Developing local ‘communities of practice’ through local community – university partnerships

Hart, Angie; Wolff, David

doi:10.1080/02697450600901616

Cited by 64 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In answer to the call for scholarship fully co-authored by community partners and academics (Hart & Wolff 2006), the BCT partners felt well placed to co-author a piece describing the lessons of our partnership and the obstacles to full co-authorship. The irony is that to accept this charge we needed to overcome those very challenges.…”

Section: Mutuality/reciprocitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This might mean fiscally strapped agencies being supplemented financially (Fielden et al 2007). Correspondingly, the academic system which perpetuates the imbalance in authorial participation would need to be realigned to expand community-engaged scholarship (Fielden et al 2007;Hart & Wolff 2006). When academic work that has actual value to community and academic partners alike (co-authoring grants, organising community-building events, co-creating artistic exhibits) is credited by the academy, then university-community partnerships may experience greater reciprocity.…”

Section: Mutuality/reciprocitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Critical to our dynamic partnership is interest in ongoing learning (Fogel & Cook 2006;Hart & Wolff 2006). We build regular reflection into our process (Merzel et al 2007;Reardon 2006) and, at the conclusion of each activity, we debrief together, sharing favourite moments and reflecting on lessons learned.…”

Section: Mutuality/reciprocitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this difficult economic climate and for those who work In order for disenfranchised community partners to join the ranks of scholars we may need to alter the paradigm of the Scholarship of Engagement yet again (Boyer 1996;Hart & Wolff 2006;Zlotkowski 2002). Community partner authors ought to be better supported to fully engage in scholarship.…”

Section: Mutuality/reciprocitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hart and Wolff (2006) note the dearth of scholarship reflecting full community partner participation. We respond to this concern by framing our discussion through the shared voice of the BCT partners' collaborative (the 'we' of the article), complemented by the unique perspectives of each partner.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Building Castles Together: A sustainable collaboration as a perpetual work-in-progress

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Building Castles Together project is a multidisciplinary collaboration between the University of Southern Maine at Lewiston-Auburn College and Sandcastle Clinical and Educational Services that aims to build solidarity and resilience in vulnerable young children, their families and their community. This article explores how the partnership exemplifies five key areas impacting the sustainability of community-university collaborations. 1) Mutuality and reciprocity are foundational elements in establishing trust and ensuring project relevance to both organisations. 2) Interdisciplinarity and diversity are constructs related to the core mission of both the University and Sandcastle. The multiple perspectives offer a range of holistic strategies for addressing complex social problems, but also create the potential for misunderstandings between disciplines and organisations. 3) Community integration at multiple levels is critical to the partnership’s sustainability as well as to achievement of its ideals. 4) Dynamic interaction is an evolutionary process, both internal and external to both organisations, that impacts their relative contributions and necessitates flexibility in planning and outcomes. 5) Asset enhancement describes the potential to increase capacity, but also the concern for overextension and resource exhaustion. We conclude that sustainability in university-community partnerships is not a goal in itself, but an ongoing process, and an attribute of a partnership based on common principles, continuous input and constant change. Keywords Community-university partnership, sustainability, diversity, vulnerable youth

show abstract

Section: Mutuality/reciprocitymentioning

confidence: 99%