Yesterday morning we had a lively conversation about Community-Based Research and its role on the Colorado College campus. In my opinion, these two first chapters of Strand et. al offered an easily understandable and relateable introduction to Community-Based Research to a reader (myself) who has little to no former knowledge on the topic. The CBR newbies (me, Sarah and Adison), agreed that one of the most helpful sections of this article was the “Ten Principles of Successful Community-Campus Partnerships” (p. 29)
Entering partnerships
Community and campus partners
- Share a worldview
- Agree about goals and strategies
- Have trust and mutual respect
Conducting partnerships
Community and campus partners
- Share power
- Communicate clearly and listen carefully
- Understand and empathize with each other
- Remain flexible
Outcomes of partnerships
Community and campus partners
- Satisfy each other’s interests or needs
- Have their organizational capacities enhanced
- Adopt long-range social change perspectives
Although these principles can certainly be unpacked and analyzed [“share a worldview” — on everything?? the issue at-hand? social inequality and justice? Is this too idealistic of an outlook?], they set a clear and concise baseline of expectations and best practices when entering into a relationship with a community partner.
The second expectation/best practice outlined by Strand that we chose to discuss was the thought that, “in every case, the community consists of people who are oppressed powerless, economically deprived, or disenfranchised — that is, who disadvantaged by existing social, political or economic arrangements” (p. 3). This sentence struck a chord with us because often, the CCE’s current community-based research partners are in fact more resourced than we are. How do we reconcile these fruitful community partnerships with the striking reality that 18% of Colorado Springs children live in poverty, and that in our zip code alone, 21% of people live in poverty (thank you Adison for these stats)? Where are we choosing to dedicate our resources and what does that say about our motivations as an institution of higher education?
Additionally, how do we encourage students to contribute to our surrounding community? A common barrier for student engagement could possibly be that students consider themselves temporary community members. If this is the case, how can we encourage students to articulate why they would rather conduct research in places so removed from their physical location? How do we remove the stigmas associated with Colorado Springs, or better yet, how do we make conducting research in Colorado Springs cool?
One final question that I would like to highlight for readers is the following:
One major problem with CBR is faculty buy-in. Primarily, the rigor of community-based research when compared to traditional, “hard science” research is often called into question. How do we combat these doubts? How do we incentivize faculty participation in CBR?
In conclusion, as we move forward with a CBR feasibility study and implementation of new workshops, how do we address these very major questions? What suggestions do you have for us?