Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Presidential SummitCommitment to Civic
EngagementOctober 3, 2006
Research Park IIISymposium Room
Oklahoma Campus Compact Mission
Oklahoma Campus Compact (OkCC) supports the civic purpose of higher education that includes developing students as citizens. OkCC will assist member institutions in their efforts to develop citizenship skills by promoting and advancing methodologies including service-learning (SL), volunteerism, community service, and political engagement.
Civic Engagement Methodologies
Academic Service-Learning: a teaching methodology that connects learning in the classroom to meeting community needs;
Volunteerism: direct service to recipient and the primary beneficiary is the recipient;
Community Service: is the engagement in activities where services provided and received are mutually beneficial to both the community and the student. May be connected to coursework, but credit is not awarded (also called co-curricular).
Political Participation: Individual and collective actions designed to address issues of public concern;
Internships: similarities exist between internships and service-learning, but distinctions exist in the purpose, method, structure, and duration.
THE ENGAGED CAMPUS
Positive student, community,
and institutional outcomes
Student Civic
Engagement
InstitutionalCivic
Engagement
Copyright, Minnesota Campus Compact, 2004
The Home of Engagement
Packet Materials
Presidential Summit Agenda Featured Speaker Bios Participant List Oklahoma Campus Compact One-Pager Ms. Gina Wekke PowerPoint Dr. Barbara Holland PowerPoint Dr. Steve Crow PowerPoint
Criterion 5 – Engagement and Service Higher Learning Commission Crosscutting
Themes Dr. Debra Stuart PowerPoint Overview of the Literature Linking
Service-Learning and Retention
Self-Assessment on the Institutionalization of Service-
Learning
Survey conducted early 2006 Twenty-three Oklahoma Campus
Compact member institutions responded
The survey involves institutional self-assessment in five dimensions Philosophy and Mission Faculty Involvement Student Support Community Involvement Institutional Support
Average Assessment for Dimension I
“Average Assessment” is the average of all stage levels (1-3) reported within the dimension.
Stage 1=Critical Mass building Stage 2=Quality Building Stage 3=Sustained Institutionalization
Philosophy and Mission of Service-Learning
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Average Assessment for Dimension II
Stage 1=Critical Mass building Stage 2=Quality Building Stage 3=Sustained Institutionalization
“Average Assessment” is the average of all stage levels (1-3) reported within the dimension.
Faculty Support and Involvement in Service-Learning
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
OUOSU
UCOECU
NSU
NWO
SU
SEOSU
SWOSU
OPSURSU
CSC
NEOAMTCC
OSU-OKC
OSU-TB, O
km
WOSC
RCC
CASCSSC
RSC
OCCC TUOC
Average Assessment for Dimension III
Stage 1=Critical Mass building Stage 2=Quality Building Stage 3=Sustained Institutionalization
“Average Assessment” is the average of all stage levels (1-3) reported within the dimension.
Student Support for and Involvement in Service-Learning
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
OUOSU
UCOECU
NSU
NWO
SU
SEOSU
SWOSU
OPSURSU
CSC
NEOAMTCC
OSU-OKC
OSU-TB, O
km
WOSC
RCC
CASCSSC
RSC
OCCC TUOC
Average Assessment for Dimension IV
Stage 1=Critical Mass building Stage 2=Quality Building Stage 3=Sustained Institutionalization
“Average Assessment” is the average of all stage levels (1-3) reported within the dimension.
Community Participation and Partnerships
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
OUOSU
UCOECU
NSU
NWO
SU
SEOSU
SWOSU
OPSURSU
CSC
NEOAMTCC
OSU-OKC
OSU-TB, O
km
WOSC
RCC
CASCSSC
RSC
OCCC TUOC
Average Assessment for Dimension V
Stage 1=Critical Mass building Stage 2=Quality Building Stage 3=Sustained Institutionalization
“Average Assessment” is the average of all stage levels (1-3) reported within the dimension.
Institutional Support for Service-Learning
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
OUOSU
UCOECU
NSU
NWO
SU
SEOSU
SWOSU
OPSURSU
CSC
NEOAMTCC
OSU-OKC
OSU-TB, O
km
WOSC
RCC
CASCSSC
RSC
OCCC TUOC
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
OUOSU
UCOECU
NSU
NWO
SU
SEOSU
SWOSU
OPSURSU
CSC
NEOAMTCC
OSU-OKC
OSU-TB, O
km
WOSC
RCC
CASCSSC
RSC
OCCC TUOC
Average Overall Assessment for Service-Learning in 2006
Stage 1=Critical Mass building Stage 2=Quality Building Stage 3=Sustained Institutionalization
“Average Overall Assessment” is the average of all stage levels (1-3) reported within the 5 dimensions.
50%
18%
32%
13%
70%
17%
Dim I: Philosophy and Mission ofService-Learning
Definition of Service-Learning Strategic Planning
Alignment with Institutional Mission
Alignment with Educational Reform Efforts
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
17%
66%
17%
36%
32%
32%
35%
52%
13%
65%
26%
9%35%
52%
13%
Faculty Knowledge and Awareness
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
Faculty Leadership
Faculty Incentives and Rewards
Dim II: Faculty Support and Involvement in Service-Learning
35%
56%
9%
13%
74%
13%
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
57%
17%
26%
Student Awareness
Dim III: Student Support for and Involvement in Service-Learning
35%
22%
43%
Student Opportunities
Student Leadership Student Incentives & Rewards
55%
27% 18%
45%
41%
14%
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
Dim IV: Community Participation and Partnerships
23%
45%
32%
Community Partner Awareness Mutual Understanding
Community Partner Voice & Leadership
4%
79%
17%
39%
35%
26%57%
26% 17%
39%
39%22%
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
V: Institutional Support for Service-Learning
Coordinating Entity Policy-Making Entity
Staffing Funding
48%
30% 22%
61%
30%
9%
22%
30%
48%
V: Institutional Support for Service-Learning
Administrative Support Departmental Support
Evaluation & Assessment
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
11%(2)
39% (7)
50% (9)
22% (4)28% (5)
50% (9)
39% (7)
44% (8)
17%(3)
Dim I: Changes In Philosophy and Mission of Service-Learning: 2004 - 2006
Progressed
Regressed
28% (5)
17% (3)
55% (10)
Definition of Service-Learning Strategic Planning
Alignment with Institutional Mission
Alignment with Educational Reform Efforts
Regressed
Progressed
Unchanged Unchanged
Regressed
Progressed
Progressed
Regressed
Unchanged
Progressed
Regressed Unchanged
7 8
2
10
6
2
87
3
9
6
3
0
5
10
15
2
11
4
2
14
2
6
4
8
5
9
4
Definition Strategic Planning
Alignment w/InstitutionalMission
Alignment w/Educational Reform Efforts
2004
2006
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
Changes In Philosophy and Mission of Service-Learning: 2004 - 2006
56% (10)
22% (4) 22% (4)
50% (9)
17% (3)
33% (6)
28% (5)
44% (8)
28% (5)
Dim II: Changes In Faculty Support and Involvement in Service-Learning: 2004 -
2006
Faculty Leadership
Faculty Incentives and Rewards
Regressed
Progressed
Unchanged Unchanged
Regressed
Progressed
Progressed
Regressed Unchanged
Faculty Knowledge and Awareness
89
1 2
14
2
12
5
10
5
10
15
Changes In Faculty Support and Involvement in Service-Learning: 2004 - 2006
2004
2006
6
10
2 2
11
5 5
10
3
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
FacultyKnowledge And Awareness
FacultyLeadership
Faculty IncentivesAnd Rewards
56% (10)
11% (2)
33% (6)
39% (7)
44% (8)
17% (3)
67% (12)
11% (2)
22% (4)
45% (8)
11% (2)
44% (8)
Dim III: Changes In Student Support for and Involvement in Service-Learning:
2004 - 2006
Student Awareness Student Opportunities
Student Leadership
Student Incentives and Rewards
Regressed
Progressed
Unchanged Unchanged
Regressed Progressed
Progressed
Regressed
Unchanged
ProgressedRegressed
Unchanged
8
10
0
8
6
4
6
11
1
98
10
5
10
15
Changes In Student Support for and Involvement in Service-Learning: 2004 -
2006
2004
2006
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
Student Leadership
Student Incentives& Rewards
Student Awareness
Student Opportunities
4
11
3
5
9
42
14
2
6
10
2
35% (6)
18% (3)
47% (8)
20% (3)
27% (4)
53% (8)42% (7)
29% (5)
29% (5)
Dim IV: Changes In Student Community Participation and Partnerships: 2004 -
2006
Community Partner Awareness Mutual Understanding
Community Partner Voice and Leadership
Regressed
Progressed
Unchanged Unchanged
Regressed
Progressed
Progressed
Regressed
Unchanged
87
2
5
8
2
7
9
10
5
10
15
Changes In Community Participation and Partnerships: 2004 - 2006
2004
2006
Stage 1
Stage 2Stage 3
Community PartnerVoice & Leadership
CommunityPartner Awareness
MutualUnderstanding
9
6
3
9
6
3
11
43
53% (9)
12% (2)
35% (6)
35% (6)
6% (1)
59% (10)
59% (10)
6% (1)
35% (6)41% (7)
12% (2)
47% (8)
Dim V: Changes In Institutional Support For Service-Learning: 2004 - 2006
Coordinating Entity Policy-Making Entity
Staffing
Funding
Regressed
Progressed
Unchanged Unchanged
RegressedProgressed
Progressed
Regressed
UnchangedUnchanged
RegressedProgressed
62% (10)
13% (2)
25% (4)
41% (7)
6% (1)
53% (9)
20% (3)
33% (5)
47% (7)
Dim V: Changes In Institutional Support For Service-Learning: 2004 - 2006
Administrative Support Departmental Support
Evaluation & Assessment
Regressed
Progressed
Unchanged Unchanged
RegressedProgressed
ProgressedRegressed
Unchanged
11
5
1
5
10
2
13
4
0
10
43
2
9
4
10
6
1
10
5
10
5
10
15
Changes In Institutional Support for Service-Learning: 2004 - 2006
2004
2006
AdministrativeSupport
Departmental Support
Staffing Funding
Policy-Making Entity
CoordinatingEntity
Evaluation &Assessment
76
5
1
13
4
11
43
4
6
8
45
9
5
11
2
9
54
Self-Assessment on the Institutionalization of Service-Learning
Of the 15 institutions who reported having no standing service-learning committee only 7 have plans to establish one on campus.
83% of reporting institutions have mission statements that include student citizenship or civic engagement.
TRAINING
RESOURCES
CONFERENCE
SUBGRANTS
INFORMATION
RESEARCH
NETWORK
0
5
10
15
20
Services Needed by Institutions
from Oklahoma Campus Compact
74% need training
70% need resources The area of least need (44%) is help in building collaborative networks among campuses, state agencies, and community organizations.
Nearly 1/3 of the 23 reporting institutions need services in all areas
61% need conferences
65% need sub-grants 57% need information and research
Oklahoma Campus Compact (OkCC)
OkCC’s purpose is to serve our members: We can help with technical training for faculty,
students, administrators, and others related to civic engagement methodologies
Provide access to national models Sponsor conferences, workshops, etc. Serve as a clearinghouse of information and
resources Student programming Offer incentives, grants, and programming to
help institutions move in whatever direction is appropriate
Campus Visits and more….
Contact
Ms. Gina M. Wekke, Executive DirectorOklahoma Campus CompactPost Office Box 108850Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73101-
8850(405) [email protected]
![Welcome [] · • Safeguarding Civic Space: How can OGP Help? - Parallel Session Room 8 ... MUSE PIGEON SIM COUNTRY COMMITMENT ... 17:15 International Dementia Policy Hack](https://img.pdfslide.us/doc/110x75/5ae5e0327f8b9aee078c23f8/welcome-safeguarding-civic-space-how-can-ogp-help-parallel-session-room.jpg)