Jennifer M. Domagal-Goldman | November 3, 2011

1. Teaching for civic capacity And Engagement:How Faculty Align Teaching and PurposeIARSLCE 2011 | Chicago Jennifer M. Domagal-Goldman | November 3, 2011

2. Higher Education’s Civic Mission Democracy has to be born anew in each generation and education is its midwife. – John Dewey (1916) The involvement of faculty in preparing students for their role as active citizens is one of the most significant and challenging aspects of the college civic engagement movement …. Faculty members are key in helping students understand the social contributions to be made by every discipline. – Elizabeth Hollander (2007)

3. Definitions Civic Engagement: Active participation in the civic or political life of a community. Civic Capacity: Knowledge, skills, and attitudes of informed citizenship. Public Scholarship: Teaching, research, and service that contribute to informed engagement in society.

4. Research Questions • How, if at all, does faculty participation in the Public Scholarship Associates influence their teaching-related learning and/or practice? • How, if at all, do faculty members align their undergraduate courses and teaching practices with their implicit and/or explicit ideas about civic engagement as an educational purpose?

5. Sociohistorical Context Faculty Members’ Background & Characteristics Views of Academic Fields Beliefs about Purposes of Education CONTENT Student Characteristics Student Goals Pragmatic Factors External Influences Teaching & Learning Literature Advice Available on Campus CONTEXT Program & College Goals Facilities, Opportunities, & Assistance Other Influences Public Scholarship Associates Course Decisions Content FORM Goals Instruction Feedback Sequence

6. Participants • Selection Criteria: • Tenured/tenure-track faculty members in the PSA • Sample: • 6 women, 8 men • 4 Assistant, 4 Associate, and 6 Full Professors • 4 faculty of color, 10 white faculty members • 4 humanities, 4 social sciences, 2 natural sciences, 4 professional fields • 16 academic fields

7. Methods Data Collection Data Analysis Participant Data Forms Documents (CVs, syllabi) Trustworthiness & Ethical Considerations Contact Summaries Semi-Structured Interviews • Triangulation • Bracketing • Reflective Memos • Peer Debriefer • Member Checks I. Content Coding (a priori & open) Analytical Memos II. Context III. Form Fieldnotes Observations

8. Limitations • Single institution; small sample • Some PSA members elected not to participate • Retrospective interviews; did not observe teaching

9. Findings

10. Sociohistorical Context Faculty Members’ Background & Characteristics Views of Academic Fields Beliefs about Purposes of Education CONTENT Student Characteristics Student Goals Pragmatic Factors External Influences Teaching & Learning Literature Advice Available on Campus CONTEXT Program & College Goals Facilities, Opportunities, & Assistance Other Influences Public Scholarship Associates Course Decisions Content FORM Goals Instruction Feedback Sequence

11. Sociohistorical Context Faculty Members’ Background & Characteristics Views of Place of Civic Purposes in Academic Fields Beliefs about Civic Purposes of Education CONTENT Student Characteristics Student Goals Pragmatic Factors Q #2 External Influences Teaching & Learning Literature Advice Available on Campus CONTEXT Program & College Goals Facilities, Opportunities, & Assistance Other Influences Q #1 Public Scholarship Associates Course Decisions Content FORM Goals Instruction Feedback Sequence

12. Theory Development: Proposition 1 Proposition 1 Content influences on course planning, specifically views of the academic field and beliefs about educational purpose, are dynamic rather than stable.

13. Theory Development: Proposition 2 Proposition 2 A reciprocal relationship exists between content and context elements of the contextual filters model.

14. Theory Development: Proposition 3 Proposition 3 Local contexts can be catalysts for faculty learning, as well as influences on course form.

15. Theory Development: Proposition 4 Proposition 4 Planning for civic engagement courses is influenced by perceptions of institutional mission, particularly perceptions of what counts for promotion and tenure.

16. Theory Development: Proposition 5 Proposition 5 Once faculty have decided to incorporate community engagement into a course, subsequent course decisions are influenced by that community’s characteristics and needs.

18. Future Research • Continue to extend and refine the Contextual Filters Model by studying course planning in different: • Institutional settings • Faculty populations • Course levels & types • Conduct longitudinal or ethnographic studies of faculty course planning and teaching for civic purposes • Develop assessment tools for evaluating civic learning

19. Implications for Institutional Practice & Policy • Pay attention to rhetoric and reality • Allocate institutional resources • Prepare future faculty members • Forge partnerships across the institution and with local communities • Consider position descriptions and contracts • Revisit promotion and tenure policies

20. Participants’ Course Goals

21. Participant Characteristics

22. Participants’ Disciplines/Fields

23. Questions & Discussion