Universities and Community Engagement: Addressing Social Exclusion

1. Universities and community engagement: addressing the causes of social exclusionPaper presented to “Regional knowledge and economic capacity” session in “Regions: The Dilemmas of Integration and Competition?” Paul Benneworth*, Catherine Hodgson*, David Charles, Lynne Humphrey KITE, Newcastle University

2. A common vision of universities and communities?

3. Outline of the presentation • The rise of the knowledge economy and new forms of exclusion • The potential roles of university community service and development • Methodology – research project and paper • 4 drivers of university community engagement • Towards a university typology

4. Rise of the knowledge economy • Economic growth driven by productivity growth: • Rising independence from traditional capital (land, labour, machinery…) • Increasing importance of TFP  Knowledge • 50% of growth 1945-85; contribution growing • Knowledge capital unevenly spread • Rise of world cities, regional capitals • Stagnation of ‘ordinary’ cities

5. New forms of social exclusion • Particular types of places ‘cut off’ from knowledge economy (Moulaert et al, 2000). • Two kinds of problem • External disintegration – capital has no need • Internal fragmentation – no local capacity • Knowledge economy about attracting investment (money, talent, technologies) • Can universities make excluded communities better at attracting investments?

6. Preserving existing knowledge Knowledge Disseminating knowledge for learning Discovering knowledge via research Applying knowledge in practice The needs of society The arts Acting as a centre for arts activity Preserving existing knowledge The discovery and development of talent Disseminating knowledge for learning Discovering knowledge via research Applying knowledge in practice The university experience Source: Allen, 1989 Providing staff/ student satisfaction Hierarchy of university contributions

7. University contributions to excluded communities • Universities as key knowledge actors • Universities have ‘social’ compact for funding • Wide range of potential contributions Vs. • Excluded communities are weak stakeholders • Community Engagement as residual mission • Wrong side of ‘excellence/ relevance’ split. Empirically understanding if potential is realised

8. University contribution frame (1) • Service Learning • Service Provision • Faculty Involvement • Student Volunteerism • The Community in the Classroom • Applied Research. • Major Institutional Change Source: Department of Housing & Urban Development, 1999.

9. University contribution frame (2)Source: CERI, 1982

10. Barriers to university engagement

11. Methodology • ESRC Research project “Universities and excluded communities” within the “Regional contributions of Higher Education” programme • 2 phases, 3 regions (North East, North West, Scotland). • Phase 1 – study of all 33 HEIs to characterise Community Engagement activity, policy, promotion, barriers and tensions. • Paper – (practical) – 5 illustrative cases of ‘something a bit different’ • Fiches not approved: anonymous/ not discuss named cases

12. The Collegiate: Cornerstone@Everton

13. Chester University

14. Durham University

15. University ‘pen portraits’ • University 1: teaching focused large former polytechnic with strong vocational links • University 2: former teacher training college teaching led with religious background • University 3: teaching focused with strong community mission • University 4: merger of polytechnics, now with growing research critical mass, teaching led. • University 5: 19th century collegiate university in former coal mining area

16. University (1): teaching-led • Long history of industrial engagement, partly on new campus funded by regeneration • High-level awareness of engagement – • each faculty has representatives • Have reacted to community inquiries, • only where existing linkages • Aim to use students to create linkages – • placements transfer knowledge for free • Enthusiasm tied to individuals who move on – • rules remain, spirit changes Complex picture – how to interpret

17. Universities as site of competing rationales for engagement…

18. Institutional configurations

19. Senior management Centre/ Academic Schools (T&R) ‘Missing middle’ of Community Engagement The ‘stories’ within the HEI Social responsibility Institutional development ‘University’ New research opportunities Better community recruitment Principled social contribution Facilitating personal advancement

20. Senior management Centre/ Academic Schools (T&R) Community as justifying university’s social compact Community as interesting and worthy study topic Community as tapping into new markets for services Strategy/ policy Research project Resource Allocation ‘University’

21. Conclusions/ questions arising (1) • The complexity of engagement • Universities not simply managed – simple processes inhibit engagement • The pendulum of change • Short-term windows of opportunity for change • Who do universities take their orders from? • Are capital projects really a vision?

22. Conclusions/ questions arising (2) • Universities as social enterprise • Corporate social responsibility vs social compact • Universities as reactive to communities • How do excluded communities influence the business of universities? • Local nodes in wider governance networks • Do university/ community/ LA links create new opportunities for excluded communities?