Adapting the Carnegie Community Engagement Classification in Thailand: Lessons for Institutional Learning and Change
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Across multiple higher education systems, universities are increasingly expected to demonstrate public purpose alongside teaching and research. In Thailand, academic service to society is already a statutory function of higher education institutions. This study examines the early use of the Carnegie Elective Classification for Community Engagement in a pilot involving six Thai universities and considers how the framework supported institutional learning on university– society engagement.
Using a qualitative case study of a bounded developmental pilot, the analysis drew on institutional self- assessments, documentary materials, records from a kick- off event and four 2-day on-site sessions, written reflections and facilitator observations. Materials were organised by institution and source type, and a reflexive thematic analysis examined recurring opportunities, constraints, enabling conditions and differences in interpretation across a deliberately heterogeneous six- university cohort.
The Carnegie Elective Classification for Community Engagement framework was used as a guide. Findings include the following: existing engagement activity was extensive but often dispersed; the Carnegie framework served as a structured diagnostic and reflective tool; senior leadership support and coordinating capacity appeared to facilitate progress; peer exchange supported cross- institutional learning; evidence systems were a recurrent challenge; and the process reframed engagement as an institution- wide capacity rather than a collection of projects.
In this early pilot, the framework’s immediate value was evident in the institutional reflection and learning it prompted, while the possibility of external recognition remained relevant. The findings support contextual adaptation rather than literal transfer, but they do not establish sector- wide change or long- term outcomes.
Article Details
Issue
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who submit articles to this journal from 31st March 2014 for publication, agree to the following terms:
a) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share and adapt the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
c) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Open Access Citation Advantage Service). Where authors include such a work in an institutional repository or on their website (ie. a copy of a work which has been published in a UTS ePRESS journal, or a pre-print or post-print version of that work), we request that they include a statement that acknowledges the UTS ePRESS publication including the name of the journal, the volume number and a web-link to the journal item.
d) Authors should be aware that the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) License permits readers to share (copy and redistribute the work in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the work) for any purpose, even commercially, provided they also give appropriate credit to the work, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. They may do these things in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests you or your publisher endorses their use.
For Volume 6 (2013) and before, the following copyright applied:
Articles published by UTSePress are protected by copyright which is retained by the authors who assert their moral rights. Authors control translation and reproduction rights to their works published by UTSePress. UTSePress publications are copyright and all rights are reserved worldwide. Downloads of specific portions of them are permitted for personal use only, not for commercial use or resale. Permissions to reprint or use any materials should be directed to UTSePress.
References
Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice. Addison-Wesley.
Boyer, E. L. (1996). The scholarship of engagement. Journal of Public Service and Outreach, 1(1), 11–20.
Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (2002). Campus–community partnerships: The terms of engagement. Journal of Social Issues, 58(3), 503–516.
Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2009). “Mode 3” and “Quadruple Helix”: Toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46(3–4), 201–234.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Dolowitz, D., & Marsh, D. (2000). Learning from abroad: The role of policy transfer in contemporary policy-making. Governance, 13(1), 5–24.
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and Mode 2 to a triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123.
Furco, A., & Miller, W. (2009). Institutionalizing service-learning in higher education. Journal of Public Scholarship in Higher Education, 1, 9–29.
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2008). The SAGE handbook of action research. Sage Publications.
Richey, R. C., & Klein, J. D. (2007). Design and development research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Saltmarsh, J., & Hartley, M. (2011). To serve a larger purpose: Engagement for democracy and the transformation of higher education. Temple University Press.
W.K. Kellogg Foundation. (2004). Logic model development guide. W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
Watson, D., Hollister, R., Stroud, S., & Babcock, E. (2011). The engaged university: International perspectives on civic engagement. Routledge.
Weiss, C. H. (1995). Nothing as practical as good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives. New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives, 1, 65–92.