Campus Outreach And Partnership Projects: Literature Review
According to Waterman (1997), there are a number of things which have motivated universities as well as colleges to exploit opportunities so as to come up with partnerships (campus-community) aimed towards bettering the common good of the neighboring communities. This includes but is not limited to the enhanced emphasis of involvement at the community level as well as service-learning emergence. This trend has helped in addressing a number of issues considered critical in affected communities.
Before I concern myself with the various needs the program is tailored to address as well as how to best measure performance amongst other issues including but not limited to the best methods for addressing the issues and the challenges encountered, a definition of campus-community partnerships would do.Jeffrey (2002) defines “Campus Outreach and Partnership Projects” as several relationships (interpersonal) fostered between two groups with the first group being made of administrators within a campus, the campus faculty, students as well as other members of staff.
The other group in this case is made up of community members, personell of various agencies as well as a host of community leaders. It is important to note that over time, campus personell as well as service-learning instractors have allocated a significant amount of time as well as resources towards the exploration of the dynamics and phases of these relationships. This has gone a long ay towards enhancing the quality of relationships and partnerships fostered between campuses and the neighboring communities.
The needs the program is designed to address
According to Jacob (2003), though the program is tailored to address both justice as well as charity issues, it ends up concerning itself too much on the former at the expense of the latter. In brief, charity comes about when resources flow from one community to another while on the other hand, justice is more about communal mutual resources and how they are distributed or shared amongst members of that community. Jacob (2003) is of the opinion that community-campus partnerships go a long way to enhance the relationship between groups of people which are largely diversified so as to come up with the best and most workable approaches in regard to addressing the various needs of communities including but not in any way limited to education, safety and health.
In so doing, the communities stand a higher chance of benefiting from sustainability and growth.The program is also designed to comprehensively address a significant level of misunderstanding the t tends to exist between community partners and institutions of higher learning. Jeffrey (2002) argues that there is a somewhat misplaced notion that institutions of higher learning ‘demand a lot’ from those whom they are in partnerships of sorts with i.e. the community partners. In that regard, the program is designed to enhance the willingness of community organizations to put service learning at the top of their priority listings.
Here, there is need to note that there are a number of strategies which can be invoked for that purpose. This includes allowing community members to have an input into the service-learning of each grouping of students undertaking the same. Further, it also crucial to note that that the design of Campus Outreach and Partnership Projects should incorporate measures tailored to facilitate the interaction between other institutions and associations and the community partners in such a way that enhancing change in the community becomes a concerted effort for all.
Performance measurement
When it comes to the measure of performance, Bradley (2004) is of the opinion that a wide range of tools can be utilized. To begin with, a mere observation of the project upon the community is enough measure which can be used to benchmark the program with others being undertaken by different partnerships. It is important to note that in this regard, the ability of outreach and partnership to address all the issues it set out to achieve can be used to pinpoint deviations from what has been planned.
Higher Education Research Institute (2002) notes that the identification of deviations is crucial as it allows corrective measured to be undertaken so as to address the deviation. Hence an evaluation of how the plans are being met is not only crucial when it comes to performance measurement but it also remains critical towards the identification of significant deviations.Another approach which can be undertaken so as to come up with a clear measure of performance is not only the extent of achievement as far as identified outcomes are concerned but also the extent to which the interests of the partners are addressed.
Bradley (2004) is of the opinion that to enhance the Campus Outreach and Partnership Projects, the reflection process must integrate all the community partners. This could be through engaging partners in informal discussions. One other advantage of this approach other than acting as a basis of performance evaluation is that it holds students back from theoretical postulations in isolation. Hence it goes a long way to ensure that students have a realistic picture of the goings on and hence they can be said to be well grounded in reality.
Further, performance measurement can also be executed by the facilitation of student learning as far as the partnership is concerned. Some of the aspects which according to Peterson (1998) can provide an important glimpse on how effective the whole exercise is include the performance of students as far as community-based research undertakings are concerned as well as the level of understanding students develop as regards the content of the program.Hence in this regard, it can be noted that performance measurement can be executed from either side. This can help in the realization of the effectiveness as well as appropriateness of the Campus Outreach and Partnership Projects.
Best practices for addressing the issue the program seeks to address and the challenges inherent
Waterman (1997) is of the opinion that Campus Outreach and Partnership Projects are more effective when there is a balance of sorts maintained between the contributions by the community and those by the campus and universities. The reciprocity in this case should be tailored to meet both the various needs the community identifies as well as the learning needs of students. Hence it is also important to recognize the critical role of the community as far as the educational needs of the students are concerned.
This is the reason why Waterman (1997) notes that the community should be taken as co-educators as far as the academic progression of students is concerned.Further, to effectively address all the concerns the program sets off to address, there are some key elements that cannot be taken for granted. This includes the role of planning, evaluation, supervision, training as well as orientation. Each of these important elements calls for significant communication amongst the various parties and the failure to manage the same in an effective process may end up sabotaging the entire project.
However, with that in mind, it may be noted that the nature of the project being undertaken is what determines the approach to be undertaken.Next, the importance of collaboration amongst all the partners involved cannot be overstated. According to Jacob (2003) the campus/community partnerships can be taken to be built on mutual understanding and trust. However, the very nature of these relationships is largely complex and therefore, the cultural factors at play should be fully comprehended. This is an issue echoed by Jeffrey (2002) who notes that there are some inherent cultural differences which exist as far as the community and institutions of higher learning are concerned.
This is largely in terms of how each entity synthesizes knowledge and addresses issues that arise.In the light of the cultural differences existing between institutions of higher learning and the communities surrounding them, it is critical to come up with a clear mission that brings out the specific goals as well as plans of each grouping. This could go a long way towards preparing partners on what is to be expected when it comes to dealing with each other. Lastly, the role of communication cannot be understated. This is largely between the community and the institution of higher learning staff.
References
Bradley, L. R. (2004). Planning your evaluation using the backwards design process. Columbus, OH: Ohio Department of Education.
Peterson, A. (1998). W. K. Kellog foundation evaluation handbook. Battle Creek, MI: W. K. Kellog Foundation
Higher Education Research Institute. (2002). Designing a student assessment study: The CIRP surveys and the input-environment-outcome model. Los Angeles, CA: Author.
Jeffrey, R. (2002). Higher education service-learning sourcebook. Greenwood Publishing Group
Jacob, B. (2003). Building partnerships for service-learning. John Wiley and Sons
Waterman, A.S. (1997). Service-learning: applications from the research. Routledge
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
