Civic Engagement

Audience:

This resource is for instructors who wish to infuse civic engagement into their courses or begin the discussion of civic engagement within the curriculum.

Overview

Civic engagement, service learning, community-based learning, and experiential work within a community are often mentioned within the same contexts but do seek to meet different goals. Depending upon the intended audience, the people doing the work, as well as course-based vs. program-based nature, each of these kinds of civic engagement may have a better fit in different institutions and programs.

What’s the difference?

  • Civic Engagement[ref]The National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement. 2012. “A Crucible Moment: College Learning & Democracy’s Future.” Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. https://www.aacu.org/crucible. [/ref]: Often referred to as the umbrella term that encompasses aspects of the following: service learning, community-based learning, experiential work with the community. It is also considered an AAC&U High-Impact Practice.
  • Service Learning[ref]Blouin, David D., and Evelyn M. Perry. “Whom Does Service Learning Really Serve? Community-Based Organizations’ Perspectives on Service Learning.” Teaching Sociology 37, no. 2 (April 2009): 120–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X0903700201. [/ref]: According to Billie Hara, “Service learning activities, help students balance what they are learning in a classroom, what they may already know, and what the community can teach them,[ref]Hara, Billie. “Service Learning (for Students).” The Chronicle of Higher Education Blogs: ProfHacker (blog), July 8, 2010. https://www.chronicle.com/blogs/profhacker/service-learning-for-students/25360.[/ref]” but the word: “service” has some connotations that are carried over from high-school or work with faith-based organizations, so some instructors choose other language like “civic engagement projects”/”community-based learning.”
  • Community-Based Learning [ref]Fisher, Kirsten, Claudia Kouyoumdjian, Bidhan Roy, Valerie Talavera-Bustillos, and Michael Willard. 2016. “Building a Culture of Transparency.” Association of American Colleges & Universities. July 2, 2016. https://www.aacu.org/peerreview/2016/winter-spring/Fisher.[/ref]: Community-based learning involves a community stakeholder for which students engage on a specific set of tasks or projects. Successful CBL opportunities take into consideration the work that will benefit the community partner rather than having the students/class come up with an idea about what would benefit the community.
  • Experiential Work with Community [ref]Schwartz, Earl. 2015. “‘Bringing It All Back Home’: An Interdisciplinary Model for Community-Based Learning.” Journal of College and Character 16 (1): 53-61.  https://doi.org/10.1080/2194587X.2014.992910.[/ref]: This is an alternate phrase that allows for more flexibility about the kind of work students or a class may do for a community partner or organization. Often people will use this phrase because they want to include a multi-disciplinary group.

What are some key features of civic engagement opportunities?

As you might imagine from the descriptions above–civic engagement involves working on projects with and for community members, organizations or stakeholders. It is important for the members in the class to work with that stakeholder to do work that benefits the community it is trying to engage with. Oftentimes, civic engagement projects are not reciprocal–so community stakeholders don’t necessarily meet a goal that they had in mind[ref]Blouin, David D., and Evelyn M. Perry. “Whom Does Service Learning Really Serve? Community-Based Organizations’ Perspectives on Service Learning.” Teaching Sociology 37, no. 2 (April 2009): 120–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X0903700201. [/ref]. That reciprocity is one of the key features that an instructor, or a project team must grapple with together. It is a constant balance between what the students gain through their experience as well as the goals that the stakeholder has in mind.

The projects that are most unfulfilling are disorganized, do not have a clear goal in mind, and leave both parties feeling dissatisfied with the project[ref]Perry, James L., Steven Jones, and Orr. Quick Hits for Educating Citizens: Successful Strategies by Award Winning Teachers. Bloomington, UNITED STATES: Indiana University Press, 2006. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwgb/detail.action?docID=288359. [/ref]. To mitigate that reaction, there are a few strategies to ensure the project meets the goals of the community partner as well as the course goals, and student’s individual goals.

  • The instructor can set clear expectations for the students, and the community stakeholder can be clear about the kind of work that their institution needs [ref]Dolgon, C, Tania D. Mitchell, and Timothy K. Eatman, eds. The Cambridge Handbook of Service Learning and Community Engagement. Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology. Cambridge, United Kingdom ; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press., 2017.[/ref]
  • Students must feel that the work they are doing will have a direct impact on a community, so being transparent about how the work affects that specific population is crucial. This can be accomplished through project descriptions, mission statements, and frequent check-ins with the project team(s)[ref]Blouin, David D., and Evelyn M. Perry. 2009. “Whom Does Service Learning Really Serve? Community-Based Organizations’ Perspectives on Service Learning.” Teaching Sociology 37 (2): 120–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X0903700201. [/ref]
  • Setting a project charter with with stakeholder is a practical application of project management that can sometimes alleviate tensions that arise from “who’s responsible” for this part of the project.[ref]Dolgon, C, Tania D. Mitchell, and Timothy K. Eatman, eds. The Cambridge Handbook of Service Learning and Community Engagement. Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology. Cambridge, United Kingdom ; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press., 2017.[/ref]
  • The best projects that engage students in civic work have the best fit; meaning that the objectives of the course fit with the mission of the project, the mission of the community partner’s organization, and the students in the course have the domain specific knowledge to do that work well.[ref]Blouin, David D., and Evelyn M. Perry. 2009. “Whom Does Service Learning Really Serve? Community-Based Organizations’ Perspectives on Service Learning.” Teaching Sociology 37 (2): 128. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X0903700201.[/ref]

Community-based Learning at UW-Green Bay

Luckily, we have a Center for Civic Engagement on our campus, and though it is not a physical center–it has at it’s helm, Dr. Alison Staudinger of Democracy and Justice Studies and Women’s and Gender Studies, and Dr. David Coury of Humanities, and Modern Languages.

As a part of the National Association of System Heads (NASH) Grant, institutions were tasked with finding better assessment metrics for identifying experiences within courses that are also “high-impact.” To do this, programs were able to apply for funds to develop a specific high-impact practice within their program–one of the high-impact practices that multiple programs are working to improve is community-based learning. The programs are creating a scalable model that will then be available for other programs to adapt to suit their needs.

One course specific example of CBL, is a course within the Democracy and Justice Studies’ curriculum: DJS 200: Mentoring for Equity and Inclusion. Here is the course description:

Students will serve as mentors for Green Bay high school students participating in the Federal TRIO Upward Bound program. Mentors will help promote the development of skills critical to academic success, will encourage students to aspire to college, will help overcome barriers to college attainment, and will act as a role model and resource for the underrepresented students served by TRIO programs. A critical component of mentoring will involve learning about the barriers that have historically limited access to college, including low income, racism, and sexism. Mentors will work with local TRIO students at least four hours per week for twelve weeks and will provide mentoring as well as tutoring support.

Assessment

Assessment of Students:

This article, while over twenty years old, provides some examples of assessment variables, indicators, and measurements for students, instructors, community partners, and institutions. The authors also provide a chart of “Mechanisms to Measure Impact” that might be useful in collecting feedback from all partners of the service-learning project[ref]Driscoll, Amy, Barbara A. Holland, Sherril B. Gelmon, and Seanna Kerrigan. 1996. “An Assessment Model for Service-Learning: Comprehensive Case Studies of Impact on Faculty, Students, Community, and Institution.” Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 66–71. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/mjcsl/3239521.0003.107/1. [/ref]

The AAC&U’s VALUE rubrics are intended for institutional-level use, but also provides examples of learning outcomes that would be well-positioned in a program’s curriculum if they were relating back to an institution’s mission. This webpage also provides framing language for how an instructor might articulate the differences between community-based learning, service-learning, and community outreach. [ref]Association of American Colleges and Universities. “Civic Engagement VALUE Rubric.” 2009. https://www.aacu.org/civic-engagement-value-rubric[/ref]

https://www.aacu.org/civic-engagement-value-rubric

Assessing efficacy of projects 

Blouin and Perry set out to present their findings on the benefits and costs for community-based organizations (CBO), cite three common obstacles to successful service-learning opportunities, and provide three recommendations for an efficacious project or program with a CBO. One challenge the authors cite is “course-CBO fit,” where the goals of the service-learning project or program do not complement the CBO’s (128). For each of the challenges the authors provide recommendations to help institutions address these issues. [ref]Blouin, David D., and Evelyn M. Perry. 2009. “Whom Does Service Learning Really Serve? Community-Based Organizations’ Perspectives on Service Learning.” Teaching Sociology 37 (2): 120–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X0903700201. [/ref]

Who to contact for help:

  • CATL can help instructors design the course, project, assignment, or assessments
  • The Center for Civic Engagement may provide resources about scaling-up at the programmatic level, and may also have contacts in the community who are looking to collaborate

Undergraduate Research & Scholarly and Creative Activity

Audience:

  • Instructor

Overview

The Council on Undergraduate Research describes undergraduate research as scholarly work that “makes original intellectual or creative contributions to the discipline.” Benefits of undergraduate research include enhanced learning, increased retention, increased graduate enrollment rates, career preparation, and development of problem-solving skills.1 A few example undergraduate integration methods are provided here, as well as a larger list of resources further below.

Example Cases of Expanding Undergraduate Research Opportunities

Course-based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CURE) in Conservation and Ecology 2

The authors utilized student out-of-class field-work time to expand research areas. The resulting data allowed them to refine species distribution models and facilitate management decisions. Student work contributed to the students’ own research projects as well as to the larger study. Students reported an advancement in their understanding of the research process, showed science skill gains, had a clearer picture of their professional intentions, and a greater ability and willingness to discuss conservation issues with family and friends.

CURE Structured at Different Levels of Inquiry, a Case Study in Biology 3

The authors implemented three types of CUREs into three undergraduate biology course, with varying levels of teacher and student responsibilities. In one course, students conducted research as part of the instructor’s ongoing research. In another course, the students were provided with the hypothesis and methodology. In the third course, students designed and implemented their own research, framed within the course scope. All CUREs had positive outcomes, but outcomes varied by CURE implementation.

Cross-course CURE Collaborations in Ecology and Biology 4

Undergraduate Ecology and Cell Biology lab courses combine different components of a CURE to inform an integrative study. Students in experiment groups showed improved content knowledge. Student-generated data was used for individual class research projects and also contributed to a larger data collection.

Undergraduate Research Incorporated into a Health Education Capstone 5

At UW-River Falls, senior health education students learn about the research process, plan research projects, go through IRB approval, collect data, and present research results through poster sessions.

C.R.E.A.T.E.

“The C.R.E.A.T.E.(Consider, Read, Elucidate the hypotheses, Analyze and interpret the data, and Think of the next Experiment) method is a teaching approach that uses intensive analysis of primary literature to demystify and humanize research science for undergraduates. Our goal is to use the real language of science—the journal article—as an inroad to understanding “who does science, how, and why?” At the same time, we wish to help students (1) experience authentic processes of science, in particular discussion/debate about experimental data and their interpretation (including ‘grey areas’), (2) recognize the creativity and open-ended nature of research, and (3)see the diversity of people who undertake research careers (i.e. not just the genius/geeks of popular culture). As a complement to teaching based on textbooks, which tend to over simplify the research process, C.R.E.A.T.E. teaching focuses on authentic published work—peer reviewed journal articles—with students reading either series of papers produced sequentially from individual labs or series of papers from different labs focused on a single line of research.”6

Faculty Perspectives on Developing and Leading CUREs7

Authors collected faculty feedback on the benefits and challenges they experienced when leading CURE courses. Additionally, the faculty respondents provided their insights into what made a person a good fit to lead CURE courses.

Institutional Implementations

“CUREnet at Carleton College.” https://serc.carleton.edu/curenet/index.html.

“FIRE: The First-Year Innovation & Research Experience @ UMD.” https://fire.umd.edu/streams-DBN.html.

“UT Freshman Research Iniative – Research Streams.” https://cns.utexas.edu/component/cobalt/items/5-research-streams?Itemid=1971.

Who to contact for help:

  • CATL

Additional Resources

“AHA History Tuning Project: 2016 History Discipline Core | AHA.” Accessed February 9, 2019. https://www.historians.org/teaching-and-learning/tuning-the-history-discipline/2016-history-discipline-core.
Al-Ghadhban, Samir, Ali Maqaibel, Ghassan Alregib, and Ali Al-Shaikhi. “Seeding Undergraduate Research Experience: From Georgia Tech to KFUPM Case Study.” International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education 55, no. 4 (2018): 313–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020720918773054.
Allyn, Debra A. “Course-Based Undergraduate Research—It Can Be Accomplished!” Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance 84, no. 9 (November 1, 2013): 32–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2013.838113.
Al-Maktoumi, Ali, Said Al-Ismaily, and Anvar Kacimov. “Research-Based Learning for Undergraduate Students in Soil and Water Sciences: A Case Study of Hydropedology in an Arid-Zone Environment.” Journal of Geography in Higher Education 40, no. 3 (August 2016): 321–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2016.1140130.
Ballen, Cissy J., Jessamina E. Blum, Sara Brownell, Sadie Hebert, James Hewlett, Joanna R. Klein, Erik A. McDonald, et al. “A Call to Develop Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs) for Nonmajors Courses.” CBE Life Sciences Education 16, no. 2 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-12-0352.
Bangera, Gita, and Sara E. Brownell. “Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences Can Make Scientific Research More Inclusive.” CBE Life Sciences Education 13, no. 4 (2014): 602–6. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-06-0099.
Bell, J. Ellis, Jessica Bell, Erin Dolan, Todd T. Eckdahl, David Hecht, Patrick Killion, Joachim Latzer, et al. “A Practical Guide to Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences,” n.d. http://home.sandiego.edu/~josephprovost/bmb20989-sup-0001-suppinfo01.pdf.
Brown, Ryan, Marcela Chiorescu, and Darin Mohr. “Building Capacity for Undergraduate Research in Mathematics: A Case Study at Georgia College.” PRIMUS 27, no. 10 (April 7, 2017): 926–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2016.1266066.
“Center for Engaged Learning | Seven Potential Barriers to Engaging in Undergraduate Research for HURMS.” Accessed January 10, 2019. https://www.centerforengagedlearning.org/seven-potential-barriers-to-engaging-in-undergraduate-research-for-hurms/.
“Center for Engaged Learning | Using Critical Race Theory to Craft Undergraduate Research Experiences.” Accessed January 10, 2019. https://www.centerforengagedlearning.org/using-critical-race-theory-to-craft-undergraduate-research-experiences/.
Corwin, Lisa A., Mark J. Graham, and Erin L. Dolan. “Modeling Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences: An Agenda for Future Research and Evaluation.” Edited by Mary Lee Ledbetter. CBE—Life Sciences Education 14, no. 1 (March 2, 2015): es1. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-10-0167.
“CUREnet at Carleton College.” CUREnet, October 11, 2018. https://serc.carleton.edu/curenet/index.html.
Dolan, Erin L. “Course-based undergraduate research experiences: Current knowledge and future directions.” National Research Council Commissioned Paper, Washington, DC, USA (2016). https://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse_177288.pdf
“Education: Research for All: A CURE for Undergraduates.” Accessed December 10, 2018. http://www.asbmb.org/asbmbtoday/201604/Education/CUREs/.
“FIRE: The First-Year Innovation & Research Experience @ UMD.” Accessed December 4, 2018. https://fire.umd.edu/streams-DBN.html.
Gordon, Neil, and Mike Brayshaw. “Inquiry Based Learning in Computer Science Teaching in Higher Education.” Innovation in Teaching and Learning in Information and Computer Sciences 7, no. 1 (June 1, 2008): 22–33. https://doi.org/10.11120/ital.2008.07010022.
Guo, Xulin, Kara Loy, and Ryan Banow. “Can First-Year Undergraduate Geography Students Do Individual Research?” 42, no. 3 (2018): 412–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2018.1455173.
Hewlett, James A. “Undergraduate Research at the Community College: Barriers and Opportunities.” In The Power and Promise of Early Research, 1231:137–51. ACS Symposium Series 1231. American Chemical Society, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2016-1231.ch008.
Horsch, Elizabeth, Mark St. John, and Ronald L. Christensen. “A Case of Reform: The Undergraduate Research Collaboratives.” Journal of College Science Teaching 41, no. 5 (June 5, 2012): 38–43.
“How to Teach a Good First Day of Class.” The Chronicle of Higher Education, January 4, 2019. https://www.chronicle.com/interactives/advice-firstday.
“How We Teach Now: The GSTA Guide to Student-Centered Teaching.” Accessed January 10, 2019. http://teachpsych.org/ebooks/howweteachnow.
Lopatto, David. “The Essential Features of Undergraduate Research.” CUR Quart 24 (November 30, 2002).
Medicine, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, Division on Earth and Life Studies, and Committee for Convocation on Integrating Discovery-Based Research into the Undergraduate Curriculum. Integrating Discovery-Based Research into the Undergraduate Curriculum: Report of a Convocation. National Academies Press, 2015.
Mendoza, Susan G., and Dave A. Louis. “Unspoken Criticality: Developing Scholarly Voices for Minoritized Students through UREs.” Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly 1, no. 4 (2018): 18–24. https://doi.org/10.18833/spur/1/4/7.
Nancy H. Hensel editor. Course-Based Undergraduate Research: Educational Equity and High-Impact Practice / Edited by Nancy H. Hensel. First edition. STERLING, Sterling, Virgina, Bloomfield: STYLUS PUBLISHING, Stylus Publishing, Stylus Publishing, LLC, 2018.
Nancy L. Staub, Lawrence S. Blumer, Christopher W. Beck, Veronique A. Delesalle, Gerald D. Griffin, Robert B. Merritt, Bettye Sue Hennington, Wendy H. Grillo, Gail P. Hollowell, Sandra L. White, Catherine M. Mader. “Course-Based Science Research Promotes Learning in Diverse Students at Diverse Institutions.” CUR Quarterly 37, no. 2 (Winter 2016).
Pedwell, Rhianna K., James A. Fraser, Jack T. H. Wang, Jack K. Clegg, Jy D. Chartres, and Susan L. Rowland. “The Beer and Biofuels Laboratory: A Report on Implementing and Supporting a Large, Interdisciplinary, Yeast-Focused Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience.” Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education 46, no. 3 (May 1, 2018): 213–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21111.
Russell, James E., Allison R. D’Costa, Clay Runck, David W. Barnes, Alessandra L. Barrera, Jennifer Hurst-Kennedy, Elizabeth B. Sudduth et al. “Bridging the undergraduate curriculum using an integrated course-embedded undergraduate research experience (ICURE).” CBE—Life Sciences Education 14, no. 1 (2015): ar4. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4353079/
Schiraldi, David A., and Sheila Pedigo. “Growth of an Engineering Department with Undergraduate Research.” Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly 35, no. 4 (Summer 2015): 24–27.
Shaffer, Christopher D., Consuelo J. Alvarez, April E. Bednarski, David Dunbar, Anya L. Goodman, Catherine Reinke, Anne G. Rosenwald, et al. “A Course-Based Research Experience: How Benefits Change with Increased Investment in Instructional Time.” CBE Life Sciences Education 13, no. 1 (2014): 111–30. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe-13-08-0152.
Shortlidge, Erin E., Gita Bangera, and Sara E. Brownell. “Faculty Perspectives on Developing and Teaching Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences.” BioScience 66, no. 1 (January 1, 2016): 54–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biv167.
“SPUR Volumes and Issues | Publications | Council on Undergraduate Research.” Accessed December 10, 2018. https://www.cur.org/what/publications/journals/spur/issues/.
Staub, Nancy L., Marianne Poxleitner, Amanda Braley, Helen Smith-Flores, Christine M. Pribbenow, Leslie Jaworski, David Lopatto, and Kirk R. Anders. “Scaling Up: Adapting a Phage-Hunting Course to Increase Participation of First-Year Students in Research.” CBE Life Sciences Education 15, no. 2 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-10-0211.
Sorensen, Amanda E., Lucía Corral, Jenny M. Dauer, and Joseph J. Fontaine. “Integrating Authentic Scientific Research in a Conservation Course–Based Undergraduate Research Experience.” Natural Sciences Education 47, no. 1 (April 12, 2018): 0. doi:10.4195/nse2018.02.0004.
“Undergraduate Research as a High-Impact Student Experience.” Peer Review 12, no. 2 (Spring 2010): 27–30.
Urias, David, Patricia Gallagher, and Joseph Wartman. “Critical Features and Value in Assessing a Research Experience for Undergraduates: The Case of Engineering Cities.” Journal of STEM Education: Innovations & Research 13, no. 1 (January 2012): 30–42.
“UT Freshman Research Iniative – Research Streams.” Accessed December 5, 2018. https://cns.utexas.edu/component/cobalt/items/5-research-streams?Itemid=1971.
Waiwaiole, Evelyn N., E. Michael Bohlig, and Kristine J. Massey. “Student Success: Identifying High-Impact Practices.” New Directions for Community Colleges 2016, no. 175 (2016): 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.20211.
Waterman, Rory, and Jen Heemstra. “Expanding the CURE Model: Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience,” n.d., 141.
Zimbardi, Kirsten, and Paula Myatt. “Embedding Undergraduate Research Experiences within the Curriculum: A Cross-Disciplinary Study of the Key Characteristics Guiding Implementation.” Studies in Higher Education 39, no. 2 (March 2014): 233–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.651448.

 

  1. “The Council on Undergraduate Research.” https://www.cur.org ↩
  2. Sorensen, Amanda E., Lucía Corral, Jenny M. Dauer, and Joseph J. Fontaine. “Integrating Authentic Scientific Research in a Conservation Course–Based Undergraduate Research Experience.” Natural Sciences Education 47, no. 1 (April 12, 2018): 0. doi:10.4195/nse2018.02.0004. ↩
  3. Nadelson, Louis, Linda Walters, and Jane Waterman. “Course-integrated undergraduate research experiences structured at different levels of inquiry.” Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research (2010). https://scholarworks.boisestate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014&context=cifs_facpubs ↩
  4. Russell, James E., Allison R. D’Costa, Clay Runck, David W. Barnes, Alessandra L. Barrera, Jennifer Hurst-Kennedy, Elizabeth B. Sudduth et al. “Bridging the undergraduate curriculum using an integrated course-embedded undergraduate research experience (ICURE).” CBE—Life Sciences Education 14, no. 1 (2015): ar4. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4353079/ ↩
  5. Allyn, Debra A. “Course-based Undergraduate Research—It Can Be Accomplished!.” Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance 84, no. 9 (2013): 32-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2013.838113 ↩
  6. “Welcome to Teach C.R.E.A.T.E.” Teach C.R.E.A.T.E. 2019. Accessed March 06, 2019. https://teachcreate.org/ ↩
  7. Shortlidge, Erin E., Gita Bangera, and Sara E. Brownell. “Faculty Perspectives on Developing and Teaching Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences.” BioScience 66, no. 1 (January 1, 2016): 54–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biv167. ↩