A Snapshot of
Engaged
Scholarship at the
University of
Memphis:
2012 Survey Results from the
Engaged Scholarship
Faculty Committee
Study Goals
1.
2.
To learn more about the scope and
reach of community involvement by
faculty members at the University of
Memphis.
To generate short and long term
recommendations for advancing
Engaged Scholarship at the University of
Memphis.
Survey Administration and
Sample Size

A Qualtrics survey, designed by the Engaged
Scholarship Faculty Committee, was sent by
the Provost’s office to all U of M faculty.

390 individuals responded; 248 surveys were
completed in full.

This presentation reports data from the 248
completed surveys.
Sample Demographics: Gender
2%
44%
54%
Female
Male
Other
Sample Demographics: Ethnicity
1% 5%
9%
6%
White
79%
Black, not
Hispanic
Hispanic
Did not identify
Years of Employment
23%
44%
10+
7 to 10
3 to 6
21%
Under 3
13%
Academic Rank
8%
10%
26%
Professor
Assistant Professor
16%
Associate Professor
Instructor
23%
18%
Adjunct
Other
18% of respondents held administrative positions
Colleges & Schools Represented
in Sample
College of Arts and Sciences
College of Communications and Fine Arts
College of Education, Health, and Human Sciences
Fogelman College of Business and Economics
Herff College of Engineering
Lowenberg School of Nursing
University Libraries
School of Communication Sciences and Disorders
University College
Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law
School of Public Health
42%
18%
14%
11%
4%
3%
2%
2%
2%
1%
1%
Tenure Status of Respondents
Not on Tenure-track
Tenured
On Tenure-track/untenured
42%
40%
18%
The Nature of Community
Involvement
My Community Involvement Involves:
Community-university partnership that led to peer-reviewed
publications, impact, or external funding
Shared ownership of research process with community
members
37%
26%
Capacity-building among community members
Applied research
Community-based research
64%
43%
44%
71%
Reciprocal relationship between UofM and broader community
Volunteerism
Outreach
57%
67%
What Issues Do You Work On In Your
Community-Based Research?
Aging
6%
Architecture and Design
6%
Art
Children and Youth
9%
3%
City Planning
10%
Cultural Heritage
16%
Economic Development
15%
Education
45%
Empowerment
17%
Environment and Conservation
15%
Faith-based
14%
Health and Well-being
31%
Housing
10%
Labor
5%
Legal
5%
Minority Issues
23%
Neighborhood Development
16%
Parks and Recreation
13%
Poverty
14%
Public Policy
9%
Public Safety
9%
Transportation
Other
7%
19%
Respondent Examples of
Community Involvement
Demonstrating U of M Faculty Collaboration,
Applied Research, Capacity-Building, External
Funding, Reciprocity, and Shared Ownership of
Results
Example of Community
Involvement
“I have worked on the Living Wage
Campaign, drafted a non-discrimination
ordinance for County and City employees,
and drafted an Anti-bullying bill for the
TNGA.”
Example of Community
Involvement
“As part of NIH grant (2004-2011) and a grant from
the TBR Diversity Office, we worked with Memphis
City Schools in neighborhoods with large Hispanic
populations. We conducted longitudinal research in
elementary schools. Currently, as part of a US Dept.
of Education grant, we have developed a clinic with
onsite Spanish-English interpreters to better serve the
Hispanic community. As part of this grant, we have
reached out to area clinics, physicians, churches,
and Latino Memphis, to make the community aware
of the services we are now able to provide. The
response has been very positive…”
Example of Community
Involvement
“Held, along with students of architecture at the
U of M, design charettes with members of
communities to allow citizens the opportunity to
make suggestions, offer solutions, and generate
buy-in in the design of their community.
Furthermore, work with other civic groups to
determine the best ways to plug citizen groups
into the fulfillment of the community
masterplan.”
Examples of Community Partners















AmeriCorps
ArtsMemphis
Baptist Hospice
BRIDGES USA
Central Arkansas Water
City of West Memphis
Friends of T.O. Fuller
Germantown Performing Arts Centre
Youth Symphony Orchestra
Livable Memphis
Make a Splash Mid-South Swimming
Program
The Med
Memphis Advisory Council for the
Hearing Impaired
Memphis Area Legal Services
Memphis Arts Festival
Memphis Grizzlies















Memphis Police Department Blue
C.R.U.S.H
Methodist Hospitals
Mid-South Reads
Pink Palace
Shelby County Government
Shelby Farms Park Conservancy
St. Jude Research Hospital
Memphis City Schools
TN Parks and Greenways
Tipton County Schools
Urban Land Institute
U.S. Attorney’s Project Safe
Neighborhoods
Westwood Neighborhood Association
Workers Interfaith Network
Youth Villages
Developing Civically
Engaged Students
Providing Service-Learning
Opportunities for Students
 49%
of faculty incorporate, or have
incorporated, service-learning within their
classes.
 84%
of instructors who include servicelearning do so at least once a year.
Mentoring Students in
Community-Based Work
 49%
of faculty have mentored students in
completion of community-based
internships or practica.
 Undergraduate
and graduate students
are pursuing these experiences at a
similar rate.
Example of Service-Learning
“…I took my students to their neighborhood
clean ups to do service and related it to
urban sociology and Broken Windows
theory.”
Example of Collaborative
Research
“[I] involved students in [an] urban policy
course in [the] analysis of policy issues in
housing, homelessness, [and] health access
in partnership with neighborhood
associations and nonprofit agencies.”
Examples of Mentoring
“...All funded students must plan and
conduct some sort of community outreach
…that involves issues pertaining to cultural
and linguistic diversity.”
“Students teach art in community settings
as part of course requirements. We meet as
a team with community representatives
and plan appropriately.”
Respondent Views on the
University’s Commitment
to Engaged Scholarship
Engaged Scholarship at U of M:





Involves academic projects that engage faculty members and
students in a collaborative and sustained manner with
community groups.
Connects university outreach endeavors with community
organizational goals.
Furthers reciprocal relationships between the University and the
community.
Entails shared authority in the research process from design to
implementation.
Results in excellence through such products as peer-reviewed
publications, peer-reviewed collaborative reports,
documentation of impact, and external funding.
 57% of respondents currently participate in
engaged scholarship, or have in the past
 Another 30% would like to do so in the future
Faculty’s first exposure to the principles
of Engaged Scholarship?
 36%
at the University of Memphis
 20%
as a graduate student at another
institution
 12%
as an undergraduate student at
another institution
Does the U of M indicate a
commitment to community
engagement as a priority in its
mission statement or vision?
60% Responded YES
Does the U of M Administration
Value and Reward Engaged
Scholarship?
35% said YES
24% said to Some Extent
Does the U of M formally recognize
community engagement through
awards and celebrations?
28%
40%
Yes
No
18%
23%
Don't know
To some extent
Does the U of M have mechanisms in
place to assess community perceptions
of U of M community engagement?
7% 11%
19%
Yes
No
63%
Don't Know
To some extent
Does the U of M have a campus-wide
coordinating infrastructure to support
and advance engaged scholarship?
16%
11%
15%
Yes
No
58%
Don't know
To some extent
Assessment of Engaged
Scholarship at U of M
 Most
faculty know that engaged
scholarship is part of the university mission
(60%)
 Many
faculty are either conducting (57%)
or would like to conduct engaged
scholarship(additional 30%)
Further Assessment of
Engaged Scholarship at U of M
 The
majority of respondents are involved
in community partnerships (65-68%).
 However,
fewer meet all the criteria of the
U of M definition of engaged scholarship,
especially with respect to shared authority
and the production of peer-reviewed
publications, policy change, or external
funding.
Perceptions of U of M Support
for Engaged Scholarship

Most faculty do not feel engaged scholarship is
widely rewarded on campus (only 35% feel that it
is).

Most faculty do not believe engaged scholarship
is supported through on-campus infrastructure
(only 11% report infrastructure exists).

Most faculty do not believe engaged scholarship
is assessed for its value in the wider community
(only 11% believe assessment procedures are in
place).
Recommendations
Top Priorities of Survey Respondents
Respondent Priorities
 Establishing a campus-wide Center for
Community Engagement was a top priority for
Survey respondents (57%).
Other Respondent Recommendations:





Highlight ES in recruitment and fundraising
materials
Provide ES mentors for less experienced faculty
Provide a variety of financial incentives
Make ES a priority in faculty hiring
Develop an institutional strategy for tracking for ES
Recommendations by
Engaged Scholarship Faculty
Committee
Short Term (9-12 months)
Centralization/Coordination
Shore up infrastructure and build future
capacity through Provost-level support for:

Recurring funds to support faculty component
of Strengthening Communities Initiative

Graduate Assistantship dedicated to ESFC

Campus visits by nationally-recognized ES
leaders to share best practices to enhance ES
at the U of M
Faculty Development
Increase awareness of engaged scholarship:

Develop a “brief” for ES website as a
reference for faculty and community partners

Undertake meetings with departments and/or
small groups of faculty to advance
understanding of engaged scholarship
Institutional Tracking
Establish baseline understanding of faculty
and student involvement in ES:
 Identify
institutional resources where data
can be tracked to generate annualized
reports of service learning and engaged
scholarship
Recommendations by Engaged
Scholarship Faculty Committee
Mid-Term (within 24 months)
Centralization/Coordination
 Establish
an Office/Center for Community
Engagement
Faculty Development
Grow number of faculty conducting
engaged scholarship:
 Develop
ES faculty mentoring program
 Provide small financial incentives for
faculty doing service learning related to
ES
Institutional Tracking
 Institutionalize
tracking mechanisms for
student and faculty doing service learning
and/or ES
 Designation
of service learning courses in
course catalogue
Recommendations by Engaged
Scholarship Faculty Committee
Long Term (2-5 years)
Centralization/Coordination
 Ensure
Office/Center is staffed and
funded in a sustainable and integrated
way
Faculty Development
 Broaden
involvement of faculty across all
Colleges and Schools
Institutional Tracking
 Formalize
and standardize tracking of ES
across all Colleges and Schools
ESFC Survey Team
 Keri
Brondo
 Katherine Lambert-Pennington
 Linda Bennett
 Michael Hagge
 Robert Connolly
Questions? Contact: kbrondo@memphis.edu or
almbrtpn@memphis.edu