| [download Word file]
Institutional incentives are essential to the success of the public
engagement of faculty and staff at the University of Minnesota.
Each of the committees of the Council on Public Engagement, in one
form or another, provides incentives for engagement. For example,
the Outstanding Community Service Award each year recognizes the
contribution of six University employees to service in their community.
Included in this recognition is a permanent salary augmentation.
The Council itself motivates public engagement through its broad
based support of engagement across the University. The committee
of COPE presents recommendations to institutionalize the recognition
of public engagement in its reporting policies. Four recommendations
are herein presented.
Recommendations:
1. Implement annual public recognition, with University-wide emphasis.
2. Incorporate Public Engagement Goals into the annual
compact process.
3. Incorporate public engagement into annual performance reviews,
emphasizing engagement as it integrates across teaching, research
and outreach.
4. Create a fellowship(s) that recognizes excellence in public engagement.
1. Implement annual public recognition, with University-wide
emphasis.
Objective: To emphasize public engagement as an
overarching University of Minnesota commitment through coordinated
public recognition of a faculty member, a staff member and a student
in each college or unit whose efforts exemplify public engagement.
Public recognition (particularly in these times of budgetary constraints)
is an effective way to emphasize and reward significant work in
public engagement as well as provide examples, encouragement and
incentives for other individuals to go about their work in a more
engaged way.
Collegiate identity University cohesiveness:
One day annually would be highlighted as The Engaged U
day (specific tagline for promotion would be determined). Recipients
of public engagement awards, previously identified, would be highlighted
in each College/unit, featured on their college web site and in
newsletters and other print or electronic materials. Each College
would set public engagement criteria that are consistent with the
culture and goals of that unit for selection of the recipient. However,
all recipients would be featured on the University web site, with
links to Colleges. The stories of each recipient and their work
would provide a rich portfolio of examples of engagement across
the University that both include and benefit citizens and the U.
Additional promotion: Media and public information
coordination through collegiate communicators would help ensure
that public engagement day at the U was promoted to various media
outlets and to special interest organizations, business, community
and citizens groups, elected officials and others. Through the University
of Minnesota Extension Service, information would be distributed
in all counties of the state. The importance of public engagement
at the University could be highlighted in editorials and in op-ed
pieces by the President and Regents. Engagement could be emphasized
through a series of articles in print or on radio or television.
Events: Each college or unit might choose to feature
a special event as part of public engagement day, emphasizing engagement
specific to the college even as it is highlighted at the University
umbrella level. Events might include a seminar or public address,
a reception or special gathering. In this way, colleges could choose
from the no-cost option of recognition, or offer an event based
on budget flexibility. University Relations might choose to feature
a University-wide event that features and further recognizes public
engagement award recipients. A public participation component to
events would be important.
Tactics: COPE could develop general guidelines
for timing and selection of public engagement award recipients.
It would be critical for the Provost and President to emphasize
the significance of a public engagement recognition day to the Deans
as a way of rewarding high-quality effort among faculty, students
and staff. Participation across all colleges and units would be
essential for success and high visibility throughout the state.
Financial investment would be minimal, although colleges would
need to be prepared to commit staff time to recognition and any
related event.
2. Incorporate Public Engagement Goals into
the annual compact process.
Purpose. The U of M Compact process is the primary
structure for reporting priorities to the Provost. Since public
engagement is a stated high priority of the Us administration,
it is very important that there be a formalized reporting structure
within the Compact process that addresses public engagement. Currently,
certain topics are required to be addressed in each colleges
compact, topics such as diversity. In requiring a paragraph on pubic
engagement in the document, the University would be making a statement
of its importance to all of the colleges.
Proposal. It is recommended that the colleges
be required to address the issue of the public engagement in the
Compact planning process, citing both plans and metrics for accomplishments.
3. Incorporate public engagement into annual performance
reviews, emphasizing engagement as it integrates across teaching,
research and outreach.
Annual reviews are required of all faculty and staff at the University
of Minnesota. It is proposed that work in public engagement be reported
explicitly. It is recognized that public engagement can be a part
of all three missions: teaching, research, and service. It is recommended
that public engagement be reported in the categories where it fits
best and then referred to separately under the category of reporting,
public engagement. The goal of this reporting is to
instill a culture of public engagement in the University. The reporting
is an effort to have faculty and staff think in terms of public
engagement as they report work. Reporting is not intended to interfere
with performance or tenure code standards, but rather to raise awareness
of public engagement in the minds of the supervisors and persons
being evaluated. The committee requests that the Council discuss
our proposal that the University Senate address the recognition
of public engagement as a form of scholarship.
4. Create a fellowship(s) that recognizes excellence in
public engagement.
Purpose. The purpose of this fellowship program
would be to encourage University faculty, staff, and students to
carry out research projects that involve significant issues of public
policy for the state and/or its communities and that include engagement
with groups, agencies, or organizations in Minnesota involved with
the issue. Such issues will often have significance beyond the state
but there should be some appropriate level of engagement with those
in Minnesota.
Good projects should grow out of the research interests of the
faculty as well as addressing issues of importance to the state.
Process. Faculty members will be invited to submit
proposals including a statement
concerning the nature of the project's public engagement. A selection
committee representing both the University and the community will
award the fellowships.
Depending on the level of funding for the program, the fellowships
can include support for released faculty time, graduate and/or undergraduate
research assistance, appropriate research expenses, etc.
Results. In addition to professional publications
and other such outcomes, fellowship holders would be expected to
make results and findings available through appropriate means to
interested parties in the state. |
Return
to: U of M Home
