Rewarding Community-Engaged Scholarship: A State University System Approach

Abstract

The need for new and revised structures to reward new forms of scholarship is being examined nationally and globally. It is also being examined on campuses that make up the University of Massachusetts system, all which are classified by the Carnegie Foundation for Community Engagement. This paper reports on the collective exploration by the five campuses of the University of Massachusetts to understand whether the existing academic policies sufficiently and appropriately rewarding community engagement and publically engaged scholarship enact the core mission of the University of Massachusetts to effectively generate knowledge, address social issues, and fulfill its academic and civic purposes.

Mapping Tensions: Positioning Community Engagement Challenges as Generative Space

“…The role of engagement in tenure and promotion decisions presents another challenge. For two decades, engagement has challenged tenure and promotion standards (O'Meara, 2008;Saltmarsh & Wooding, 2016). Although there have been strides in recognizing and even encouraging engagement scholarship in tenure and promotion documentation, disagreement remains about what actually "counts" as scholarship and which kinds of products (e.g., grants, articles, book chapters, or curricula) appropriately demonstrate scholarship.…”

“…Community engagement work also requires more time and resources (Fitzgerald et al, 2016) than traditional instruction does. At an institutional level, engagement is often impeded by tenure and promotion standards (O'Meara, 2008;Saltmarsh & Wooding, 2016), difficulties in creating institutional support structures for sustained community engagement (Nicotera et al, 2011), and a lack of standardization in program-level curricula (Bryson, 2016;Fitzgerald et al, 2016).…”

Valuing the Engaged Work of the Professoriate: Reflections on Ernest Boyer’s Scholarship Reconsidered

“…However, this work has reached but a small fraction of institutions within the United States. Regrettably, faculty whose primary work preferences engaged teaching and research often face the risk of being denied promotion, tenure, and institutional advancement (O'Meara, 2005;Saltmarsh & Wooding, 2016).…”

“…The results of the 2013-14 faculty survey indicated that 48.8% of faculty at all undergraduate institutions and 50.4% of faculty at all public universities were academically engaged in their communities in some capacity (Hurtado et al, 2012). However, even though over half of all faculty acknowledge pursuing engaged teaching and scholarship, very few institutions recognize or reward these activities (Hurtado et al, 2012;Saltmarsh & Wooding, 2016).…”

Community Engagement vs. Racial Equity

“…Engaged scholars have called for significant shifts in promotion and tenure (Boyer, 1990;Bridger & Alter, 2006;Blanchard et al, 2009;Cherwitz, 2010;Fitzgerald et al, 2012;Kellogg Commission, 1999;Lambert-Pennington, 2016;O'Meara, 2011;Saltmarsh & Wooding, 2016). However, there has been little research conducted that explicitly connects changes to promotion and tenure policies and practices to facilitate consideration of engaged scholarship, and the impact those changes have had on faculty of Color tenure and promotion outcomes.…”