Š‡‘”›‘ˆŠƒ‰‡ 20*&HQWHUIRU&ROODERUDWLYH/HDUQLQJ
6HSWHPEHU
&DPSXV&RPSDFW7KHRU\RI&KDQJH Campus Compact seeks to educate citizens and build
communities
by advancing civic engagement and the civic purpose of higher education through a
national network of state affiliates, member institutions, and partners.
‡›–”ƒ–‡‰‹‡• 1$7,21$/675$7(*<
Promote and advance civic engagement through a national network of state affiliates, member institutions, and partners ¾ Set and promote a national agenda and direction for the network ¾ Build network capacity to support and carry out the national civic engagement agenda ¾ Build awareness about civic engagement and advance Campus ‘’ƒ…–ǯ•‹••‹‘ –‡”‡†‹ƒ–‡—–…‘‡• -­‐
–ƒ–‡ƒˆˆ‹Ž‹ƒ–‡•†‡‡’‡–Š‡‹”
‹†‹˜‹†—ƒŽƒ†…‘ŽŽ‡…–‹˜‡…ƒ’ƒ…‹–‹‡•
–‘’”‘‘–‡…‹˜‹…‡‰ƒ‰‡‡–ƒ––Š‡
‹•–‹–—–‹‘ƒŽǡ•–ƒ–‡ǡ”‡‰‹‘ƒŽǡƒ†
ƒ–‹‘ƒŽŽ‡˜‡Ž• Lead efforts to build and strengthen the civic purpose of higher education ¾ Work with the national Campus Compact office to identify national agenda issues, partners, and resources ¾ Build awareness about civic engagement and advance Campus ‘’ƒ…–ǯ•‹••‹‘ ¾ Build member institution capacity to implement civic engagement
-­‐
–ƒ–‡ƒˆˆ‹Ž‹ƒ–‡•Ž‡ƒ†‡ˆˆ‘”–•–‘
’”‘‘–‡–Š‡‡–™‘”ǯ•ƒ‰‡†ƒ
ƒ‘‰‡„‡”‹•–‹–—–‹‘•ǡ
•–ƒ–‡•ǡƒ†ƒ–‹‘ƒŽŽ› -­‐
‹˜‹…‡‰ƒ‰‡‡–‹•˜ƒŽ—‡†ƒ•ƒ
”‹–‹…ƒŽˆ—…–‹‘‘ˆŠ‹‰Š‡”‡†—…ƒ–‹‘ 67$7(675$7(*<
‘‰-­‐–‡”—–…‘‡• •–‹–—–‹‘•†‡˜‡Ž‘’‹ˆ”ƒ•–”—…–—”‡
ƒ†…ƒ’ƒ…‹–›–‘‹’Ž‡‡–ƒ†
•—’’‘”–…‹˜‹…‡‰ƒ‰‡‡–ƒ‘‰
•–—†‡–•ǡˆƒ…—Ž–›ǡƒ†
ƒ†‹‹•–”ƒ–‘”• -­‐
Š‡ƒ–‹‘ƒŽ•‘…‹ƒŽǡ’‘Ž‹–‹…ƒŽǡ
ƒ†‡…‘‘‹…Žƒ†•…ƒ’‡
•—’’‘”–•ƒ†’”‘‘–‡•…‹˜‹
‡‰ƒ‰‡‡– ‹˜‹…‡‰ƒ‰‡‡–‹•‡„‡††‡†
‹–Š‡…—Ž–—”‡ƒ†ˆ—…–‹‘‘ˆ
Š‹‰Š‡”‡†—…ƒ–‹‘‹•–‹–—–‹‘• ƒ’—•‡•ƒ†…‘—‹–‹‡•
‡•–ƒ„Ž‹•Š†‡‡’ǡ”‡…‹’”‘…ƒŽǡƒ†
•—•–ƒ‹ƒ„Ž‡’ƒ”–‡”•Š‹’• –—†‡–•…‘’Ž‡–‡…‘ŽŽ‡‰‡ƒ•
ƒ…–‹˜‡ƒ†‡‰ƒ‰‡†…‹–‹œ‡•
™‹–Š•‹ŽŽ•–‘‡ƒ…–…Šƒ‰‡
Ž‘…ƒŽŽ›ƒ†‰Ž‘„ƒŽŽ› Note about language: Dzivic enga‰‡‡–dzȋȌ‡…‘’ƒ••‡• the variety of terms used throughout the field, including community engagement, participatory action research, community service, and service-­‐learning. &DPSXV&RPSDFW7KHRU\RI&KDQJH
1DWLRQDOVWUDWHJ\3URPRWHDQGDGYDQFHFLYLFHQJDJHPHQWWKURXJKDQDWLRQDOQHWZRUNRIVWDWHDIILOLDWHVPHPEHULQVWLWXWLRQVDQGSDUWQHUV
6WDWHVWUDWHJ\/HDGHIIRUWVWREXLOGDQGVWUHQJWKHQWKHFLYLFSXUSRVHRIKLJKHUHGXFDWLRQ
&RQWH[W
$VVXPSWLRQV
Opportunities Strength and reach of the Campus Compact (CC) network: ¾ CC is the only national higher education association dedicated solely to campus-­‐based civic engagement (CE) ¾ The presence of affiliates in 34 states allows CC to leverage the knowledge and expertise of staff, implement state and multi-­‐state initiatives, and build a cohesive voice regarding CE ¾ ǯ•‡„‡”•Š‹’‘ˆapproximately 1200 college and university presidents provides a powerful and far-­‐
reaching network for advancing the CC mission ¾ CC has engaged more than 20 million students in CE, and participation rates keep rising Increased recognition of the value of civic engagement: ¾ ”‡•‹†‡–„ƒƒǯ•†—ƒŽ…ƒŽŽ•–‘‹…”‡ƒ•‡…‘ŽŽ‡‰‡…‘’Ž‡–‹‘”ƒ–‡•ƒ†ˆ‘”ƒ‰”‡ƒ–‡”†‡†‹…ƒ–‹‘–‘•‡”˜‹…‡
’”‘˜‹†‡ƒˆƒ˜‘”ƒ„Ž‡’‘Ž‹–‹…ƒŽ…Ž‹ƒ–‡ˆ‘”ǯ•™‘” ¾ Recent emphasis on college completion, and its connection to economic and workforce development, align with ǯ• mission and the demonstrated results of CE ¾ Increased attention to the value of CE by AAC&U and other organizations provide opportunities for partnerships ¾ Participation rates in service/CE among college students continue to rise Institutional commitment to support CE: ¾ Higher education practices of engagement and community partnership have grown in recent years, demonstrating increasing institutional will in support of CE ¾ Eighty three percent of 2011 CC annual survey respondents indicated that civic knowledge and engagement were included in their strategic plans ¾ In 2011, 98% of CC member institutions reported having at least one partnership with a community-­‐based organization ¾ ‹‡–›ˆ‹˜‡’‡”…‡–‘ˆǯ•‡„‡”‹•–‹–—–‹‘•”‡’‘rt having at least one office or center to coordinate CE initiatives Challenges ¾ Budget cuts at the state and federal levels have constrained resources at many colleges and community organizations ¾ Higher education institutions are dealing with numerous competing demands; program funding streams or operating agreements (for space on campus, etc.) are often cut or reduced ¾ A national focus on college completion and reducing student debt puts co-­‐ and extra-­‐curricular activities under scrutiny ¾ Expansion of onli‡†‡‰”‡‡’”‘‰”ƒ•ƒ†‘˜‡‡–ƒ™ƒ›ˆ”‘ƒ’Š›•‹…ƒŽDz…ƒ’—•dz™‹–Š‹ƒgeographic community challenges traditional models for 2-­‐ and 4-­‐year institutions ¾ ‹˜‹…‡‰ƒ‰‡‡–ǯ•—ƒ…‡† language may pose challenges to simple, cohesive messaging to current and potential stakeholders About the Campus Compact model ¾ Mobilizing a network of state affiliates is an effective strat‡‰›ˆ‘””‡ƒŽ‹œ‹‰ǯ•‹••‹‘ƒ†for carrying out a national agenda in local contexts ¾ A network of state affiliates with diverse approaches and strengths can effectively implement a national agenda ¾ The collective strength of the CC network relies on the strong organizational health of individual member institutions, state affiliates, the national CC office, and partners ¾ Partnerships with organizations working in CE or related fields are critical to advancing the civic purpose of higher education ¾ Building the capacity of higher education institutions and community partners is an effective approach to increasing meaningful CE ¾ Cultivating champi‘•–‘‡„”ƒ…‡ƒ†ƒ†˜‘…ƒ–‡ˆ‘”ǯ•‹••‹‘‹•…”‹–‹…ƒŽ–‘–Š‡‡–™‘”ǯ••—……‡•• ¾ ǯ•‘™Ž‡†‰‡, skills, and experience fill a resource gap for higher education institutions About higher education ¾ Institutions of higher education have a civic responsibility to: x educate students as responsible, socially-­‐ and politically-­‐engaged citizens who contribute to a functional democracy x act as socially responsible anchor institutions, working collaboratively within their communities to define and address the needs of those communities ¾ Higher education institutions possess a wealth of resources that can and should be used to improve society ¾ College and university presidents must lead efforts to embed CE in the culture and function of their institutions ¾ Faculty and senior administrators are essential to influencing change within higher education institutions ¾ Dedicated resources, including a well-­‐trained and adequately staffed team, are essential to institutionalizing CE within higher education institutions About student civic engagement ¾ Effective CE must focus on both student learning and community outcomes ¾ The integration of complementary, high quality CE experiences into course/academic curricula is an essential aspect of CE ¾ Student engagement with communities reinforces academic learning and encourages lifelong civic habits ¾ Students with meaningful CE experiences are more likely to become active citizens who work to improve communities ¾ CE is effective in helping students develop critical thinking, life, leadership, and career skills ¾ ‹…”‡ƒ•‡••–—†‡–•ǯ•‡•‡‘ˆ„‡Ž‘‰‹‰–‘–Š‡‹”Š‹‰Š‡”‡†—…ƒ–‹‘‹•–‹–—–‹‘•ǡ™Š‹…Š‹…”‡ƒ•‡•–Š‡
likelihood of completion ¾ Students have a desire to get involved on their campus and in local communities 1DWLRQDO6WUDWHJ\
3URPRWHDQGDGYDQFHFLYLFHQJDJHPHQWWKURXJKDQDWLRQDOQHWZRUNRIVWDWHDIILOLDWHVPHPEHULQVWLWXWLRQVDQGSDUWQHUV
Intermediate Outcomes
Activities
Set and promote a national agenda and direction for advancing civic engagement (CE) for the Campus Compact (CC) network Build awaren‡••ƒ„‘—–ƒ†ƒ†˜ƒ…‡ǯ•
mission: ¾ ”‘‘–‡ǯ•mission among college presidents, policymakers, funders, and the field ¾ Employ strategic communications to promote the value of CE and the national network agenda among key constituencies and the public ¾ Set and support a research agenda to advance the CE field (for case-­‐making, proof points, statements of impact) ¾ Serve as a clearinghouse for information about CE (e.g., promising approaches, research trends) ¾ Identify opportunities for policy change and advocate for state and federal policies that advance, support, and promote CE ¾ Identify advocacy allies; build strategic partnerships with these organizations and individuals ¾ Recognize and reward outstanding work of faculty, students, and contributors —‹Ž†–Š‡‡–™‘”ǯ•…ƒ’ƒ…‹–›–‘•—’’‘”–ƒ†…ƒ””›
out the national CE agenda within and across states, member institutions, and affinity groups: ¾ Work with state affiliates and partners to identify salient national agenda issues, strategic partners, and necessary resources ¾ Convene stakeholders to increase dialogue, resource sharing, and collaborative efforts ¾ Identify, develop, and share financial and other resources (e.g., academic literature/research, syllabi samples, program models and best practices) ¾ Provide organizational development support (e.g., consultation, technology infrastructure, fundraising support) ¾ Provide professional development (e.g., workshops, institutes, networking, conference presentations) ¾ Identify and coordinate innovative multi-­‐state and national pilot programs and initiatives FIELD-­‐LEVEL CHANGE: CE is valued as a critical function of higher education Increased awareness, commitment, and dedicated resources to CE by college presidents and other institutional leaders Expanded role for CC in the national CE and higher education dialogue Increased resources to higher education institutions nationally to support CE Increased number and diversity of campuses that embrace CE across the U.S. Increased collaboration and strategic partnerships among organizations working toward the promotion of CE Increased number and diversity of champions supporting CE, including policy makers, funders, and national and regional organizations STATE-­‐LEVEL CHANGE: State affiliates deepen their individual and collective capacities to promote CE at the institutional, state, regional, and national levels Increased state affiliate understanding of the national CE agenda and ability to support it Increased knowledge, skills, and resources to carry out state affiliate work and advance the Network agenda Increased use of best practices among state affiliates to support and promote CE efforts Increased alignment, coordination, and leverage of knowledge and resources among states Increased partnerships between state affiliates and with regional and national organizations to promote CE Increased participation in regional and national initiatives Long-term Outcomes
FIELD-­‐LEVEL CHANGE: The national social, political, and economic landscape supports and promotes CE CC is recognized as an innovative and influential voice in higher education and CE Increased public attention and dialogue regarding the importance of CE COMMUNITY CHANGE: Campuses and communities establish deep, reciprocal, and sustainable partnerships Institutions and communities work together to improve social and economic conditions Increased recognition of CE in academia including in accreditation standards and Carnegie Classifications Communities regard higher education institutions as contributors to a healthy, just, and democratic society State and federal policies support CE STUDENT CHANGE: Students complete Sustainable funding to encourage and support CE A majority of campuses in the US embrace CE Increased collaboration between organizations working on CE issues STATE-­‐LEVEL CHANGE: State affiliates lead efforts to promote the n‡–™‘”ǯ•ƒ‰‡†ƒ
among member institutions, states, and nationally State affiliates are critical partners in the advancement and implementation of CE among member institutions Increased leadership in state, regional, and national dialogue regarding the importance of CE college as active and engaged citizens with skills to enact change locally and globally Increased persistence and completion Increased critical thinking skills, knowledge, and commitment to address •‘…‹‡–›ǯ•‘•–’”‡••‹‰’”‘„Ž‡• Increased life and 21st century career skills, including communication, leadership, and interpersonal competencies Increased personal efficacy, spiritual and moral identity Increased cultural and racial understanding 6WDWHVWUDWHJ\
/HDGHIIRUWVWREXLOGDQGVWUHQJWKHQWKHFLYLFSXUSRVHRIKLJKHUHGXFDWLRQ
Activities
Work with the national Campus Compact (CC) office to identify salient national agenda issues, strategic partners, and necessary resources Build member institution capacity to implement civic engagement (CE): ¾ Convene stakeholders, including faculty, staff, presidents, institutional leaders, administrators, students, and community partners, to provide inter-­‐ and intra-­‐state networking opportunities, sharing of resources, and best practices ¾ Identify and provide financial and other resources (e.g., academic literature/research, sample syllabi, program models, and best practices) to faculty, staff, students, community partners, and college presidents ¾ Consult with campuses to provide technical assistance, help develop strategic plans, and support institutional alignment, faculty development, and CE assessment ¾ Provide professional development (e.g., workshops, institutes, networking, and conferences) to faculty, staff, students, community partners, and college administrators and presidents ¾ Develop and deliver programs to support student success Build awareness about CE and advance CCǯ•
mission: ¾ Promote the role of CE in higher education among college presidents, funders, policymakers, national organizations, and other stakeholders ¾ Build strategic partnerships with local, state, regional, and national stakeholders in support of the CE agenda ¾ Conduct, collect, publish, and disseminate research demonstrating best practices in CE ¾ Advocate for state and federal policies that support the mission of CC ¾ Recognize and reward outstanding work, leadership, commitment, and advocacy of students and student groups, faculty, Community Service Directors/staff, and community partners Intermediate Outcomes
INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE: Institutions develop infrastructure and capacity to implement and support CE among students, faculty, and administrators Increased awareness, commitment, and dedicated resources to CE by institutional leaders, faculty, and administration Increased support for, breadth and quality of CE efforts on campus and across departments: ¾ Increased number of staff and resources to support and implement CE programming, including the creation or enhancement of Centers or Institutes on campus ¾ Increased number and variety of CE opportunities for students ¾ Increased number of faculty who incorporate CE in their teaching and research ¾ Use of best practices in CE among faculty, staff, and administrators New and strengthened partnerships between campuses and community members/organizations FIELD-­‐LEVEL CHANGE: CE is valued as a critical function of higher education Increased resources to member institutions to support CE Increased number and diversity of campuses that embrace CE across the state and region Increased collaboration and strategic partnerships among higher education institutions and organizations working toward the promotion of CE Increased number and diversity of champions supporting CE, including policy makers, funders, and national and regional organizations Long-term Outcomes
I NSTITUTIONAL CHANGE: CE is embedded in the culture and function of higher education institutions Institutional policies and practices reflect a commitment to CE: ¾ Inclusion of CE in institutional mission and strategic planning ¾ Student and community voice are respected and recognized in institutional decision-­‐making process ¾ Review, promotion, and tenure policies recognize and reward faculty CE approaches ¾ Dedicated funding to support CE activities and initiatives ¾ Systems to evaluate and improve CE activities are in place, including assessing impact on student academic performance and progress ¾ All students have developmentally appropriate CE experiences aligned with student learning outcomes Institutions are socially responsible anchors in their communities: ¾ Day-­‐to-­‐day operations and administration (e.g., hiring practices, purchasing decisions, investments) reflect a commitment to the local community ¾ Community members have access to and utilize campus resources, staff, and current opportunities for CE ¾ Institutional resources (e.g., financial, human) are allocated to address community issues FIELD-­‐LEVEL CHANGE: The national social, political, and economic landscape supports and promotes CE Increased public attention and dialogue regarding the importance of CE Increased recognition of CE in academia including in accreditation standards and Carnegie Classifications COMMUNITY CHANGE: Campuses and communities establish deep, reciprocal, and sustainable partnerships Institutions and communities work together to improve social and economic conditions Communities regard higher education institutions as contributors to a healthy, just, and democratic society STUDENT CHANGE: Students complete college as active and engaged citizens with skills to enact change locally and globally Increased persistence and completion Increased critical thinking skills, knowledge, and commitment to address •‘…‹‡–›ǯ•‘•–’”‡••‹‰’”‘„Ž‡• Increased life and 21st century career skills, including communication, leadership, and interpersonal competencies Increased personal efficacy, spiritual and moral identity State and federal policies support CE Increased cultural and racial understanding Sustainable funding to encourage and support CE A majority of campuses in the US embrace CE Increased collaboration between higher education institutions and organizations working on CE issues