carnegie hacks

Decreasing your Carnegie learning curve
so you can focus on what really matters

 

Carnegie Hacks are insights and tools to save you time and energy you can use to

advancing CE on your campus, instead. We post them every week, right here.

#59 The Sorting of the Scholarship


If you've been following along this month, you have a pile of great scholarship examples. Here are some quick rules of thumb for sorting them into the best answer. (The question language and corresponding Carnegie Advice is referenced below, to help you with examples that could fit into more than one question.)



Reclassifying applicants, scroll down to the second half of this post for your rules of thumb.


Quick rule of thumb for first time applicants


Has an obvious community partner? --> Scholarship of Engagement

  • Faculty-authored --> Question C.2

  • Staff --> There's no question asking for this type of example


Primarily advances the authors' discipline(s)? --> Scholarship of Engagement

  • Faculty-authored --> Question C.2

  • Staff -- There's no question asking for this type of example


Primarily advances the field of SLCE? --> Scholarship of Teaching & Learning

  • Faculty-authored --> Question C.3

  • Staff-authored:

  • Curricular --> Question C.3.

  • Co-Curricular --> Question C.1.


Funded by NSF? --> Broader Impacts of Research

  • Faculty-authored --> Question D.4.

  • Staff --> There's no question asking for this type of example


Scholarship questions with corresponding Carnegie Advice:


C. 1. (Page 16) Are there examples of staff professional activity (conference presentation, publication, consulting, awards, etc.) associated with their co-curricular engagement achievements (i.e., student program development, training curricula, leadership programing, etc.)?

o No o Yes

1.1. Provide a minimum of five examples of staff professional activity:

Carnegie Advice:

  • The purpose of this question is to determine the level to which staff are involved in professional activities that contribute to the ongoing development of best practices in curricular and co-curricular engagement.

  • Doing so is an indicator of attention to improvement and quality practice as well as an indication that community engagement is seen as a valued staff professional activity.

  • Please provide examples that your staff have produced in connection with their community engagement professional duties.

  • We expect this to include professional products on topics such as but not limited to curriculum and co-curriculum development, assessment of student learning in the community, student development and leadership, etc., that have been disseminated to others through professional venues as illustrated in the question.


C. 2. (Page 17) Are there examples of faculty scholarship, including faculty of any employment status associated with their curricular engagement achievements (scholarship of teaching and learning such as research studies, conference presentations, pedagogy workshops, publications, etc.)?

o No o Yes

2.1. Provide a minimum of five examples of faculty scholarship from as many different disciplines as possible.

Carnegie Advice:

  • The purpose of this question is to determine the level to which faculty are involved in traditional scholarly activities that they now associate with curricular engagement.

  • Doing so is an indicator of attention to improvement and quality practice as well as an indication that community engagement is seen as a valued scholarly activity within the disciplines.

  • Please provide scholarship examples that your faculty have produced in connection with their service learning or community-based courses.

  • We expect this to include scholarly products on topics such as but not limited to curriculum development, assessment of student learning in the community, action research conducted within a course, etc., that have been disseminated to others through scholarly venues as illustrated in the question.


C. 3. (Page 17) Are there examples of faculty scholarship and/or professional activities of staff associated with the scholarship of engagement (i.e., focused on community impact and with community partners) and community engagement activities (technical reports, curriculum, research reports, policy reports, publications, other scholarly artifacts, etc.)?

o No o Yes

Provide a minimum of five examples of scholarship from as many different disciplines as possible:

Relevant Carnegie Advice:

  • Characteristics of scholarship within research and creative activities include the following:

  • applying the literature and theoretical frameworks in a discipline or disciplines posing questions conducting systematic inquiry that is made public providing data and results that can be reviewed by the appropriate knowledge community built upon by others to advance the field.

Further Carnegie Advice:

  • The purpose of this question is to explore the degree to which community engagement activities have been linked to faculty scholarly activity and staff professional activity.

  • Describe outputs that are recognized and valued as scholarship and professional activity.

  • Please provide examples such as but not limited to research studies of partnerships, documentation of community response to outreach programs, or other evaluations or studies of impacts and outcomes of outreach or partnership activities that have led to scholarly reports, policies, academic and/or professional presentations, publications, etc.

  • Examples should illustrate the breadth of activity across the institution with

  • representation of varied disciplines and professional positions the connection of outreach and partnership activities to scholarship.

  • Broader Impacts of Research activities producing co-created scholarship of investigators and practitioners aimed at meaningful societal impacts could be included here.


D.4. (Page 18) Broader Impacts of Research

Is community engagement connected to campus efforts that support federally funded grants for Broader Impacts of Research activities of faculty and students?

o No o Yes

4.1. Please describe and provide examples:

  • No Carnegie Advice offered.



Quick rule of thumb for reclassifying applicants


Primarily advances the authors' discipline(s)? --> Scholarship of Engagement

  • Faculty-authored --> Question 5.2

  • Staff-authored --> Question 5.3

Primarily advances the field of SLCE? --> Scholarship of Teaching & Learning

  • Faculty-authored --> Question 5.1

  • Staff-authored --> Question 5.3

Has an obvious community partner? --> Scholarship of Engagement

  • Faculty-authored --> Question 5.2

  • Staff-authored --> Question 5.3

Funded by NSF? --> Broader Impacts of Research

  • Faculty-authored --> Question 6.4.

  • Staff-authored --> There's no question asking for this kind of example


Scholarship questions with corresponding Carnegie Advice:

5.1. (Page 13) How have faculty of any employment status (tenured/tenure track, full time non-tenure track, and part time faculty) not only incorporated community-based teaching and learning into courses, but turned that activity into research to improve teaching and learning through the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL), i.e., publishing articles, making presentations, conducting studies of their courses, conducting workshops, etc..

Provide five examples of faculty scholarship to improve, critique, promote, or reflect on community engaged teaching and learning. Indicate whether the faculty are tenure-track or part-time/non-tenure track Also, describe how this scholarship has been supported since your last classification. (Word limit: 500 )

Carnegie Advice:

  • The purpose of this question is to determine the level to which faculty are involved in traditional scholarly activities that they now associate with curricular engagement.

  • Doing so is an indicator of attention to improvement and quality practice as well as an indication that community engagement is seen as a valued scholarly activity within the disciplines.

  • Please provide scholarship examples that your faculty have produced in connection with their service learning or community-based courses.

  • We expect this to include scholarly products on topics such as but not limited to curriculum development, assessment of student learning in the community, action research conducted within a course, etc., that have been disseminated to others through scholarly venues as illustrated in the question.


5.2. (Page 14) How have faculty of any employment status (tenured/tenure track, full time non-tenure track, and part time faculty) collaborated with community partners to produce scholarly products of benefit to the community that are representative of co-created knowledge between academics and community partners resulting from outreach and partnerships (e.g., technical reports, curriculum, research reports, policy reports, publications, etc.).

Provide five examples of faculty scholarship conducted with partners for community benefit or to improve, critique, promote, or reflect on partnerships. Also, describe how this scholarship has been supported since your last classification. (Word limit: 500 )

Carnegie Advice:

Characteristics of scholarship within research and creative activities include the following:

applying the literature and theoretical frameworks in a discipline or disciplines posing questions conducting systematic inquiry that is made public providing data and results that can be reviewed by the appropriate knowledge community built upon by others to advance the field.

Carnegie Advice:

  • The purpose of this question is to explore the degree to which community engagement activities have been linked to faculty scholarly activity and staff professional activity.

  • Describe outputs that are recognized and valued as scholarship and professional activity.

  • Please provide examples such as but not limited to

  • research studies of partnerships, documentation of community response to outreach programs, or other evaluations or studies of impacts and outcomes of outreach or partnership activities that have led to scholarly reports, policies, academic and/or professional presentations, publications, etc.

  • Examples should illustrate the breadth of activity across the institution with

  • representation of varied disciplines and professional positions the connection of outreach and partnership activities to scholarship.

  • Broader Impacts of Research activities producing co-created scholarship of investigators and practitioners aimed at meaningful societal impacts could be included here.



5.3. (Page 14) How have professional staff contributed to the scholarship of community engagement (through conference presentation, publication, consulting, awards, etc.) associated with their co-curricular engagement achievements (i.e., student program development, training curricula, leadership programing, etc.)? Provide five examples of professional staff scholarship related to community engagement and describe how this scholarship has been supported since your last classification. (Word limit: 500):

Carnegie Advice:

  • The purpose of this question is to determine the level to which staff are involved in professional activities that contribute to the ongoing development of best practices in curricular and co-curricular engagement.

  • Doing so is an indicator of attention to improvement and quality practice as well as an indication that community engagement is seen as a valued staff professional activity.

  • Please provide examples that your staff have produced in connection with their community engagement professional duties.

  • We expect this to include professional products on topics such as but not limited to curriculum and co-curriculum development, assessment of student learning in the community, student development and leadership, etc., that have been disseminated to others through professional venues as illustrated in the question.



6.4. (Page 14) Indicate whether community engagement is connected to campus efforts that support federally funded grants for Broader Impacts of Research activities of faculty and students, and describe what has changed since the last classification. Provide relevant links if available.

  • No Carnegie Advice offered.

24 views

Heather Mack Consulting, LLC

carnegie2020@hmackconsulting.com

Getting Carnegie Classified™️ and Heather Mack Consulting, LLC operate independently from and are not affiliated with the Brown University Swearer Center for Public Service or the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education.