Portland, Oregon
June 23, 2024
June 23, 2024
June 26, 2024
Empowering Students and Strengthening Community Relationships
Community Engagement Division (COMMENG)
Diversity
12
10.18260/1-2--48509
https://peer.asee.org/48509
91
Angela Bielefeldt is a professor at the University of Colorado Boulder in the Department of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering (CEAE) and Director of the Integrated Design Engineering (IDE) program. The IDE program includes an IDE BS degree accredited under the ABET EAC general criteria and a new PhD degree in Engineering Education. Bielefeldt's research includes community engagement, engineering ethics, social responsibility, and sustainability. Bielefeldt is a Fellow of the ASEE and a licensed P.E. in Colorado.
Lupita D. Montoya is Assistant Professor in the Department of Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineering at the University of Colorado, Boulder with courtesy appointment in the Department of Environmental and Occupational Health at the Colorado Sc
Academia can engage with communities in a variety of ways, including an education focus (such as service-learning) or geared toward research (community engaged research, CER). These different forms of community engagement (CE) share many elements in common, while other attributes differ. This paper first compares and contrasts educationally-focused CE with CER. We then present a rubric that was developed to evaluate CER in environmental engineering, indicating what aspects are appropriate for community engaged education. The CER rubric proposes nine evaluation categories: centering on communities, capacity building, action-oriented outcome, shared leadership, shared funding, shared data, equitable valuing of CER scholarship, culturally specific assessment, and culturally specific communication and dissemination. For illustrative purposes the rubric is applied to two case studies. In the educationally-focused CE case study, a senior capstone design course in environmental engineering worked on a project defined by a community partner. The rubric did a good job revealing where improvements in the project could have been realized while also revealing that the non-profit facilitator was instrumental in engaging the community. In the second case study, a community sub-contracted an academic partner to explore residential indoor air quality. The project was at a higher level of the rubric for most criteria compared to the educationally-focused case study. Use of the rubric at the start of any project will open important conversations, thereby contributing to both the community and academic partners more fully meeting their needs.
Bielefeldt, A. R., & Montoya, L. D., & Ferro, A. (2024, June), Work in Progress: Quality Indicators for Community-Engaged Education, Scholarship, and Research Paper presented at 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Portland, Oregon. 10.18260/1-2--48509
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2024 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015