How Arnstein’s Ladder of Citizen Participation Can Enhance Community-Engaged Teaching and Learning

Chelsea Willness, John Boakye-Danquah, Danielle Nichols
{"title":"How Arnstein’s Ladder of Citizen Participation Can Enhance Community-Engaged Teaching and Learning","authors":"Chelsea Willness, John Boakye-Danquah, Danielle Nichols","doi":"10.5465/amle.2020.0284","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Community-engaged teaching and learning (CETL) is an educational approach heralded as fostering student learning and social responsibility. However, prior research has noted the absence of consideration for the “community” component of this approach, including whether there is mutual benefit in the relationship between institutions and their community partners, and the extent to which the community has voice or power in the process and outcomes of CETL. To address this issue, we introduce a process-oriented framework based on theory that should help to advance best practices and scholarship in CETL: Arnstein’s (1969) Ladder of Citizen Participation. We then “test” this framework adapted for CETL by using it to assess examples of current practice of community participation in CETL, as evidenced in a purposeful cross-section of cases published in business and management education literature. Our findings suggest the Ladder provides meaningful differentiation among various forms of CETL and can offer effective guidance for achieving partnerships with mutual benefit, voice, and empowerment, and for identifying approaches that could limit community engagement in CETL. In this context, the framework can guide instructors to reflect on their practices and to explore what greater involvement of community partners in CETL may mean.","PeriodicalId":228757,"journal":{"name":"Academy of Management Learning and Education","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academy of Management Learning and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2020.0284","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Community-engaged teaching and learning (CETL) is an educational approach heralded as fostering student learning and social responsibility. However, prior research has noted the absence of consideration for the “community” component of this approach, including whether there is mutual benefit in the relationship between institutions and their community partners, and the extent to which the community has voice or power in the process and outcomes of CETL. To address this issue, we introduce a process-oriented framework based on theory that should help to advance best practices and scholarship in CETL: Arnstein’s (1969) Ladder of Citizen Participation. We then “test” this framework adapted for CETL by using it to assess examples of current practice of community participation in CETL, as evidenced in a purposeful cross-section of cases published in business and management education literature. Our findings suggest the Ladder provides meaningful differentiation among various forms of CETL and can offer effective guidance for achieving partnerships with mutual benefit, voice, and empowerment, and for identifying approaches that could limit community engagement in CETL. In this context, the framework can guide instructors to reflect on their practices and to explore what greater involvement of community partners in CETL may mean.
安斯坦的公民参与阶梯如何促进社区参与的教与学
社区参与教学(CETL)是一种促进学生学习和社会责任的教育方法。然而,先前的研究指出,缺乏对这种方法的“社区”成分的考虑,包括机构与其社区合作伙伴之间的关系是否互惠互利,以及社区在CETL的过程和结果中有多大程度的发言权或权力。为了解决这个问题,我们引入了一个基于理论的面向过程的框架,该框架应该有助于推进英语教学的最佳实践和学术研究:阿恩斯坦(1969)的公民参与阶梯。然后,我们“测试”这个适用于CETL的框架,用它来评估社区参与CETL的当前实践例子,如商业和管理教育文献中发表的有目的的横截面案例所证明的那样。我们的研究结果表明,梯子在各种形式的CETL之间提供了有意义的区分,可以为实现互利、发言权和赋权的伙伴关系提供有效指导,并为确定可能限制社区参与CETL的方法提供有效指导。在此背景下,该框架可以引导教师反思他们的实践,并探索社区合作伙伴更多地参与英语教学可能意味着什么。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信