Educating...for what?: Effective Practice

Higgins School of the Humanities/Difficult Dialogues: Video Recording from 09/27/2011 event featuring John Makransky and Alan Lightman titled "Effective Priactice" Event Description: At Clark, we have chosen to focus on the concept of effective practice as we rethink our curriculum. What is the nature of practice? What makes something a practice? Does practice serve our intentions, or open unexpected pathways? What does it mean if we also ask it to be effective? And what forms of practice do the humanities cultivate? Our guests for a conversation about practice are John Makransky, Professor of Buddhism and comparative theology at Boston College and a teacher in the Dzogchen tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, and Alan Lightman, physicist, writer and activist, and adjunct faculty member at MIT. They both have lives profoundly rooted in questions of practice.

"What is the Value of Youth Work?" Symposium Booklet

As a group of experienced and novice youth workers, we believe that youth work is fundamentally about building trust-filled, mutually respectful relationships with young people. We create safe environments for young people to connect with other supportive adults and peers and to avoid violence in their neighborhoods and their homes. We guide those harmed by oppressive community conditions such as racism, sexism, agism, homophobia, and classism through a process of healing. As we get to know more about young people’s interests, we help them develop knowledge and skills in a variety of areas including: academic, athletic, leadership/civic, the arts, health and wellbeing, and career exploration. In short, we create transformative experiences for young people. In spite of the critical roles we play, we have largely been overlooked in youth development research, policy, and as a professional workforce. We face challenges ‘moving up’ in our careers. We get frustrated by how little money we earn. We are discouraged that despite our knowledge and experience we are not invited to the tables where youth funding, programming, and policy decisions are made. It is true—many of us do not have formal training or degrees in youth work—a reality which at times we regret. Yet, as our colleague communicates in the accompanying passage (see below), we resent that formal education is required for us to get ahead, particularly because we question whether we need it to do our jobs more effectively. Through the “What is the Value of Youth Work?” symposium, we hope to address these concerns through a dialogue about youth work with the following objectives: • Increase awareness of the knowledge, skills, contributions, and professionalism of youth workers; • Advance a youth worker professional development model that integrates a dilemma-focused approach with principles of social justice youth development; • Launch an ongoing Worcester area Youth Worker network. This booklet provides a brief overview of the challenges in ‘professionalizing’ youth work and an alternative approach that we are advancing that puts the knowledge and expertise of youth workers at the center of professional development.

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.