Conference Agenda

Throughout their long history, higher education institutions (HEIs) have regularly been confronted with intensive discussions about their position in society. They have faced a fundamental paradigm shift about what they are expected to accomplish on an economic, social, and environmental level, how they are to be made more accountable to society, and which forms of relationships with partner organizations shape this transformation. Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, many endeavours of HEIs have been subject to uncertain conditions due to limited access to partner organizations, reduced operating hours or other issues. These uncertainties have also affected the area of applied teaching, in which educators cooperate with external partners such as non-governmental organizations or schools in the framework of their courses (campus-community partnerships – CCPs). Unfortunately, in the aftermath of the pandemic, many active cooperations were reduced to a minimum. In addition, HEIs have been going through far-reaching processes of transformation in terms of their needed societal impact, which makes CCPs even more important (Fahrenwald et al. 2023). Applied coursework with community partners has multifold benefits for students and fosters civic engagement with mutual, inter-organizational learning. CCPs – defined as the specific cooperation of higher education institutions with community partners pursuing common goals by exploring a relevant societal problem to improve the living conditions in communities, regions, or cities – have proven to be relevant for innovative teaching, applied research and the third mission of universities (Butterfield & Soska 2004). Strategies must be identified, how to revitalize and maintain these cooperations after the pandemic, even if uncertainty remains in, by and between organizations.

Against this background, the following questions arise to which degree these CCPs have been institutionalized and supported so far and which interorganizational learning challenges relate to this form of cooperation. Questions are discussed within the framework of societal transformation and uncertainty addressing the institutionalization of suitable framework conditions for the promotion of social innovation for CCPs.

The first presentation explicates the existing organizational structures for CCPs in Germany on the basis of a nationwide survey with n=101 board members from HEI in 2023. This recent study sheds light on the level of institutionalisation of CCPs. The second presentation focusses on the perspectives of HEIs’ educational leaders on CCPs in Austria. In a nationwide, quantitative, cross-sectoral survey it succeeded in giving voice to a target group, which is hard to reach (top educational leaders). The third presentation shows a specific CCP between HEI and municipalities in Norway who collaborate across public sectors. The study shows how the campus-community partnership is organized and which benefits arise. The fourth presentation also shows a specific CCP between HEI and a region in Germany. Data from this longitudinal study is meaningful because it focuses on the perspectives and experiences of community partners in a yearlong study against the background that studies usually report on HEIs’ perspectives more often than those of community partners. All results from the four presentations are showcased within specific theoretical frameworks, as indicated in the abstracts, in order to highlight relevant organizational aspects.

The symposium will analyse CCPs in the framework of organizational uncertainty and discuss innovative teaching perspectives between higher education institutions and community partners from three national perspectives (Austria – Germany – Norway). First, (1) all presentations explore the state-of-the art of campus-community partnerships in their country from recent, national data, and second, (2) they analyse these partnerships in the light of post-pandemic teaching conditions and as inter-organizational learning challenges. The symposium, thus, contributes to innovative teaching and better coordinated practice, and is at the same time based on empirical findings in all participating countries.

Knowledge transfer is one of the main activities of Higher Education institutions (HEI) (Backhaus-Maul et al. 2024), which, however, does not only comprise cooperating with industry partners, but also with civil society and nonprofit organizations. The umbrella term – campus-community partnerships (CCP) means specific forms of cooperation (e.g. Service Learning, Community Research) between HEI and their communities to solve societal challenges. For the sustainable implementation of CCPs in HEI, change processes like organizational and personal development are needed (Gerholz et al. 2018). In the German speaking countries, we can observe CCPs as being ‘work in progress’ from an institutional point of view. The aim of the current study ‘Strategies and organizational structures for CCP at Higher Education Institutions in Germany’, which is funded by the Transferfonds of the Research Institute Social Cohesion, is to investigate the current status of development regarding knowledge transfer and cooperation with civil society and nonprofit-organizations on the one hand and Science and German HEI on the other hand. A mixed-method design was chosen encompassing a survey deployed among boards of HEI and staff separately as well as content analysis of transfer mission statements and interviews. A total of n=101 board members from HEI nationwide participated in the survey conducted in 2023. 44,3 percent of them agreed or tended to agree, that in HEI’s mission statements CCP was taken into account as a form of knowledge transfer. In contrast, only one fourth (24, 7 percent) of the board members agreed/tended to agree to the statement that the institutionalization of CCP is advanced in Germany. Regarding aspects of institutionalizing CCPs, 10,9 percent of the board members reported the establishment of a position to coordinate CCP activities, whereas approximately one third of the participants (30,6 and 38,6 percent) announced giving incentives to lecturers and students. However, crosstabs revealed relationships between giving incentives to students and the variables of HEI type (Fisher-Freeman-Halton, n=70, p =.011) and research orientation of the HEI (Fisher-Freeman-Halton, n=67, p =.028) as well as between incentives for lecturers and registered students (Fisher-Freeman-Halton, n=72, p =.038). Furthermore, correlation analysis showed statistically significant relationships between the importance attached to CCPs as a form of knowledge transfer and the perceived degree of institutionalization (Spearmans ρ = .443, p < .001) as well as between the latter and the use of internal resources (Spearmans ρ = .635, p < .001).

Backhaus-Maul, H., Fücker, S., Grimmig, M., Kamuf, V., Nuske, J. & Quent, M. (Eds.) (2024). Forschungsbasierter Wissenstransfer und gesellschaftlicher Zusammenhalt. Theorie, Empirie, Konzepte und Instrumente, Frankfurt/New York. Gerholz, K.-H., Backhaus-Maul, H. & Rameder, P. (2018): Editorial: Civic Engagement in Higher Education Institutions in Europe. Journal for Higher Education Development, Vol. 13/ I. 2, 9-19.

Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have been going through far-reaching processes of transformation in terms of their missions in teaching, research, and societal impact. Contrary to their previous understanding and mission, Austrian universities are now increasingly required to contribute evidence from research and teaching to meet social challenges and to cooperate with community partners (Resch et al. 2020). As a form of research-practice transfer activities, campus-community partnerships (CCPs) contribute to organizational innovative practice by involving civil society partner organizations in higher education (Rameder et al. 2019). This requires educational leadership on multiple levels, but especially within higher education management (Fassi et al., 2020). Against this background, the questions arise to which degree these partnerships have been institutionalized and supported by educational leaders so far and who takes the lead for their initiation and maintenance. These questions are discussed on the basis of a recent empirical study (2024) with educational leaders in Austria, namely higher education management (rectorate, vice-rectorate). The study was performed as a quantitative, cross-sectoral, online survey with a target group, which is hard to reach due to time restraints and other high-profile management responsibilities. The findings with n=30 educational leaders reveal the level of awareness of participants for CCPs and the level of their implementation and support from a management level. The results are analysed in a cross-sectoral manner – throughout the four different types of higher education institutions in Austria. CCPs have, in principle, the potential for broader participation in social transformation processes in times of uncertainty; however, the establishment of CCPs, but also preparation and implementation of partnerships usually require a lot of resources. Cooperation between HEIs and community partners has so far been linked primarily to educators’ interest or commitment. In this respect, support services must be designed in a way that a culture of participation is sustainably promoted and institutionally anchored.

Fassi, D., Landoni, P., Piredda, F. & Salvadeo, P. (Eds.) (2020). Universities as Drivers of Social Innovation. Theoretical Overview and Lessons from the "campUS" Research. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31117-9 Rameder, P., Moder, C. M., Meyer, M., & Heinisch, M. (2019). Soziale Innovationen—Herausforderungen und Potenziale im Gesundheitsbereich. In Johannes Eurich, Markus Glatz-Schmallegger (Hrsg.), Soziale Dienste entwickeln. Innovative Ansätze in Diakonie und Caritas Ein Studien- und Arbeitsbuch (S. 129– 152). EVA Verlag. Resch, K., Fellner, M., Fahrenwald, C., Slepcevic-Zach, P., Knapp, M., & Rameder, P. (2020). Embedding Social Innovation and Service Learning in Higher Education's Third Sector Policy Developments in Austria. In Frontiers in Education, 5(112), 1-5.

This paper explores how key actors responsible for education, health, and social welfare in six municipalities in Norway collaborate across public sectors to accommodate the needs of children and youth in their region. The collaboration is organized as an intermunicipal network led by a network coordinator. The network was established due to two major national reforms that involve all three public sectors. These reforms imply changes that aim to improve collaboration across public sectors focusing on identifying and supporting vulnerable children from when they are born until they have finished upper secondary education. In this region, the leaders of municipalities decided to merge these two reforms which would enable identifying problems early and provide a more holistic approach to supporting children and youth in various life phases. To support the multiprofessional collaboration, a partnership with the local university college was established. The partnership includes support in terms of moderating meetings, coaching the network coordinator, providing professional development as well as establishing a joint language, and understanding that facilitate multi-professional collaboration. The following research questions guide our analysis: 1) How is the campus-community partnership organized? 2) What characterizes the emerging professional collaboration across public sectors and institutions? 3) What are mutual benefits from the campus-community partnership? For the analysis, we apply theories on institutional work developed by Lawrence and Suddaby (2006). This concept can help illuminate how actors at different levels translate, share and develop joint knowledge as they put the children at the centre of attention. Translation as a theoretical concept is not only useful for analysing knowledge‐transfer processes, it also has the potential to guide deliberate interventions as part of institutional work in such processes to achieve various outcomes (Røvik, 2016). The analysis draws on data gathered by the means of observation of network meetings and semi-structured interviews with key actors involved in the campus-community partnership. Key findings show that support from the university college is essential to structure, moderate meetings and keep the focus on the children. Moreover, the discussions around interventions reflect appreciation of bringing in multiprofessional perspectives to create support not only for children, but also for their families.

Lawrence, T. B. and Suddaby, R. (2006) Institutions and Institutional work. In Clegg, S.R., et al. (Eds.) Sage Handbook of Organization Studies (p. 215-254). Sage. Røvik, K. A. (2016). Knowledge Transfer as Translation: Review and Elements of an Instrumental Theory. International Journal of Management Reviews, 18(3), 290-310.

Campus-community partnerships (CCPs) aim to establish ‘sustainable, productive and meaningful relationships’ (Kmack et al., 2023, 6), in which knowledge and experience transfer and social engagement can take place in a mutually beneficial way (Slepcevic-Zach et al., 2023). Particularly in sustainable development, partnerships between universities and practitioners are seen as critical to the success of transformation processes (Leal Filho et al., 2023). Research in this context often focuses on the experiences, perspectives and learning processes of the academic staff or students involved. However, for a holistic picture of CCP, more research needs to focus on the community side and the involved practice partners. Therefore, this paper presents empirical findings from a longitudinal study focusing on the perspectives and experiences of practice partners in a yearlong CCP study. The study used three innovation labs and organizational network consulting to support local network-building processes toward sustainable development. Following the idea of Dewey (Dewey, 1980), the programme sees uncertainty as a learning opportunity rather than a challenge. The innovation labs are conceived as a methodical form of exploring ‘the unknown’ (ibid.) together. Within the partnership programme, students from several master programmes played the role of novice-network consultants while stakeholders worked together on solutions for regional sustainable development. In this way, the partnerships between the university and the region aimed at a mutual professionalisation process. Participating stakeholders (n = 32) from different fields (consumers, produces, administration and several others) were asked about their experiences within the innovation labs through image-based interviews before and after each event. The results of the metaphor-oriented (Schmitt, 2017), triangulated (Brake, 2011) analysis of the interview material show that the actors imagine the partnership through path-related and collective metaphors (a train, a joint expedition, a rowing boat), but also through images that refer to risk and uncertainty along the shared path (a white-water rafting trip, climbing a mountain, crossing a river). (Heidelmann & Klös, 2023). The organizational educational consultants are imagined as someone (who sets the pace for rowing, as a hiking guide, as a stable bridge) who 'leads' (Klös & Heidelmann, 2023) the stakeholders on their way through the epistemic terrain of the unknown, rather than someone who merely transfers knowledge (Klös, 2023). Based on the results of a discourse-oriented analysis (Karl, 2007), the paper also discusses how the metaphorical concepts that structure stakeholders' narratives are linked to the discourse about the role of universities within CCPs.

Dewey, J. (1980). The quest for certainty: A study of the relation of knowledge and action. Perigee Books. Heidelmann, M.-A., & Klös, T. (2023). Optimierung des regionalen Wirtschaftskreislaufs: Das Potenzial organisationspädagogischen Wissens im Praxisfeld ländlicher Räume. In S. M. Weber, C. Fahrenwald, & A. Schröer (Eds.), Organisationen optimieren? Springer. Karl, U. (2007). Metaphern als Spuren von Diskursen in biographischen Texten. Klös, T., & Heidelmann, M.-A. (2023). Sustainability Leaders’ Perspectives on the Potential of Innovation Labs: Toward Collective Regional Leadership. In W. Leal Filho, A. Lange Salvia, E. Pallant, B. Choate, & K. Pearce (Eds.), Educating the Sustainability Leaders of the Future (pp. 659–679). Springer Natur. Kmack, H., Pellino, D., & Fricke, I. (2023). Relationship, leadership, action: Evaluating the framework of a sustainable campus-community partnership. Community Development, 54(6), 828–845. Leal Filho, W., Dibbern, T., Viera Trevisan, L., Coggo Cristofoletti, E., Dinis, M. A. P., Matandirotya, N., Sierra, J., Shulla, K., Buttriss, G., L’Espoir Decosta, P., Mbah, M. F., & Sanni, M. (2023). Mapping universities-communities partnerships in the delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11, 1246875. Slepcevic-Zach, P., Fahrenwald, C., & Resch, K. (2023). Editorial: Campus-Community-Partnerships: Zukunftspartnerschaften zwischen Hochschule und Gesellschaft. https://doi.org/10.3217/ZFHE-18-02/01