pathways of public service and civic engagemen 30 presentation.pdf · pathways of public service...
Post on 26-May-2020
2 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Pathways of Public Service and Civic Engagement
AD VA N C I N G T H E F I E L D T H R O U G H A SO C I A L CH A N G E FR A M E W O R K A N D C O L L A B O R AT I V E TO O L
A A C & U G E N E D C O N F E R E N C E , S A N F R A N C I S C O , F E B R U A R Y 1 5 , 2 0 1 9
Overview
• Review of tool and framework
• Preliminary data highlights
• Small group discussion: Using the tool
• Application with national initiatives
• Closing and next steps
Pathways of Public Service and Civic Engagement
• Evolution and rationale
• Piloting and modifying a Pathways tool
• Broad applicability across higher education
• Relevance for students, faculty, and staff
Pathways of Public Service and Civic Engagement
Community Engaged Learning and Research: Connecting coursework and academic research to community-identified concerns to enrich knowledge and inform action on social issues.
Community Organizing and Activism: Involving, educating, and mobilizing individual or collective action to influence or persuade others.
Direct Service: Working to address the immediate needs of individuals or a community, often involving contact with the people or places being served.
Philanthropy: Donating or using private funds or charitable contributions from individuals or institutions to contribute to the public good.
Policy and Governance: Participating in political processes, policymaking, and public governance.
Social Entrepreneurship and Corporate Social Responsibility: Using ethical business or private sector approaches to create or expand market-oriented responses to social or environmental problems.
Pathways 3.0 Vision
• Someop'ons:
• Examplestailoredfordifferentinterests
• Accompaniedbyac'vity
• Comparestudentresponses
• Pilotscheduledforspring/summer2019
8
Private Institutions Brown University Cedar Crest College Duke University Duquesne University Edgewood College George Washington University Gonzaga University Juniata College Lawrence University Loyola University Chicago Pacific University Pepperdine University St. Mary's College of California St. Norbert College Stanford University Tulane University University of Chicago University of San Francisco University of Southern California Whitworth University
Campus Compacts Iowa Campus Compact Utah Campus Compact Wisconsin Campus Compact
Public Institutions Bellevue College Dutchess Community College Gateway Technical College Oregon State University Palo Alto College Salt Lake Community College State University of New York at Binghamton University of California - Merced University of California - San Diego University of Delaware University of Maryland - Baltimore County University of Minnesota - Twin Cities University of Pittsburgh University of Texas at Austin University of Utah University of Wisconsin Colleges University of Wisconsin - Madison University of Wisconsin - Parkside University of Wisconsin – Stout Weber State University East China Normal University University of Western Australia
Past and Present Institutions
Preliminary Data Highlights – Participating Institutions (2017-2018)
• Nine public institutions (n=320, 22%)
• Fifteen private institutions (n=1078, 74%)
• One state Campus Compact (n=57, 4%)
Female58%
Male28%
Declinetoanswer13%
Nonbinary/Nonconfor
ming1%
Distribu'onbyGender,n=1455
Profile of Respondents
Freshman39%
Sophomore23%
Junior13%
Senior13%
GraduateStudent
3%(blank)9%
Distribu'onbyYear,n=1455
Declinetoanswer18%
No36%
Yes46%
Distribu'onbyFaithTradi'on,n=1455
Limitations • Students’ perceptions – self-reported
• Uniform exposure
• Imperfect typology
• Multiple uses
• Non-random sample
• Not currently designed for pre and post (identifying students), focused on changes between cohort
• Snapshot of trends in time
Data Trends • Gender: F (685), M (295) o Females more experienced in 3 Pathways o Females more interested except 1 o Females perceived impact and expressed self-impact
Data Trends • Faith: Y(665), N(531)
• Y more interested and have more experience in Philanthropy than N
• First Generation: Y(395), N/A(1060) • Y recognize personal strengths in COA
• Pell Grant: Y(234), N/A(1221) • Y are more interested and consider COA more
impactful
17%
3%
6%
3%
26%
34%
31%
23%
9%
3%
40%
37%
49%
46%
40%
49%
17%
26%
20%
26%
49%
49%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Philanthropy
Social Entrepreneurship & CSR
Policy & Governance
Community Organizing & Activism
Community Engaged Learning & Research
Direct Service
Interest in Pathways, 2018 Branner (n=35)
None Very Little Some A Lot
Mean1-43.46
3.34
2.91
2.89
2.86
2.57
Stanford’s Branner Residence Hall
14%
9%
6%
9%
3%
46%
54%
46%
34%
46%
20%
40%
37%
49%
57%
51%
80%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Social Entrepreneurship & CSR
Philanthropy
Community Engaged Learning and Research
Community Organizing & Activism
Direct Service
Policy & Governance
Perceived Impact of Pathways, 2018 Branner (n=35)
None Very Little Some A Lot
Mean1-43.80
3.49
3.49
3.43
3.29
3.26
Top 1 Mental Health 7 Inclusion / Access to Opportunities 6 Sexual Assault / Violence 5
Issues / Concerns Facing Your Campus (n=33)
Issues / Concerns Facing Your Local Region (n=34) Top 1
Housing / Gentrification 9 Economic Inequality 7 Racial Inequality / Racism 4
Top 1 Economic Inequality 10 Environment / Climate Change 9 Politics / Apathy 4
Issues / Concerns Facing the World (n=33)
Example of Use at Branner Residence Hall
Discussion
How do you think this framework might give students more agency?
How might you envision using this
tool at your campus to prepare students for self-directed civic life?
• Student advising • Program development • Research
› Cohort – pre/post › Demographic differences › Institutional types › Longitudinal › Others?
• Community partner perspectives
Current and Potential Uses
Pathways and National Initiatives • AAC&U LEAP Initiative
• AAC&U Civic Prompts: Civic Learning in the Majors
• Campus Compact Civic Action Plans
• Carnegie Community Engagement Classification
top related