Engaging+our+Terminological+Messiness+-+Conceptualizations,+Distinctions,+Assessments+Thereof,+and+Implications

**IARSLCE Distinguished Research Award** **Engaging our terminological messiness:** **Conceptualizations, distinctions, assessments thereof, and implications**

Jeffrey Howard, Director of Faculty Development, Steans Center for Community-based Service Learning, DePaul University [jhowar15@depaul.edu]



**Keywords**: Community-engaged scholarship, scholarship of engagement, campus-community engagement, terminology

**Track**: Faculty roles and professional development

**Format**: Conversation hour


 * Date & time: **Friday 3:20 - 4:30
 * Location: **Crystal Room

**Summary**: Is service-learning a model of community engagement or of community-engaged scholarship? How about research on service-learning, professional service, or scholarship //on// engagement? There are so many terms in the literature, often used synonymously and interchangeably. But as our field has grown—and it might be said that we are still very much emerging—perhaps it is time to establish some clearer distinctions amongst the various terms we use.

With active and participatory methods, we will clarify the terms, conceptualizations, and models of faculty engagement with the community, noting distinctions among them and identifying examples of research questions subsumed under each where appropriate.

Picking up on Giles’ (2008) article citing terminological messiness in the faculty campus-community engagement literature, we will review the umbrella terms “community engagement,” “scholarship,” and “community-engaged scholarship.” We will consider the various manifestations of each of these three umbrella categories, including service-learning teaching, community-based research, research on service-learning, professional service, scholarship of engagement, scholarship on engagement, and public scholarship. Definitions found in the literature will serve as backdrops to this discussion, and we will look at resonance amongst these manifestations and Boyer’s scholarship paradigms.

Helping to elucidate the differences amongst these terms, we will look at a number of rubrics available to assess quality of these various community-based practices, including that of the National Review Board for the Scholarship of Engagement as well as others developed by TRUCEN, by Furco, and by Howard. Then we will discuss the implications of terminology for what counts at various types of higher education institutions, in particular at attendees’ institutions.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 140%;">We will conclude with discussion of how involvement in one manifestation of this work can serve as a steppingstone to others, which would be helpful for those responsible for growing community engagement on their respective campuses and for faculty seeking seamlessness across their teaching, research, and service through community engagement.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 140%;">**References**: <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 140%;">Giles, D. (2008). Understanding an emerging field of scholarship: Toward a research agenda for public, engaged scholarship. //Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 12//(2), 97-106.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 140%;">**Please click here to access a PDF of this page:** <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 140%;">[|Howard_Engaging our Terminological Messiness- Conceptualizations Distinctions Assessments Thereof and Implications.pdf]


 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 140%;">To download materials from this session please click on the file link(s) below. **

**Please join the conversation about this session! To do so, please click on the "Edit" tab at the upper right, scroll back down to here, and lead the comment with your name.**