themes supporting increased impact also emerged: the development of collaborative knowledge and actions; and, building networks of CCE communities of practice. The research also identified the limitations of evaluating CCE impact when mea surements are pre- determined, top down, and are not rooted in community needs and perspectives. While we believe that evaluating impact can be a meaningful and important process, it is necessary to challenge assumptions that measuring impact is always desirable or possible.","PeriodicalId":93128,"journal":{"name":"Michigan journal of community service learning","volume":"36 12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Questioning the Impact of Impact: Evaluating Community-Campus Engagement as Contextual, Relational, and Process Based\",\"authors\":\"Charles Z. Levkoe, Lauren Kepkiewicz\",\"doi\":\"10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0026.113\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As community- campus engagement (CCE) continues to gain momentum, impact has increasingly been evaluated through qualitative measurements rooted in community- based perspectives. However, for CCE to have meaningful impact, it must challenge dominant power structures and work to create equitable relationships. This article explores efforts to better understand and evaluate the impacts of CCE. Based in our research on 12 place- based CCE projects that aimed to support food sovereignty in Canada, the findings highlight how evaluating impact needs to be contextual, relational, and process- based with a focus on how CCE contributes to or hinders broader social change. Two additional themes supporting increased impact also emerged: the development of collaborative knowledge and actions; and, building networks of CCE communities of practice. The research also identified the limitations of evaluating CCE impact when mea surements are pre- determined, top down, and are not rooted in community needs and perspectives. While we believe that evaluating impact can be a meaningful and important process, it is necessary to challenge assumptions that measuring impact is always desirable or possible.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93128,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Michigan journal of community service learning\",\"volume\":\"36 12 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Michigan journal of community service learning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0026.113\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan journal of community service learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0026.113","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

随着社区-校园参与(CCE)的势头不断增强,越来越多的影响通过基于社区视角的定性测量来评估。然而,CCE要产生有意义的影响,就必须挑战占主导地位的权力结构,并努力创造公平的关系。本文探讨了如何更好地理解和评估CCE的影响。基于我们对12个以地方为基础的CCE项目的研究,这些项目旨在支持加拿大的粮食主权,研究结果强调了如何评估影响需要上下文、关系和基于过程的,重点是CCE如何促进或阻碍更广泛的社会变革。支持增加影响的另外两个主题也出现了:发展协作性知识和行动;建立CCE实践社区网络。该研究还确定了评估CCE影响的局限性,当测量方法是预先确定的,自上而下的,而不是植根于社区的需求和观点。虽然我们认为评估影响可能是一个有意义和重要的过程,但有必要挑战衡量影响总是可取或可能的假设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Questioning the Impact of Impact: Evaluating Community-Campus Engagement as Contextual, Relational, and Process Based
As community- campus engagement (CCE) continues to gain momentum, impact has increasingly been evaluated through qualitative measurements rooted in community- based perspectives. However, for CCE to have meaningful impact, it must challenge dominant power structures and work to create equitable relationships. This article explores efforts to better understand and evaluate the impacts of CCE. Based in our research on 12 place- based CCE projects that aimed to support food sovereignty in Canada, the findings highlight how evaluating impact needs to be contextual, relational, and process- based with a focus on how CCE contributes to or hinders broader social change. Two additional themes supporting increased impact also emerged: the development of collaborative knowledge and actions; and, building networks of CCE communities of practice. The research also identified the limitations of evaluating CCE impact when mea surements are pre- determined, top down, and are not rooted in community needs and perspectives. While we believe that evaluating impact can be a meaningful and important process, it is necessary to challenge assumptions that measuring impact is always desirable or possible.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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