When Is a Partnership Not a Partnership? Reflecting on Inherent Challenges in University-Community Collaborations on Educational Programs

A. King, Allyson Eamer, Shanti I. Fernando
{"title":"When Is a Partnership Not a Partnership? Reflecting on Inherent Challenges in University-Community Collaborations on Educational Programs","authors":"A. King, Allyson Eamer, Shanti I. Fernando","doi":"10.54656/jces.v14i2.31","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In our research on supported education (SEd) programs in Canadian psychiatric hospitals, community-university partnerships have offered hopeful findings that demonstrate the potential for improved social and educational outcomes for patients in these programs. There were inherent challenges associated with conducting academic research on these programs alongside nonacademic partners. While some of our research collaborators, who were patient-educators with varying backgrounds, were fully engaged in the research process, others were only somewhat engaged, and some wanted minimal involvement. Because most psychiatric hospital–based research involves medical or pharmaceutical research, we did not locate established frameworks that could be used as models for our educational qualitative research. Although we encountered some obstacles to fully engaged partnerships, we still conducted productive collaborations that resulted in rich, broadly useful qualitative and quantitative data from interviews with students, teachers, and administrators. That being said, we found that in trying to respect the limited time availability of our partners, we ended up with less input from our partners than we had originally hoped for. The lessons we learned—such as the need for clearer role definitions and strategies to manage power imbalances, conflicting objectives, and time constraints faced by nonacademic collaborators—may be applied to other projects that engage community partners whose time and capacity constraints may inhibit their full engagement, such as municipalities supporting long-term care homes or emergency shelters.","PeriodicalId":73680,"journal":{"name":"Journal of community engagement and scholarship","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of community engagement and scholarship","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54656/jces.v14i2.31","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

In our research on supported education (SEd) programs in Canadian psychiatric hospitals, community-university partnerships have offered hopeful findings that demonstrate the potential for improved social and educational outcomes for patients in these programs. There were inherent challenges associated with conducting academic research on these programs alongside nonacademic partners. While some of our research collaborators, who were patient-educators with varying backgrounds, were fully engaged in the research process, others were only somewhat engaged, and some wanted minimal involvement. Because most psychiatric hospital–based research involves medical or pharmaceutical research, we did not locate established frameworks that could be used as models for our educational qualitative research. Although we encountered some obstacles to fully engaged partnerships, we still conducted productive collaborations that resulted in rich, broadly useful qualitative and quantitative data from interviews with students, teachers, and administrators. That being said, we found that in trying to respect the limited time availability of our partners, we ended up with less input from our partners than we had originally hoped for. The lessons we learned—such as the need for clearer role definitions and strategies to manage power imbalances, conflicting objectives, and time constraints faced by nonacademic collaborators—may be applied to other projects that engage community partners whose time and capacity constraints may inhibit their full engagement, such as municipalities supporting long-term care homes or emergency shelters.
什么时候合伙不是合伙?反思大学与社区在教育项目上合作的内在挑战
在我们对加拿大精神病院支持教育(SEd)项目的研究中,社区大学合作提供了有希望的发现,证明了这些项目中患者改善社会和教育成果的潜力。与非学术合作伙伴一起对这些项目进行学术研究存在固有的挑战。虽然我们的一些研究合作者,他们是不同背景的患者教育工作者,完全参与了研究过程,但其他人只是有点参与,有些人想要最小程度的参与。由于大多数以精神病院为基础的研究涉及医学或药物研究,我们没有找到可作为我们教育定性研究模型的既定框架。尽管我们在全面参与伙伴关系方面遇到了一些障碍,但我们仍然进行了富有成效的合作,从对学生、教师和管理人员的采访中获得了丰富、广泛有用的定性和定量数据。话虽如此,我们发现,在努力尊重合作伙伴有限的时间可用性时,我们最终从合作伙伴那里得到的投入比我们最初希望的要少。我们吸取的经验教训——例如需要更明确的角色定义和策略来管理权力失衡、目标冲突和非学术合作伙伴面临的时间限制——可以应用于其他项目,这些项目吸引了时间和能力限制可能阻碍其充分参与的社区合作伙伴,例如支持长期护理院或紧急避难所的市政当局。
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