Association for Public Policy Analysis & Management

Michael Sherraden once wrote, “The underlying assumption is that the national economic pie is not finite. It can grow with the spirit and ability of the people. Paradoxically, the more people who have a piece of the pie, the faster it will grow.” Access to education, and in particular, higher education, has been the most consistently successful method for upward class mobility, both for individuals and for larger demographics of people. Unfortunately, not all educational opportunities are created or distributed equally; government actions (such as FHA’s redlining policies, the GI Bill, and gerrymandering initiatives) along with cultural decisions made by the privileged beneficiaries of these decisions (white flight, reversal of affirmative action and desegregation programs) have contributed wildly to the disparate outcomes produced by the American education system.

Universities are seen as providing a service to the greater public good. They are charged with teaching critical life skills but they are also an essential step in securing economic stability for one’s future. The capital acquired at university--social, navigational, and especially aspirational capital--leads students to professional and personal connections that are nearly impossible to obtain without support from the institutional higher education system. Not only are there societal inequities hindering low-income and racial groups from obtaining a college education, there are severe inequities in which groups benefit from university resources.

One group often woefully left out of sharing in university assets are the neighborhoods and towns that colleges are based in. Communities surrounding college campuses are used in marketing a university’s allure to prospective students and faculty; however, the communities that universities are located in often view the relationship negatively, with opinions ranging from the school is only marginally interested in a relationship with the region to the school is a drain on local resources. Studies on universities’ community engagement demonstrate that universities that pursue active and equitable community partnerships with nonprofits, local government and/or businesses in their towns--particularly through community development corporations--are successful producers to regional development, boast of positive community-university relations, and offer valuable scholarship to faculty and students.

There are some in academia who believe that a college must stay faithful to the Humboldt archetype of education: that the development of knowledge for students and faculty is both the method and true purpose of higher education. But in our modern globalist age, each level of society is too interconnected and dependent on each other to isolate ourselves into different castes.

Universities' equitable community engagement is an issue I deeply believe in; current research suggests opening up university capital and relationships with their neighbors can make significant, institutional changes to communities' quality of life. This poster will highlight different models of community engagement, discuss the pros and cons of these specific models, and explore universities’ paradoxical role as symbols of enlightenment, learning, and meritocracy with their simultaneous role as gatekeepers to (and for) elite networks of professions, people, and wealth.