Community

Engagement:

some issuesRhodes University Imbizo, 22 July, 2006, Mpekweni

by Guy Berger

1 3

3 2 4

3 1

1 2

A

B

C

D

W X Y Z

1 4 3 2

3 2 1 4

2 3 4 1

4 1 2 3

A

B

C

D

W X Y Z

1 4 3 2

3 2 1 4

2 3 4 1

4 1 2 3

A

B

C

D

W X Y Z

Coming up

•Context & definitions

•Trade-offs in TL-R-C• A perspective beyond the university’s

corporate point of view•Partnership issues

•Resources & priorities

•Resolutions

1. Introduction

Post-94: Accountability

HEQC: Put community service in visionVC s in 2000: helps teach citizenship

BUT:

Substantive or symbolic matter?

2. Definitions

CE

2. Definitions

CE

CS

2. Definitions

CE

CS

SL

2. Definitions

What is community?

–State bodies?

–Industry associations?

–Critique or only constructive?

– Include a controversial contribution?

3. Trade-offs & integrations

CHE view is ― make a move from:

Silos to Simultaneityversus

Prioritise 1st & 2nd

functionalities?

T RC T CR →

3. Trade-offs & integrations

Service ←goal→ Learning

Learning ← outcome → Research

Learning ←CE → Research

4. Whose point of view?

• CE as a good in-itself, not only in institutional interests.

• But assessing players’ points of view:

helps with sustainability.

• Even reluctant students benefit.

• How ensure symmetry of benefit:

Community ←beneficiary → Campus

5. Partnership: who helps who?

Paternalism? or “research”“Opportunity to break myopic preoccupation with academic forms of learning by validating indigenous, tacit and pre-theoretical knowledge endemic to the non-academic world”

Issue: $ contributions of each partner?Issue: Contracts – including risk management.

N E S T

E I N A

S N A P

T A P E

A

B

C

D

W X Y Z

EASE EASY EATS EARS EDGE EERY EINA EMIT EN EPIC EYRE ENDS EUR0 ES

B O O K

O

O

K

A

B

C

D

W X Y Z

B O O K

O

O

K

A

B

C

D

W X Y Z

B O O K

O B O E

O O Z E

K E E N

A

B

C

D

W X Y Z

6. Resources & rhetoric

CHE: “due recognition”VCs: “promoted & rewarded”

What will be mobilised, and, where relevant, at expense of what?

7. @ Rhodes?

Many projects, uneven pedagogy.

Still: CinderellaCan we go through all stages to 100%

“institutionalise”?Or: Concentrate on increasing

co-ordination of a few, even if limited impact?

8. Conclusion

• CE difficult – goes against SA trend.

• CE vision conflicts with reality in servicing industry (& unequal social order), and with aspiration to be ivory tower.

= CE is extrinsic, and new• But tensions a source of creative

energy• So, despite no resources, embrace it

Summing up• SA context calls for CE• Definitions – and open sky• Simultaneity, vs hierarchy of

functionality?• Points of view: beyond RU interests• Seeking symmetry of benefit – and

recognising knowledge input to partnership

• Resources & strategy: shoot for whole, or narrow target?

So … embrace creative tension of 3 roles:

ivory, ebony/bigben, & …

still-to-find-its-colour.

Not ignoring R, it’s a fact that a bit of TLC never did anyone any

harm!

Thank you