Desktop version

Home arrow Religion

  • Increase font
  • Decrease font

<<   CONTENTS   >>

Program Impact on Faculty/Staff

Since the CYTI program was expected to have a beneficial impact on participating faculty and staff in the areas of personal sense of purpose, institutional mission, and integration of faith and action, the survey included items to assess perceptions of participating faculty' and staff regarding vocation, operationalization of University' mission, and the impact of participation in the CYTI initiative. That is, the survey focused explicitly on perceptions of the personal impact of СУТІ participation to assess the extent to which these purposeftilly-sclectcd faculty and staff experienced growth and/or reinforcement of leadership, vocational, and community-oriented dispositions.

Figure 2.1 shows that on four of the items, 80% or more of the respondents agreed that CYTI had positively impacted their understanding of personal calling and commitment to the mission of the University. Specifically, the survey items with overwhelming affirmative responses include perceptions of connections between professional role and personal calling as well as increased awareness of community' engagement activities across the campus. Even further, most respondents (65%) reported that as a result of CYTI they' had become involved in other service-oriented collaborations in the university. This finding suggests that CYTI participation appears to encourage new interdisciplinary collaboration to some extent, but that improvement opportunities exist to facilitate additional joint projects across academic disciplines.

Institutional Indicators

In addition to measuring the impact on participating faculty' and staff, the broader aims of the CYTI initiative included catalyzing more coherent and

Through planning for and participating in CYTI. I have become involved in additional service-oriented collaborations with other disciplines at Campbell University.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

%Agree ■ %Disagree

After participating in CYTI. I have a deeper understanding of my personal calling or sense of purpose.

In helping to lead CYTI. I gained a better awareness of the community engagement activities happening across different departments of Campbell University.

After my involvement with CYTI. I have felt a stronger sense of mission in my tasks at the university.

CYTI pushed me to think deeply about the connection between "calling'' and my specific field/disdpline.

Figure 2.1 Perceptions of personal impact of CYTI participation by faculty/staff leaders (m = 20).

comprehensive community engagement across the University. In recent years, various approaches have emerged for identifying meaningful benchmarks for community engagement by institutions of higher education (Driscoll, 2008; Hart & Northmore, 2011; Noel & Earwicker, 2015). A common approach to organizing institutional indicators simply categorizes iterations of activity as inputs, outputs, and outcomes (Rennekamp ct al., 2005). In this context, Input Indicators include the allocations of resources to community engagement programs. Output Indicators refer to the work products, deliverables, and volume of activity involved in the program. The resultant impact on the conditions of the campus-community context and capacity for future engagement comprises the final category, Outcome Indicators. As depicted in Figure 2.2, inputs produce outputs which then create outcomes. In turn, these outcomes reshape and influence the inputs in an iterative cycle. In the context of institutions of higher education, and particularly with an initiative such as CYTI that focuses on an intensive annual effort, the academic year is a meaningful iteration of the aforementioned cycle. Progress toward the institutional goals can be measured through analysis of each of the three categories of indicators in successive years. Table 2.2 presents institutional indicators over the first four years of the CYTI program (Planning Year, Implementation Year One, Implementation Year Two, and Implementation Year Three).

In the planning year for CYTI, the chief input from the university was the formation of a grant committee tasked with writing and submitting a grant proposal for a youth theological institute. In turn, the key output of the planning year was the completion and submission of the grant

Iterative proeess of institutional indicators

Figure 2.2 Iterative proeess of institutional indicators.

proposal, which resulted in the outcome of substantial grant funding for the program.

With the grant binding secured, Implementation Year One included progress in input indicators with the creation of staff positions, including a full-time Director and two graduate assistants. Additionally, significant contributions of faculty from the four key program areas (public health, restorative justice, social entrepreneurship, and religious leadership) represented further expansion of the institutional inputs. Also, this year expanded investment of university assets through the recruitment of the first group of university student mentors (including undergraduate and graduate students). Outputs from these substantial investments of resources included the development of the CYTI curriculum and the implementation of the initial 14-day immersive experience for 17 high school students. Outcomes from this year included increased interest from additional academic departments. In addition, a strategic planning subcommittee focused on service-learning began exploring the possibility of scaling up critical features of the CYTI initiative for campus-wide replication. This strategic planning process represents a pivotal outcome indicator for the institution because, for the first time, aspects of the CYTI initiative began impacting organizational functions beyond the project itself.

In Implementation Year Two, inputs from university resources expanded to include the School of Engineering, the School of Education (specifically the Department of Social Work), and the School of Osteopathic Medicine. In addition, the organizational structure supporting CYTI was enlarged to include a newly created position of Associate Campus Minister to supervise CYTI staff, extend CYTI involvement more widely across the university, and deepen engagements with networks of faith

Table 2.2 Institutional Indicators in the First Three Years of CYTI


Planning Tear

Implementation Tear One

Implementation Tear Two

Implementation Tear Three


• CYTI grant proposal writing committee

  • • Creation of fulltime staff position, Director of CYTI
  • • Allocation of graduate assistant positions to assist
  • • Four academic disciplines involved (public health, law, business, and divinity/ Christian studies)
  • • Creation of Associate Campus Minister position to supervise CYTI and develop related projects
  • • Maintenance of CYTI staffing (director and graduate assistants)
  • • Seven academic disciplines involved (additions of engineering, medicine, and social work)
  • • Strategic planning subcommittee on Service-Learning tasked

to create a scalable model for campus-wide replication of core elements of the CYTI initiative

  • • Hiring of new director to supervise CYTI and further explore projects around faith and vocation with undergraduate students
  • • Maintenance of CYTI staffing (director and graduate assistant)
  • • Nine academic disciplines involved (addition of pharmacy/clinical research and culinary arts)
  • • Alumni Engagement to identify sustainable, vocational mentorship models for high school and collegiate internships


• CYTI grant proposal written and submitted

  • • CYTI framework and curriculum developed
  • • Initial CYTI includes 17 high school aged youth participants
  • • Second CYTI involves 26 high school aged youth participants
  • • Development of IMPCT model for campus-wide strategic support of interdisciplinary communitybased service-learning
  • • Additional grant proposal submitted to fund professional development projects similar to CYTI for rural clergy
  • • Third CYTI involves 25 high school aged youth participants and 13 college aged mentors
  • • Development of a proposal for a program development grant to explore faith and vocation with university faculty and staff
  • • Creation of an undergraduate course to explore faith and vocation (taught by CYTI director)

42 Tillman and Foreman

Indicators Planning Year

Implementation Year One Implementation Year Two Implementation Year Three

Outcomes • CYTI grant awarded

• Positive feedback • Grant funds awarded for expansion • First hire of a graduated scholar from

from faculty and staff of faith-based community within the high school institute as a

results in interest from engagement work college mentor

additional disciplines • Establishment of the Center for • Support from grantors with additional

• CYTI project Church & Community funds for building capacity of CYTI

begins to shape • Approval of a pilot of the IMPCT program

Strategic Planning model

subcommittee focused

on Service-Learning

Re-memb ering the Mission 43

communities throughout the region. Output Indicators in this year evidenced substantial progress with increased numbers of youth participants (26 in year 2 as previously indicated), expanded CYTI curriculum and learning opportunities in additional disciplines, and the submission of a grant proposal to establish additional programing to provide continuing education and support for rural ministers using many similar approaches and partnerships leveraged in the creation of CYTI. The additional grant funding in combination with the presidential strategic planning emphasis on leadership development through community engagement helped to establish a new Center for Church & Community at the University. The Center for Church & Community provides robust structural support for the CYTI initiative, but also directs a range of other faith-driven, mis-sional community outreach projects for a diverse group of stakeholders. The establishment of the Center for Church & Community represents a transformational Outcome Indicator that provides ideal conditions for leveraging the success of CYTI into sustainable and far-reaching campuswide commitments.

In Implementation Year Three, inputs from the university included the creation of a position as Executive Director for Community Engagement and Leadership, whose responsibilities include supervision of CYTI staff as well as the Center for Church & Community. With the creation of this executive-level position aimed at moving community engagement from service-learning to placemaking and collective impact, the university expanded its financial and administrative commitments to transformational models. The maturation of the CYTI program has resulted in increases in the number of academic programs involved (with the addition of clinical research and culinary arts), as well as engagement of the alumni network (both alumni from the university and alumni of the CYTI program). Regarding Output Indicators, the CYTI program has submitted an additional grant proposal to enhance the faculty/staff development aspects of the program and to enrich the curriculum at the university through the creation of an undergraduate course to explore faith and vocation that will be taught by the CYTI Director. Outcome Indicators for the most recent year of implementation included expansion of participating programs to undergraduate programs (evolving from the early years of implementation which was driven by graduate/professional programs) and the awarding of capacity-building mini-grant funds to enhance community engagement activities associated with CYTI. Additionally, a few participants from the CYTI program have now matriculated as students at the university and one former CYTI scholar (as a high school student) was employed in the most recent iteration of the program as a CYTI college mentor—representing the completion of an important maturation cycle. These institutional outcomes demonstrate substantial progress toward the sustaining phase of program implementation.

<<   CONTENTS   >>

Related topics