Beginning fall 2016, the College of Education faculty have been approved to incorporate engaged scholarship in the retention, tenure and promotion process. The Faculty Roles Committee has put together this website to help guide you as you explore this new option as a faulty member, as a chair and a member of the DPC. Please note that the work on this site just represents a possible example (see the checklist under the "criteria" tab for information about what is required as a part of an engaged scholarship submission and for examples of what various components may look like). In no way is it meant to represent the only possible approach to address this new policy.
After a 6 year journey we are excited about the policy, and we strongly believe that incorporating this work into the RTP process helps the faculty in the COE to truly live our mission.
Faculty Roles and Expectations Strategic Planning Task Force Members:
- Lisa Kirtman, Associate Dean, Task Force Chair
- Erica Bowers, Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Literacy and Reading Education
- John Hoffman, Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Educational Leadership
- Adrian Jung, Professor, Department of Special Education
- Christopher Street, Professor, Department of Secondary Education
For an overview of the responsibilities, policies, and criteria related to this subject, please check back for updated content and documentation.
Definition
“…Engaged scholarship is defined by the collaboration between academics and individuals outside the academy - knowledgeable professionals and the lay public (local, regional/state national, global) - for the mutually beneficial exchange of knowledge and resources in a context of partnership and reciprocity. The scholarship of engagement includes explicitly democratic dimensions which encourage the participation of non-academics in ways that enhance and broaden engagement and deliberation about major social issues inside and outside the university. It seeks to facilitate a more active and engaged democracy by bringing affected publics into problem-solving work in ways that advance the public good with and not merely for the public” (New England Resource Center for Higher Education, 2011).
Responsibilities
Reviewer: Submitted evidence will be reviewed to determine whether a given project is consistent with the definition and guidelines of engaged scholarship. Faculty are encouraged to submit multiple forms of evidence, and assure any letters of validation refer concretely to practices of engaged scholarship and reflect the criteria and standards of engaged scholarship as outlined in this document.
Faculty Member: The faculty member must make a case for why this work should be accepted as engaged scholarship. Engaged scholarship and traditional scholarship include a theoretical basis for the work. The quality of traditional scholarship, as determined by the retention, tenure and promotion process, is typically evaluated by peer review journal dissemination. The quality of engaged scholarship is evaluated by the impact on community partners. When submitting traditional forms of scholarship such as a journal article, it is the responsibility of the faculty member to document peer review by external individuals (e.g. journal reviewers and editors)--this demonstrates their mark of approval for the quality of the work (additional information may include the acceptance rate or impact factor for the journal). With engaged scholarship, RTP reviewers (DPC, chair, dean, etc.) will not be considering peer reviews from other scholars; faculty submitting engaged scholarship items must include compelling evidence to document the quality of the engaged scholarship project.
The faculty member must also include the completed engaged scholarship checklist form in his/her portfolio. In addition for any collaborate projects, the
Co-Authorship Disclosure Form
provided by the University must be completed.
Policy Language
A meaningful, high quality, Engaged Scholarship project, as defined per the criteria that follow, may be substituted for one high quality peer-reviewed publication for the purpose of meeting department standards for a rating of excellent in scholarly and creative activities. Engaged scholarship cannot be used to achieve a rating of good or lower.
For more information, please review your Department Personnel Standards.
Criteria
A meaningful, high quality, Engaged Scholarship project includes a narrative that must addresses the five following criteria (Faculty must submit multiple forms of evidence for each area):
- A clear rationale demonstrating the need for the work addressed and for the strategies and/or tools with which the work is carried out (The plan must be supported by evidence-based practices). Demonstration that the work is reciprocal in nature.
- Work must have a conceptual or theoretical basis; i.e., is conducted within the context of existing peer reviewed knowledge. Normally, this is accomplished through a review of related work in an area showing what has been done in the past and providing a rationale as to why additional work is needed in this area.
- Demonstration of the quantitative and/or qualitative impact of the project. A clear impact on a district/community partner is required. This could include a letter from partners with documentation of measured impact on outcomes.
- A description of the evaluation process and outcomes that includes the following: research questions informed by and situated within the literature; an analysis of findings that is contextualized within the particular community/district/school/classroom needs and the discipline; implications that illustrate the practical ways in which the project shaped or is shaping lived realities for the better; and directions for future work. Evaluation results and implemented changes based on this evaluation must be completed and disseminated before the faculty member can submit this work for the RTP process.
- Evidence of dissemination activities and feedback from stakeholders must be included. Dissemination may be accomplished in various ways, including formal presentations to partnership groups and reports for partners.
Please note: "It is essential that community engaged scholars document their work to be scholarly, in that it creates, advances, or extends knowledge. Mere provision of community service, while being a form of community engagement, cannot be considered to be community-engaged scholarship."
https://depts.washington.edu/ccph/pdf_files/CES_RPT_Package.pdf
Documentation
This section contains a checklist that will help you gather evidence for the minimum criteria required to produce a quality project. There are also examples of the different pieces of evidence such as letter composition examples, a narrative example, and links to supporting documentation.
Please click on a link below to access a resource directly:
Q & A
If you have any questions, please review the FAQs below. If you still have questions and you do not see it below, please do not hesitate to contact your department head.
-
What is the definition of Engaged Scholarship?
“…Engaged scholarship is defined by the collaboration between academics and individuals outside the academy – knowledgeable professionals and the lay public (local, regional/state national, global) – for the mutually beneficial exchange of knowledge and resources in a context of partnership and reciprocity. The scholarship of engagement includes explicitly democratic dimensions which encourage the participation of non-academics in ways that enhance and broaden engagement and deliberation about major social issues inside and outside the university. It seeks to facilitate a more active and engaged democracy by bringing affected publics into problem-solving work in ways that advance the public good with and not merely for the public” (New England Resource Center for Higher Education, 2011).
-
Do I need to present a narrative that address all 5 criteria?
Yes. It would also be helpful to note where each piece of evidence can be found that is referred to in the narrative.
-
Can engaged scholarship be used to achieve a rating of good or progressing?
No. A meaningful, high-quality Engaged Scholarship project, as defined per the criteria established by the College of Education, may be substituted for one high quality peer-reviewed publication for the purpose of meeting department standards for a rating of excellent in scholarly and creative activities. Engaged scholarship cannot be used to achieve a rating of good or lower.
Please check your department standards for language that applies to your department.
-
Can an untenured faculty member undertake an engaged scholarship project?
Pursuing an engaged scholarship project is something that may be undertaken by junior faculty members. However, faculty should be advised that they will need to establish themselves as researchers primarily through the publication of peer reviewed articles/books.
-
The checklist notes that you must have multiple sources of evidence for each of 5 criteria areas. How many is multiple?
We suggest two or more pieces of evidence for each area. The only area that may only need one piece of evidence is the theoretical framework. This framework can be part of the narrative and does not have to appear in any other document.
-
Can one source of evidence be used in more than one category?
Yes this is allowed.
-
Can faculty collaborate on an engaged scholarship project?
Yes, just like a published article that can be co-authored, faculty collaborative efforts are acceptable. It is the responsibility of each collaborator to demonstrate his/her contribution to the project. The Co-Authorship Disclosure Form (provided by the University) should be used for any collaborate projects.
-
Does an engaged scholarship project take the place of a grant (funded or unfunded)? Does PI or Co-PI status matter?
This answer depends on your department standards. Please check your department standards for specifics that apply to your department.
-
Can an engaged scholarship project lead to a peer-reviewed publication and still be counted?
This depends. In departments that allow faculty members to accept a grant and then develop scholarly work from that funded grant, the same is true for engaged scholarship. If a department does not allow faculty members to publish from funded grants, then they cannot use an engaged scholarship project as the basis for scholarly publications.
-
What is the difference between service, traditional scholarship, and engaged scholarship?
Difference between service, traditional scholarship, and engaged scholarship ENGAGED SCHOLARSHIP SERVICE TRADITIONAL SCHOLARSHIP Co-Constructed Inquiry (with community partners) Individually or co-constructed Individually or co-constructed Theoretical basis for decision-making The focus is on service, with “inquiry” being minimal or absent. Theoretical basis for decision- making Systematic plan for evaluation that includes evidence of continued improvement/change based on evaluation No evaluation or one time evaluation Analysis of findings Multiple and public dissemination No dissemination/limited dissemination Publication or scholarly presentation Verifiable community impact, resulting in an intellectual and imaginative work that yields a “public good” product (Ellison & Eatman, 2008) Possible or no indicated community impact Possible or no indicated community impact
