Understanding Research Fatigue in the Context of Community-University Relations

Community research fatigue has been understudied within the context of community-university relationships and knowledge production. Community-based research (CBR), often occurring within a limited geography and population, increases the possibility that community members feel exhausted or over-whelmed by university research —particularly when they do not see tangible results from research activities. Prompted by informal stories of research fatigue from community members, a small graduate student team sought to understand the extent to which community members experienced research fatigue, and what factors contributed to or relieved feelings of research fatigue. In order to explore these dimensions of research fatigue, semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted with 21 participants, including community members (n = 9), staff and faculty (n = 10), and students (n = 2). The objective of the research was to identify university practices that contribute to research fatigue and how to address the issue at the university level. Qualitative data analysis revealed several important actionable findings: the structure and conduct of community-based research, structured reciprocity and impact, and the role of trust in research. This study’s findings are used to assess the quality of Clark University’s research relationship with its adjacent community. Recommendations are offered; such as to improve partnerships, the impact of CBR, and to develop clear principles of practice.

Youth and Young Adult Homelessness in Worcester, Massachusetts:

Supporting Worcester’s ongoing effort to understand and address youth and young adult homelessness, the Community Roundtable on Youth Homelessness in conjunction with the Compass Project and Clark University conducted the fourth annual Point-in-Time Survey during October of 2012. Young people were surveyed at city shelters, youth programs, outside of schools, in parks, and on the streets of Worcester. Out of the 753 young people (ages 13to 25) surveyed, 120 (16%) dentified as homeless. We define homeless to include young people in shelters, staying with others temporarily (i.e. couch surfing) or on the streets. In addition to these 120 young people, another 220 youth who were housed reported that they had a friend who was homeless. As in prior years, when compared to their housed counterparts in the study, homeless youth: Have experienced more residential instability and family conflict; Have more precarious income situations; Are more likely to have children; Are more likely to have had involvement with the foster care and/or juvenile justice systems; and Have faced more barriers accessing services.