Kankana MUKHOPADHYAY*, Siok Kuan TAMBYAH, and Daniel JEW
College of Alice & Peter Tan (CAPT)
*kankana.m@nus.edu.sg
Mukhopadhyay, K., Tambyah, S. K., & Jew, D. (2023). Choices and collaborations in university-community partnerships: intentional pedagogy and its impact on student learning [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Campus Conference (HECC) 2023, 7 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecc2023proceedings/choices-and-collaborations-in-university-community-partnerships-intentional-pedagogy-and-its-impact-on-student-learning/
SUB-THEME
Communities and Education
KEYWORDS
University-community partnership, study trips, experiential learning, survey analysis, intentional pedagogy
CATEGORY
Paper Presentation
ABSTRACT
The current discourse on “communities and education” in higher education emphasises building partnerships with diverse community stakeholders to create authentic learning opportunities for students. Studies have indicated that university-community partnerships (UCPs) can provide positive pedagogical outcomes, like enhanced quality of teaching and student access to applied learning (Buys & Bursnall, 2007). Although a great deal of research has focused on the impact of the different forms of collaboration (Kellet & Goldstein, 1999; Waddock & Walsh, 1999; Watson, 2003), research on how to organise effective UCPs in overseas experiential learning is still limited.
Over the past decade, study trips at the College of Alice & Peter Tan (CAPT-STEERs)1 have invested in building relationships with overseas community partners as an intentional pedagogical practice (Mukhopadhyay et al., 2022). Classroom discussions have been complemented with field visits and real-world experiences, where students had engagements and interactions with different partners and communities and in different contexts.
Careful choices were made in selecting partners, communities2 and sites3 visited, and in designing a range of interactive activities and engagements. In this presentation, we specifically examine the impact of choices of sites and communities visited, and collaborations with various partners on learning outcomes.
Data for this quantitative study is derived from surveys conducted by three different CAPT STEERs—India, Myanmar, and Nepal—from 2015-2019 (see Table 1). We asked participants about the effectiveness of visits to the different sites, communities and partners, which include non-governmental organisations (NGOs), institutions of learning, businesses4, and government (see Table 2). We then examined their relationship with the multi-faceted learning outcomes of the programme, indicating participants’ perception of relevance and meaningfulness of the engagements, and level of satisfaction. We also explored whether the STEER experience had broadened students’ perspectives and enhanced their ability to perform in a globalised environment. Table 3 shows the average degree of agreement among the participants on these learning outcomes across STEERs over the years.
Table 1
Number of survey respondents across STEERs (India, Myanmar, Nepal) from 2015-2019
| STEERs/Year | Frequency |
| STEER India 2015 | 18 |
| STEER India 2017 | 11 |
| STEER Myanmar 2016 | 21 |
| STEER Myanmar 2017 | 24 |
| STEER Nepal 2018 | 13 |
| STEER Nepal 2019 | 18 |
Table 2
Sites, communities, partners in different STEERs/years
| STEER/Year | Sites | Communities | Partner-organisation | Partner-institution | Partner-business | Partner-government | |
| India 2015/2017 | N = 4-6
E.g., Gandhi Ashram, Ahmedabad; Lake Pichola, Udaipur; Rann of Kutch, Bhuj |
N = 2-5
E.g., Gujari market, Ahmedabad; Hodka village, Udaipur; Shilpgram, Bhuj |
N = 6-8
E.g., Aajeevika Bureau; Self Employed Women’s Association (SEWA); Khamir; Hunnarshala |
N = 1
Indian Institute of Technology, Ahmedabad |
N = 1-2
Aavaran |
||
| Myanmar 2016/2017 | N = 6-9
E.g., Shwedagon Pagoda Yangon; Bagan Archaeological Museum; U Bein Bridge |
N = 1-2
Community clinic |
N = 2-3
E.g., Inle Heritage Centre; Community Agency for Rural Developmentin Mandalay; Shwe Min Tha Foundation |
N = 2
E.g., University of Mandalay; University of Global Peace in Mandalay
|
N = 1
Mandalay Regional Parliament; Singapore Embassy in Yangon |
||
| Nepal 2018/2019 | N = 6-12 E.g., Durbar Square, Kathmandu;
Boudanath Temple |
N = 1-7
Bhujung village |
N = 7
E.g., Bikas Udhyami; Avni Centre for Sustainability (ACS); Annapurna Conservation Area Project (ACAP); Namaste Community Foundation |
N = 2-3
E.g., Prithvi Narayan Campus, Tribhuban University; Madan Puraskar Putakalaya |
N = 1-2
Ecoprise |
||
N = number of sites visited/interactions with communities/engagement with partners
Table 3
Descriptive statistics of the learning outcomes
| Learning Outcomes | N | Mean | SD |
| Balance in pedagogies was appropriate. | 95 | 3.45 | .56 |
| Overall satisfaction | 71 | 3.55 | .69 |
| Overall field visits were relevant and meaningful | 95 | 3.65 | .54 |
| Broadened perspectives in an academic area/realm | 70 | 3.5 | .63 |
| Enhanced ability to perform in a globalized environment | 70 | 3.41 | .602 |
N = Total sample size across six STEERs from 2015-2019; SD = Standard deviation
Correlational analysis and the means comparisons (ANOVA) across STEERs over time were conducted. The results reveal, firstly, that the choice of sites, communities and engagement activities can significantly enhance the learning for students across STEERs. Secondly, having collaborations with diverse partners—organisations, institutions, businesses—is effective in creating positive programme outcomes. Thirdly, having well-designed programmes make a significant difference in the depth of learning among students. The findings additionally inform broader institutional best practices when seeking to integrate UCPs within the formal and co-curriculum, in terms of policy, resource deployment, and local support.
These results confirm that impactful learning in experiential learning requires a mediated learning experience (Moon, 2004; Roberts, 2012). The choice of sites, communities and collaborations with partners as intentional pedagogies should provide opportunities for students to have firsthand field experience and engagement with partners to enhance their learning (Savicki, 2008; Meyers & Jones, 1993). When experiential learning is intentionally designed and employed in intercultural teaching opportunities, deep learning happens. Understanding in this area can potentially contribute to the broader knowledge base of how universities can best develop valued, sustainable UCPs to promote learning.
ENDNOTES
- CAPT-STEERs refer to short-term overseas experiential learning programmes conducted under the auspices of the NUS Global Relations Office (GRO)’s Study Trip for Engagement and EnRichment (STEER) programme. CAPT conducted 19 STEER trips to India, Myanmar, Eastern Europe, Botswana, the Balkans, and Nepal from 2012-2022.
- The term “communities” here is defined as specific places visited during the study trips where students experienced interactions and economic and cultural activities with groups of persons associated with the space.
- Places of interest with respect to geography/society/history/culture.
- Including social businesses and social enterprises.
REFERENCES
Buys, N., & Bursnall, S. (2007). Establishing university-community partnerships: Processes and benefits. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 29(1), 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800601175797
Kellet, C., & Goldstein, A. (1999). Transformation in the university and the community: The benefits and barriers of collaboration. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 91(2), 31–35. https://www.proquest.com/docview/218162491
Meyers, C., & Jones, T. B. (1993). Promoting active learning: Strategies for the college classroom. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Moon, J. A. (2004). A handbook of reflective and experiential learning: Theory and practice. Routledge Falmer.
Mukhopadhyay, K., Balachandran, L., Wong, S.F., Lai, C. Y. J., Tan, X. Y. A., McGahan, K., Toh, T. C., Wong, R., & Tan, L. Y. (2022). Steering towards the internationalisation of higher education: Lessons from pedagogical interventions in overseas experiential learning programmes. Asian Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 12(1), 1-19. https://nus.edu.sg/cdtl/engagement/publications/ajsotl-home/archive-of-past-issues/v12n1/steering-towards-the-internationalisation-of-higher-education-lessons-from-pedagogical-interventions-in-overseas-experiential-learning-programmes
Roberts, J. W. (2012). Beyond learning by doing: Theoretical currents in experiential education. Routledge.
Savicki, V. (2008). Experiential and affective education for international educators. In V. Savicki (Ed.), Developing intercultural competence and transformation: Theory, research, and application in international education (pp. 74-91). Stylus.
Waddock, S. A., & Walsh, M. (1999). Paradigm shift: Toward a community–university community of practice. International Journal of Organisational Analysis, 7(3), 244–64. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb028902
Watson, D. (2003). The university in the knowledge society. In S. Bjarnason & P. Coldstream (Eds.), The idea of engagement: Universities in society (pp. 25–47). Association of Commonwealth Universities.
