Book Review | Civic Studies: Approaches to the Emerging Field

Mark Wilson
{"title":"Book Review | Civic Studies: Approaches to the Emerging Field","authors":"Mark Wilson","doi":"10.21768/EJOPA.V3I1.27","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For faculty and staff in colleges and universities who labor to fulfill higher \neducation’s civic purpose and mission, two challenges generally dominate the \ndiscussion on what it will take to create a culture where the civic mission flourishes: \n1) institutional support to develop and maintain robust civic relationships and \nstudent learning outcomes; and 2) an intellectual shift among departments and \ndisciplines regarding the nature and understanding of scholarship. Institutional \nsupport for civic engagement rises and falls with changes in administration and the \noccasional realignment of priorities. The precarious nature of federal and state \nfunding is not insignificant either. The second challenge—academic departments \nthat eschew non-traditional methods, products, and outputs as inferior and \nunworthy of tenure and promotion—is more complex and pervasive, though \nequally frustrating for those faculty and staff who work to align scholarship with \npublic engagement. As a result, the narrative of the institutionalization of \nuniversity-public engagement is generally negative in tone and less optimistic than \npessimistic. The walls of the ivory tower seem impenetrable to new forms of \nscholarship, especially those that espouse a civic purpose.","PeriodicalId":434223,"journal":{"name":"eJournal of Public Affairs","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"eJournal of Public Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21768/EJOPA.V3I1.27","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

For faculty and staff in colleges and universities who labor to fulfill higher education’s civic purpose and mission, two challenges generally dominate the discussion on what it will take to create a culture where the civic mission flourishes: 1) institutional support to develop and maintain robust civic relationships and student learning outcomes; and 2) an intellectual shift among departments and disciplines regarding the nature and understanding of scholarship. Institutional support for civic engagement rises and falls with changes in administration and the occasional realignment of priorities. The precarious nature of federal and state funding is not insignificant either. The second challenge—academic departments that eschew non-traditional methods, products, and outputs as inferior and unworthy of tenure and promotion—is more complex and pervasive, though equally frustrating for those faculty and staff who work to align scholarship with public engagement. As a result, the narrative of the institutionalization of university-public engagement is generally negative in tone and less optimistic than pessimistic. The walls of the ivory tower seem impenetrable to new forms of scholarship, especially those that espouse a civic purpose.
书评|公民研究:新兴领域的途径
对于那些努力实现高等教育的公民目标和使命的高校教职员工来说,在如何创造一种公民使命蓬勃发展的文化的讨论中,两个挑战通常占据主导地位:1)建立和维持健全的公民关系和学生学习成果的制度支持;2)院系和学科之间关于学术性质和理解的思想转变。对公民参与的机构支持随着行政管理的变化和优先事项的偶尔调整而起起落落。联邦和州政府资金的不稳定性也不容忽视。第二个挑战——学术部门回避非传统的方法、产品和产出,认为它们是低劣的,不值得获得终身职位和晋升——更为复杂和普遍,尽管对于那些致力于将学术与公众参与结合起来的教职员工来说,这同样令人沮丧。因此,关于大学-公众参与制度化的叙述通常是消极的语气,乐观多于悲观。象牙塔的墙壁似乎无法穿透新的学术形式,尤其是那些支持公民目的的学术形式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信