Engaging University and Community
Partners for Positive Change
Presentation by:
Phil Nyden
Loyola University
Chicago
Center for Urban
Research and
Learning
Overview
CURL model
barriers to university-community partnerships
factors that break down barriers and facilitate
partnerships
what is the attractiveness to collaborative
research? …to faculty? …to students? …to
universities? …to community partners?
what strategies can be used to promote and/or
create strong, sustained partnerships?
Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research & Learning
???
Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research and
Learning (CURL)
Collaborative Research Model
not research on the
community, but
research with the
community
recognizes knowledge in the
university and knowledge in the
community
“adds chairs” at the research
table
Community as partners at all
levels of research
conceptualization
designing the methodology
collecting data
analyzing data
writing reports
dissemination of results
Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research & Learning
CURL Team-Based Research &
Action Projects
faculty
graduate students
undergraduate students
community organization leaders/
staff/members
CURL staff
Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research & Learning
What are the barriers to
effective communityuniversity partnerships?
Barriers: the discipline defines
research priorities
university-based
research focuses on
furthering knowledge
in the discipline
social change is not
the primary goal
the theoretical is
favored over the
practical
Barriers: Community-based
research is seen as biased
without unbiased “outside”
researchers, data analysis
might be manipulated to
serve political ends
involving “representatives” of the population
to be studied in the research process raises
potential of bias in collecting data
Barriers: Community-based
research is perceived as parochial
research is seen as
limited in scope and less
powerful in its application
traditional academic
culture gives higher
value to the “national or
global” than to the
“local”
Barriers: Tenure and promotion
guidelines
publications and contributions to
“the field” favored over impact
on society
“demonstrated contributions to the improved
quality of life in society” not generally a
category on the balance sheet
indifference and even hostility to community
engagement
Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research & Learning
Barriers: Community’s past
experience with university research
 only the object of research, not a participant in
research
 limited practical relevance to community
development or improved service delivery
 more of thumbs up/thumbs down evaluation
research of existing programs

Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research & Learning
On the other hand, there are factors
that can break down barriers and
facilitate partnerships
For the community, collaborative
partnerships have potential for
building increased capacity
gain familiarity with the research process;
knows how to manage research
develop independent research skills
improve practices in community organizations
For the community, collaborative
partnerships have potential for
building increased capacity
move from research to action: gets
information into hands of constituencies
For the university, partnerships
also build capacity
promote interdisciplinary
research
create a stimulating
environment for faculty and students
engage in research that is used and does not sit
on a library shelf
increase visibility of university in community,
region, nation, world
For the university and the
community, partnerships are
beneficial
integrate university and community
knowledge into the learning environment
build an environment where learning takes
place in multiple directions
provide an understanding of connection
among knowledge, power, and social change
produce an understanding of what is possible.
For university faculty,
partnerships...
provide a “real” environment for
teaching and learning
produce a dynamic learning environment
with challenges, unpredictability, &
constant questioning (the qualities of a
good classroom)
For university faculty,
partnerships...
open the door to more
research opportunities than
can be completed in lifetime
give access to significant
research funding and
publication opportunities
For university students, working
in university-community
partnerships provide...
an antidote for civic disengagement
you can have an impact
demystifies the policy
making process
For university students, working
in university-community
partnerships helps to...
gives a real face to social issues; they
are no longer academic abstractions
see connections among disciplines
A Closer Look at
Center for Urban Research and
Learning (CURL)
Support for team members
faculty fellowships
graduate fellowships
undergraduate--fellowships and course
credit
community fellowships
CURL staff
Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research & Learning
Funding
government-funded grants
foundation-supported projects
endowment
leveraging university resources
matching resources for faculty released time
student fellowship awards and course credit
volunteer time
Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research & Learning
Examples of CURL
Collaborative
University-Community
Projects
CURL Project: What creates and
sustains racially/ethnically diverse
communities?
concept emerged from activistresearcher discussions
solution-focused, not problemfocused
policy maker and activist
attention
media interest in research
Center for Urban Research & Learning
CURL Project: What creates and
sustains racially/ethnically diverse
communities?
two-types of communities:
diverse by design
diverse by circumstance (new immigrant groups)
changing way advocates promote
diversity
connection to work on sustaining mixedincome communities
CURL Project: Impact of Welfare
Reform on Mixed-Income
Communities
idea developed from breakfast meetings
with different community partners
linked CURL with advocacy organization
and traditional social service agency
three reports and impact on state
legislation
CURL Project: Developing
Culturally Sensitive Approaches
to Addressing Domestic Violence
community organization was aware
of CURL’s other collaborative work
needed evaluation of impact of its
programs
CURL Project: Developing
Culturally Sensitive Approaches to
Addressing Domestic Violence
connection to national network of
organizations serving South Asian
community
exploring expansion of project:
international
organizations serving women in other ethnic
communities
CURL Project: Documenting
Changes in Affordable Housing
gentrifying community
arguments among developers, affordable
housing advocates, and city re: extent of
affordable housing loss
CBO lobbied state representative to
provide funding for study
Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research & Learning
CURL Project: Documenting
Changes in Affordable Housing
advisory committee
from all sectors of
community
data from report
viewed as credible by
all involved
other communities
interested in research
Tenure and Occupancy in Uptown
Census 2000
Renter Occupied Units
72%
Vacant Units For Rent
61%
Vacant Units
5%
Vacant For Sale
8%
"Other" Vacant Units
25%
Owner Occupied Units
23%
Vacant Units Rented or
Sold
6%
Creating a regional network
to promote universitycommunity/government
partnerships
Policy Research Action Group
(PRAG)
Created in the late 1980s
 developed from the “grassroots” by activist faculty and
community leaders
 collaborative research model
 four universities
 more than 15 community partners
 over 175 collaborative projects
 www.luc.edu/depts/curl/prag
Policy Research Action Group
(PRAG)
produced an environment of collaboration in
Chicago
collaborative and “participatory research” still
minority research approaches, but this
provided visibility and a support network
became a “self-help” network
 contributed to the development of more than six
collaborative centers in Chicago
 if funding disappears, still have network now
Lessons learned in
building and sustaining
partnerships
Lessons learned in building and
sustaining partnerships
start small
concentrate on projects that will produce
tangible outcomes, not just the process itself
develop “interdependent partnerships”
 accomplish end results that individuals or individual
institutions could not achieve on their own
 organize/match expertise to produce a sum that is greater
than its parts
recruit people who are committed to the
project and the process
Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research & Learning
Lessons learned in building and
sustaining partnerships
create a partnership culture
everyone shares credit
help each other promote work in their
work/institutional setting
open environment: welcome new members to
partnership (individual/institutional)
create trust
Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research & Learning
Lessons learned in building and
sustaining partnerships
 harness the tensions of universitycommunity/government
relationships
 both academics and community activists
willing to criticize and argue—this is OK, it
provides…
 different perspectives helpful in understanding
complex issues
 a more complete knowledge base
 also, it is not community-driven research or
university-driven research; it’s collaborative
research
Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research & Learning
Lessons learned in building and
sustaining partnerships
develop resources to sustain the collaboration
 political support (from institutional leaders)
 funding
 grants
 endowments
 income/funding from multiple sources (diversification)
 fellowships—university (faculty & students) and community
 ongoing centers/networks
 staff dedicated to developing & sustaining collaboration
 “leverage” other resources with what funding/resources you do get
Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research & Learning
Lessons learned in building and
sustaining partnerships
 understand that individuals are
motivated to participate by factors
other than just money
 collaborations enable
participants…
 to become part of social-change process
 to connect with like-minded colleagues
 to join a support network which provides
guidance on research projects
Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research & Learning
Some strategies for building on
strengths and overcoming obstacles
visibility and
information sharing
publications
web presence
reports
books
periodicals
Some strategies for building on
strengths and overcoming obstacles
media attention
Some strategies for building on
strengths and overcoming obstacles
working groups
researchers &
practitioners
citywide or regional
Some strategies for building on
strengths and overcoming obstacles
doing “political work” within disciplines
visibility of collaborative methods
“translating research” for use by practitioners
building a following of people
experienced in partnerships
emphasizing that this is
“research with a constituency”
Strategies for change: change hiring &
tenure and promotion
procedures/guidelines
 reduce discipline-bound control of faculty personnel
policies
 increase university-wide incentives to promote
engaged scholarship.
 creating a national and international networks of
peers to judge faculty doing collaborative research
 service as a primary, not residual, evaluation
category
Strengthen existing or create new
collaborative centers that can serve
multiple functions as …
institutional advocates for collaborative
research
places where multiple collaborative efforts
can be concentrated and made more visible
brokers of information and resources
technical assistance centers for collaborative
projects
Creating new collaborative centers
that can serve multiple functions as …
alternative socialization
venues for faculty
students, and community
partners
conveners of
collaborative researchers
to discuss ongoing
projects
Loyola University of Chicago
Center for Urban Research & Learning
Gains have been made in promoting
collaborative research in
universities & the community, but
there is still substantial work to be
done.