Resources (UNESCO Chair CBR-SR)
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Recent Submissions
Item Participatory research: Where have we been, where are we going? – A dialogue(UCL IOE Press, 2017-07) Hall, Budd L.; Tandon, RajeshRajesh Tandon and Budd Hall, the UNESCO Co-Chairs in Community-Based Research, have worked together on the theory and practice of participatory research since they first met in Caracas, Venezuela in 1978. This article is a conversation between the two of them that took place in New Delhi, India in 2015. It covers the creation of the concept of participatory research, a coming to awareness of the importance and power of local knowledge, the creation of the International Participatory Research Network and their thoughts on some of the challenges facing community and academic partners today. Of note is the fact that the early roots of participatory research were found in the global South, specifically in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Of further interest is the fact that for the first 20 to 25 years, participatory research was a discourse located almost entirely outside formal academic circles but rather in social movement structures and civil society circles.Item Decolonization of knowledge, epistemicide, participatory research and higher education(UCL IOE Press, 2017-01-30) Hall, Budd L.; Tandon, RajeshThis article raises questions about what the word ‘knowledge’ refers to. Drawn from some 40 years of collaborative work on knowledge democracy, the authors suggest that higher education institutions today are working with a very small part of the extensive and diverse knowledge systems in the world. Following from de Sousa Santos, they illustrate how Western knowledge has been engaged in epistemicide, or the killing of other knowledge systems. Community-based participatory research is about knowledge as an action strategy for change and about the rendering visible of the excluded knowledges of our remarkable planet. Knowledge stories, theoretical dimensions of knowledge democracy and the evolution of community-based participatory research partnerships are highlighted.Item Conference Report. Producing Evidence for Development in Brexit Britain. 27th -28th March 2017, UCL-Institute of Education, London(The Christian Aid Centre for Excellence for Research, Evidence and Learning and the Open University, Institute of Educational Technology, 2017-04) Newman, Kate; Fransman, JudeThe final event in the Rethinking Research Partnerships seminar series took the form of a high-level conference. Around 100 participants (academics, students, NGO practitioners, knowledge brokers/trainers, consultants, policy makers and research funders) attended over the two-day event. The conference responded to the context of ‘Brexit Britain’ to explore how research partnerships between academics and INGOs might contribute to better evidence for international development.Item Community Engagement: A Critical Guide for Practitioners(2017-05) Shaw, Mae; Crowther, JimThe motivation for this critical guide to community engagement comes primarily from our experience over many years as teachers on undergraduate and postgraduate programmes of community education. These programmes have historically been validated both by the university and the appropriate professional body, so they are firmly located at the interface between academic and vocational standards; between theory and practice. We have found that these different, sometimes contradictory, demands create a productive dynamic which has been at the core of our teaching, our writing and our relationships with the broader field of practice. We consider that an engagement with significant theoretical frameworks, an awareness of important historical traditions and an empathetic identification with the social reality of marginalized groups are all necessary in order to practise critical community engagement.Item Knowledge Democracy and Excellence in Engagement(IDS Bulletin, 2016-12) Tandon, Rajesh; Singh, Wafa; Clover, Darlene E.; Hall, Budd L.We often come across theories and aspects related to ‘knowledge’, but seldom do we try to understand its hidden implications. Knowledge as understood generally is about the information of facts and understanding of a subject. This article essentially argues against this understanding. It explores the multiple dimensions of ‘knowledge’ through a literature review and illustrations of practical examples. It makes a case for how important the process of knowledge creation is, especially given current societal challenges. It also outlines the importance of co-creation of knowledge, through acknowledgement and valuation of alternate paradigms of knowledge. Further, it discusses the concept of ‘knowledge democracy’, and how institutions of higher education, by abiding by its principles, can help achieve ‘excellence in engagement’. The article concludes with the fndings of two studies undertaken by the United Nations Educational, Scientifc and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Chair, which were based on the principles of ‘knowledge democracy’ and ‘excellence in engagement’.Item Gauging the Impact of Community University Engagement Initiatives in India(ASEAN Journal of Community Engagement, 2017-07-02) Singh, WafaToday, the world we live in is challenged with the co-existence of ‘prosperity and poverty’. In India, in particular, although we are witnessing staggering increase in various economic indicators, our Human Development Indicators (HDIs) remain unenviable. It is in this context that Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have assumed profound importance as having the potential to offer sustainable solutions to such societal challenges. As a result, the practice of Community University Engagement (CUE) has gained prominence, as a phenomenon seeking a two-way discourse between the communities and the universities, in an attempt to produce ‘socially relevant knowledge’ which is inclusive and sustainable. Considering the importance and value of such an initiative, an attempt was made to tap such engagement practices between the HEIs and communities in India. In addition to plain documentation of such engagement, another highly crucial parameter in this regard is the measurement of the impact of such initiatives, on all the stakeholders involved in the process. However, academic literature related to this is still limited. In an attempt to fill this gap, the study at hand involved impact assessment of CUE activities as an important component. Using qualitative tools of impact assessment, this paper documents the empirical evidence of the impacts on various stakeholders, arising out of CUE activities, undertaken at various universities in India. The results generated through primary data, show that although it appears to be the case of binary stakeholders (Community and University), CUE envisages engagement, integration and cross linking among a number of sub-stakeholders, getting impacted in a multitude of ways. Students get an opportunity of experiential learning; while teachers can take up socially relevant research, as part of the curriculum. Communities benefit by way of empowerment and sustainable livelihoods, while universities get a chance to project themselves as ‘socially engaged’ institutions. Indirect and subsidiary stakeholders like Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and Government, respectively also take away several benefits from the process. Therefore, in essence, the paper makes the case of CUE by demonstrating the positive and mutually beneficial experienced enjoyed by the stakeholders involved in the process.Item Curriculum, Higher Education and the Public Good(GUNi, 2017-03) Hall, Budd L.; Bhatt, Nandita; Lepore, WalterCurriculum change in higher education is an extremely complex process. Influences on the content of what is taught in higher education include new knowledge coming from the various academic disciplines, from the regulatory bodies of many professions, from national calls for action, from global challenges, and from social movements of the day. This chapter argues that in the search for excellence, engagement and social responsibility there is no contradiction between responding to local calls for action and global maters. Illustrations of curriculum change which attend to both the local and the global include classroom changes, single university changes and system-wide changes in Canada, Asia, Latin America and New Zealand. We call for more attention to community engaged learning and the creation of central offices for community university engagement.Item Mutual Learning and Empowering Support: Networks and Balance between Local and Global Demands(GUNi, 2017-03) Tremblay, Crystal; Singh, Wafa; Lepore, WalterCommunity-University Engagement (CUE) networks and research partnerships may be particularly useful for advancing sustainable social and ecological development as they can mobilize the knowledge, skills and assets of both Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and communities. In this chapter, we present a series of principles for stakeholder engagement and partnership at HEIs, showcase key global CUE networks committed to strengthening the civic roles and responsibility of HEIs, and propose recommendations to help policymakers and practitioners use networks and partnerships as a practical tool to engage with global and local pressing problems. There is growing evidence that indicates a large aggregate trend to unite civil society, HEIs and networks in common efforts to co-create knowledge, mobilize it to inform practice and policy, and enhance the social, economic and environmental conditions of people, communities, nations and the world.Item Impact Assessment. Community-engaged Research (CER) at the University of Victoria, 2009-2015(2017-05-23) Tremblay, CrystalThis Impact Assessment report is based on several consultations and research (empirical and document analysis) that took place between July – December 2016 with former Directors, Associate Directors and Research Affiliates from the Office of Community-based Research (OCBR) and the Institute for the Studies and Innovation in Community University Engagement (ISICUE) at the University of Victoria. This assessment is prepared for the Office of the Vice President Research (OVPR) by the Office of Community University Engagement (OCUE), in partnership with Research Partnership Knowledge Mobilization (RPKM) unit at the University of Victoria (UVic). The main objective is to assess the various levels (e.g. micro, messo, macro) and broad range of impact resulting from Community-Engaged Research between 2009-2015. This includes direct outputs and outcomes of the OCBR (2008-2012) and ISICUE (2012-2015), as well as a full academic unit scan across the campus drawing from the Enhanced Planning Tool document (2014-15). Impact is documented by 5 indicators including: 1) external research funding, 2) academic unit scan, 3) reputation, 4) 12 indepth impact case studies, and 5) community-engaged learning metrics. The occurrences of impact are applied to OCUE’s 5 pillars of engagement: Community-engaged Research, Community-engaged Learning, Knowledge Mobilization, Good Neighbour and Institutional Policies and Support, the United Nations Sustainable Development framework (17 goals), as well as UVic’s International Plan (4 areas). The results point to a wide range and diversity of impact to society in each of the 5 OCUE pillars across the academic units in almost all the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Impact narratives from 12 in-depth case studies across the campus (e.g. Business, Engineering, Geography, History) demonstrate signifcant institutional and community beneft as an outcome of CER. The results highlight key institutional supports (e.g., RPKM, ORS) and provide an enhanced understanding of key contextual features of successful Community-engaged Research (CER) initiatives. The results inform criteria to support the assessment of community engaged scholarship in reviewing grant applications, partnership proposals, and faculty tenure, promotion, and merit applications. An impact rubric and guidelines for promotion and tenure are a valuable outcome of this project. This assessment is not exhaustive of all CER activities on campus. Appendix II provides some insight into the numerous research partnerships excluded from this study due to not having enough information that ft the criteria (See methodology).Item Recognizing Excellence in Community Engaged Scholarship at the University of Victoria. Peer Review Guidelines for Faculty Promotion and Tenure & Impact Rubric(2017-05-23) Tremblay, CrystalTis document provides an overview and suggested guidelines for evaluation and documentation in promotion and tenure of Community Engaged Scholarship (CES) at the University of Victoria. Te impact rubric and guidelines are based on a comprehensive literature review and empirical research conducted by the Office of Community University Engagement (OCUE) between August-December 2016 (See Impact Stories, an institutional assessment of CER at UVic). It is the intention that these tools be used to support a meaningful consultation process for reviewing and implementing tenure, promotion and merit policies for Community-engaged Scholarship at UVic.Item Guidelines for Global Review on Training in Community-Based Research (CBR)(UNESCO Chair in Community-Based Research and Social Responsibility in Higher Education, 2014-04) UNESCO Chair CBR-SRItem Beyond epistemicide: Knowledge democracy and higher education(UNESCO Chair in Community-based Research and Social Responsibility in Higher Education, 2015) Hall, BuddItem Resources Available at the UNESCO Chair Website(2015-06-05) Foulkes, Tabitha