Reshaping institutional boundaries to accommodate an engagement agenda

Innovative Higher Education

Volumn 33, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 181-196

  Sandmann, Lorilee R ^a   Weerts, David J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Boundary reshaping; Engagement; Organizational development; Outreach

Indexed keywords

EID: 51249100863     PISSN: 07425627     EISSN: 15731758     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10755-008-9077-9     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. American Association of State Colleges and Universities. (2002). Stepping forward as stewards of place. Washington, DC: American Association of State Colleges and Universities.
2. Berman, P., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1978). Federal programs supporting educational change. vol. VIII: Implementing and sustaining innovations (R-1589/8 HEW). Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
3. Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organizations and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
4. Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: The priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
5. Boyer, E. L. (1996). The scholarship of engagement. Journal of Public Service and Outreach, 1(1), 11-20.
6. Braxton, J. M., Luckey, W., & Helland, P. (2002). Institutionalizing a broader view of scholarship through Boyer's four domains. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 29(2). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
7. Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (2000). Institutionalization of service learning in higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 71, 273-290.
8. Brukardt, M. J., Holland, B., Percy, S. L., & Zimpher, N. (2004). Calling the question: Is higher education ready to commit to community engagement? A Wingspread statement 2004 [Electronic version]. Retrieved April 28, 2008, from http://www.uwm.edu/MilwaukeeIdea/elements/wingspread.pdf
9. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. (2007a). Community engagement elective classification. Retrieved April 28, 2008, from http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/classifications/index.asp?key=1213
10. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. (2007b). Carnegie selects colleges and universities for new elective community engagement classification. Retrieved April 28, 2008, from http://www.carnegiefoundation. org/news/sub.asp?key=51&subkey=2126
11. Colbeck, C. L. (1998). Merging in a seamless blend: How faculty integrate teaching and research. Journal of Higher Education, 69, 647-671.
12. Corrigan, D. (2000). The changing role of schools and higher education institutions with respect to community-based interagency collaboration and interprofessional partnerships. Peabody Journal of Education, 75, 176-195.
13. Dickson, A., Gallacher, J., Longden, B., & Bartlett, P. (1985). Higher education and the community. Higher Education Review, 17(3), 49-58.
14. Duderstadt, J. J. (2000). A university for the 21st century. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
15. Eckel, P. D., & Kezar, A. (2003). Taking the reins: Institutional transformation in higher education. Westport: American Council on Education & Praeger.
16. Erikson, K. (1966). Wayward puritans. New York, NY: Wiley.
17. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., & Schwartzman, S. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London, England: Sage.
18. Haworth, J., & Conrad, C. (1997). Emblems of quality in higher education: Developing and sustaining high quality programs. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
19. Holland, B. (2005). Institutional differences in pursuing the public good. In A. Kezar, T. Chambers, & J. Burkhardt (Eds.), Higher education and the public good (pp. 235-259). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
20. Holland, B. (2006). Levels of commitment to community engagement, characterized by key organizational factors evidencing relevance to institutional mission. Retrieved April 28, 2008, from http://www.henceonline.org
21. Kellogg Commission on the Future of State and Land-Grant Universities. (1999). Returning to our roots: The engaged institution [Electronic version]. Retrieved March 20, 2008, from http://www.nasulgc.org/NetCommunity/Document.Doc? id=183
22. Levine, A. (1980). Why innovation fails: The institutionalization and termination of innovation in higher education. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
23. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
24. National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research. (1996). A review of the literature on dissemination and knowledge utilization. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
25. National Forum on Higher Education for the Public Good. (2006). Higher education for the public good. Retrieved April 28, 2008, from http://www.thenationalforum.org/Docs/PDF/NSR.pdf
26. Newman, F., & Scurry, J. (2001). Higher education in the digital rapids. Providence, RI: Futures Project, Brown University.
27. O'Meara, K., & Rice, E. (Eds.). (2005). Faculty priorities reconsidered: Rewarding multiple forms of scholarship. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
28. Peters, C. J., Jordan, N. R., Adamek, M., & Alter, T. R. (Eds.). (2005). Engaging campus and community: The practice of public scholarship in the state and land-grant university system. Dayton, OH: The Kettering Foundation Press.
29. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
30. Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 1-19.
31. Yin, R. K. (2001). Case study research: Designs and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32. Yin, R. K. (2001). Case study research: Designs and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.