Matching Items (3)
Description
This dissertation examines the conditions that foster or hinder success of university-based community design centers (CDCs) in the United States. Little is known about the normative underpinnings of CDCs, how successful these centers have been, which factors have contributed to or impeded their success, and how they have responded to the changes in social, political, professional and economic contexts. Adopting Giddens' theory of structuration as a research framework, this study examined CDCs via a mixed-methods sequential research design: a cross-sectional survey of CDCs on current definitions of success and metrics in use; and in-depth interviews to document the centers' histories of change or stasis, and how these changes influenced their successes. The findings of the first phase were utilized to develop a comprehensive success model for current CDCs that comprise measures related to organizational impacts, activities, and capacities. In the multiple case study analysis, four major rationales were identified: universities for public service, pragmatist learning theories, civic professionalism, and social change. These four rationales were evident in all of the studied cases at varying degrees. Using the concept of permeability, the study also exemplified how the processes of CDCs had transformative impacts in institutional, societal, and personal contexts. Multidisciplinarity has also emerged as a theme for the current organizational transformations of CDCs. The main argument that emerged from these findings is that it is not possible to identify a singular model or best practice for CDCs. The strengths and unique potentials of CDCs depend on the alternative rationales, involved agencies, and their social, political and spatial contexts. However, capitalizing on the distinctive attributes of the institutional context (i.e. the university), I consider some possibilities for university-based CDCs with an interdisciplinary structure, pushing the professional, curricular, and institutional boundaries, and striving for systemic change and social justice. In addition to contributing to the theoretical knowledge base, the findings provide useful information to various CDCs across the country, particularly today as they struggle with financial constraints while the community needs they provide are increasingly in demand. Since CDCs have a long history of community service and engagement, the findings can inform other university-community partnerships.
ContributorsTural, Elif (Author) / Ahrentzen, Sherry (Thesis advisor) / Meunier, John (Committee member) / Yabes, Ruth (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
In a contemporary socioeconomic context that pushes universities toward a more neoliberal agenda, some are answering a call to reinvest in the public purpose of higher education. Their strategies increasingly integrate teaching, research, and service through university-community partnerships. Within this movement, several initiatives aim to support a qualitative transformational shift toward a more egalitarian paradigm of collaboration. However, the literature and knowledge-building around these aims is largely insular to higher education and may be insufficient for the task. Thus, this study situates these aspirations in the community development literature and theories of power to better conceptualize and operationalize what is meant by reciprocal, mutually-beneficial approaches to university-community partnerships.
First, a theoretically grounded analytical framework was developed using both higher education and community development literatures to build two ideal-typical approaches to community practice characterized by power-over versus power-with. Within power-over, the institution exclusively holds authority, control, and legitimacy. Power-with is built through partnerships that share these elements with communities. Second, the resulting theoretical framework was developed further through a multi-stage deductive-inductive content analysis of written data readily available from university websites about their community partnerships. This process operationalized the framework by identifying and clarifying specific indicators within the power-over and power-with ideal-types.
The analytical framework was then compared to the aspirational community empowerment goals found in materials about the Carnegie elective classification for Community Engagement and materials from both the Anchor Initiatives Task Force and Anchor Initiatives Dashboard Learning Cohort. This comparative analysis found that while these initiatives aspire to transform power dynamics between universities and communities, they are vague on the meaning of these practices and their antitheses. This gap in clarity hinders these initiatives from distinguishing transformative work from the status quo, potentially inadvertently allowing the perpetuation of power-over dynamics in university-community partnerships.
The more robust analytical framework developed herein will enable these initiatives to better assess the quality of university-community partnerships against the aspirations of equity, social justice, democratic practice, mutual respect, shared authority, and co-creation. Such assessment will enable more effective knowledge-building toward transformational practice.
First, a theoretically grounded analytical framework was developed using both higher education and community development literatures to build two ideal-typical approaches to community practice characterized by power-over versus power-with. Within power-over, the institution exclusively holds authority, control, and legitimacy. Power-with is built through partnerships that share these elements with communities. Second, the resulting theoretical framework was developed further through a multi-stage deductive-inductive content analysis of written data readily available from university websites about their community partnerships. This process operationalized the framework by identifying and clarifying specific indicators within the power-over and power-with ideal-types.
The analytical framework was then compared to the aspirational community empowerment goals found in materials about the Carnegie elective classification for Community Engagement and materials from both the Anchor Initiatives Task Force and Anchor Initiatives Dashboard Learning Cohort. This comparative analysis found that while these initiatives aspire to transform power dynamics between universities and communities, they are vague on the meaning of these practices and their antitheses. This gap in clarity hinders these initiatives from distinguishing transformative work from the status quo, potentially inadvertently allowing the perpetuation of power-over dynamics in university-community partnerships.
The more robust analytical framework developed herein will enable these initiatives to better assess the quality of university-community partnerships against the aspirations of equity, social justice, democratic practice, mutual respect, shared authority, and co-creation. Such assessment will enable more effective knowledge-building toward transformational practice.
ContributorsTchida, Celina V (Author) / Knopf, Richard C. (Thesis advisor) / Buzinde, Christine N (Committee member) / Feeney, Mary K. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
Universities and community organizations (e.g., nonprofit organizations, schools, government, and local residents) often form partnerships to address critical social issues, such as improving service delivery, enhancing education and educational access, reducing poverty, improving sustainability, sharing of resources, research, and program evaluation. The efficacy and success of such collaborations depends on the quality of the partnerships. This dissertation examined university-community partnership (UCP) relationships employing stakeholder theory to assess partnership attributes and identification. Four case studies that consisted of diverse UCPs, oriented toward research partnerships that were located at Arizona State University, were investigated for this study. Individual interviews were conducted with university agents and community partners to examine partnership history, partnership relationships, and partnership attributes. The results revealed several aspects of stakeholder relationships that drive partnership success. First, university and community partners are partnering for the greater social good, above all other reasons. Second, although each entity is partnering for the same reasons, partnership quality is different. University partners found their community counterparts more important than their community partners found them to be. Third, several themes such as credibility, institutional support, partner goodwill, quality interpersonal relationships have emerged and add descriptive elements to the stakeholder attributes. This study identifies aspects of UCPs that will be contextualized with literature on the subject and offer significant contributions to research on UCPs and their relational dynamics.
ContributorsSmith, Kendra Lindsay (Author) / Knopf, Richard C. (Thesis advisor) / Desouza, Kevin C (Committee member) / Larsen, Dale (Committee member) / Roscoe, Rod D. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015