Why  Partner?  

Eric  Hartman  Assistant  Professor  of  Leadership  Studies,  Kansas  State  University  

 

Why  Partner?  

•  Student-­‐centered  • Community-­‐centered  • Knowledge-­‐centered    •  JusBce-­‐centered    

Why  Partner?   •  Enhance  Student  Learning  

•  Intrinsic  rather  than  extrinsic  moBvaBon  for  course  content  mastery  •  Develop  specific  professional  skills  and  capaciBes    •  Pro-­‐social  behaviors  and  aItudes  

• Contribute  to  Community    •  Harness  vast  human  resources  of  university  on  behalf  of  addressing  a  community  concern  (good  neighbor  partnering  through  donaBon  of  many  hours  of  un-­‐skilled  or  semi-­‐skilled  service)    •  Harness  specific  university  skills  and  capaciBes  in  targeted  ways,  such  as  developing  architectural  plans,  business  plans,  product  or  infrastructure  designs,  and  curricula    

Why  Partner?   • Develop  Knowledge  

•  Community  members’  key,  specific  insights  provide  the  best  way  forward  for  knowledge  development,  such  as  is  recognized  through  CPBR,  PAR,  CBR,  and  public  history  efforts    •  Community  members  also  hold  unique  insights  regarding  most  pressing  issues,  including  those  potenBally  addressed  through  social  entrepreneurship  

• Advance  Social  JusBce    •  The  historic  task  of  the  American  University  has  been  to  advance  democracy  through  increasing  understanding  of  other-­‐affiliaBon  and  moral  equality,  among  other  things;  this  can  only  be  accomplished  through  broad  community  engagement.  Related  -­‐      •  The  university  is  uniquely  posiBon  to  support  cross-­‐community  dialogue  on  our  collecBve  moral  aspiraBons,  or  determinaBon  of  what  we  will  become    

Partnership  Pa0erns  

• Charity,  Project,  Social  Change  •  ExploitaBve,  TransacBonal,  TransformaBonal  • Deepening  Reciprocity      

Service  is  a  process  of  integraBng  intenBon  with  acBon  in  the  context  of  a  movement  toward  a  just  relaBonship.      

 -­‐  Nadinne  Cruz,  as  quoted  in  Morton,  1995    

An  assump4on

• How  we  enter  service  and  community  partnership,  and  how  we  dialogue  about  that  process,  will  influence  not  only  community  development  and  quality  of  partnership,  but  also  student  learning,  student  development,  and  student  disposiBons  toward  service,  acBvism,  and  social  change.    

Charity   Project   Social  Change  De

scrip

5on   Direct,  immediate  relief;  o]en  

connected  to  individual  relaBonships  

Defining  problems  &  soluBons  &  implemenBng  well-­‐conceived  plans  for  their  resoluBon;  o]en  group  /  organizaBon  based  

Social  system  is  the  focus  of  change;  people  affected  by  the  changes  are  involved  in  making  that  change  

Strengths    

Tsedakah  –  anger  at  injusBce  provoking  one  to  remedy  that  injusBce;  spiritually-­‐based  service  that  bears  witness  to  the  worth  of  others    

No  soluBons  are  ulBmate;  focus  on  reasonable  approaches  to  measurable  acBon;  best  pracBce  includes  parBcipaBon  of  those  served;  builds  exisBng  efforts  

“We  organize  people  around  their  values  …  family,  dignity,  jusBce,  and  hope.  And  we  need  to  protect  what  we  value.”  Strong  ownership  of  community,  hope,  future.  

Weakn

esses   Does  not  address  root  causes;  

power  remains  with  the  servants;    

“ExperBse”  frequently  located  outside  community;  May  focus  excessively  on  management/  $  objecBves;  may  miss  root  causes    

Does  not  address  immediate  needs*    

Time   Out  of  Bme   Time-­‐bound,  specific,  potenBally  ongoing   Future  oriented,  imaginaBve  

Morton,  K.  (1995).  The  irony  of  service:  Charity,  Project,  and  Social  Change  in  Service-­‐Learning.  Michigan  Journal  of  Community  Service-­‐Learning,  2(1):  19  –  32.  

*not  menBoned  in  Morton,  1995  

Clayton,  P.,  Bringle,  R.G.,  Senor,  B.,  Huq,  J.,  Morrison,  M.,  (2010).  DifferenBaBng  and  assessing  relaBonships  in  service-­‐learning  and  civic  engagement:  ExploitaBve,  transacBonal,  or  transformaBonal.  Michigan  Journal  of  Community  Service-­‐Learning,  5  –  22.        

Morton,  K.  (1995).  The  irony  of  service:  Charity,  Project,  and  Social  Change  in  Service-­‐Learning.  Michigan  Journal  of  Community  Service-­‐Learning,  2(1):  19  –  32.  

Korten,  D.  (1990)  Ge:ng  to  the  21st  century.  West  HarRord,  CT:  Kumarian  Press.  

Reciprocity  

Exchange  Reciprocity   Influence  Reciprocity   Genera5vity  Recriprocity  

ParBcipants  give  and  receive  something  from  the  others  that  they  would  not  otherwise  have.  In  this  orientaBon,  reciprocity  is  the  interchange  of  benefits,  resources,  or  acBons.    

Outcomes  are  iteraBvely  changed  as  a  result  of  cooperaBve  influences  of  diverse  ways  of  knowing  and  doing.  Reciprocity  is  expressed  as  a  relaBonal  connecBon  that  is  informed  by  personal,  social,  and  environmental  contexts.    

ParBcipants  become  &/or  pro-­‐  duce  something  new  that  would  not  otherwise  exist.  The  collaboraBon  may  extend  beyond  the  iniBal  focus  as  outcomes,  as  ways  of  knowing,  and  as  systems  of  belonging  evolve  &  transform.    

Where  do  these  kinds  of  engagement  happen  at  this  ins4tu4on,  and  how  are  they  ins4tu4onalized?      

-­‐  Holland’s  rubric   -­‐  Examples  of  offices  and  ins4tu4onal  structures  that  support  both  transac4onal,  

project-­‐based  engagement,  as  well  as  ongoing  faculty  commitment,  rela4onships  and  transforma4onal  partnerships  with  community  organiza4ons