Teaching online students to collaborate effectively with community partners and to solve problems through service-learning projects are “on trend” topics for technical communication faculty. This article presents collaboration specifics as well as the author's Collaborative Communication Framework (CCF) to show the types of communication needed to work well with community partners/clients in service-learning. Tips for teaching, including using the CCF and service-learning, will be highlighted so faculty can make choices about how to meet curricular goals while addressing community partner/client needs. Resources for teaching will be offered. Successful student projects will show detailed examples of key ideas throughout the article.
AgbokaG. (2012). Liberating intercultural technical communication from “large culture” ideologies: Constructing culture discursively. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 42(2), 159–181. http://dx.https://doi.org/10.2190/TW.42.2.e
2.
AlexanderB. (2019, August 8). Brilliant technologies and challenged campuses: What's next in ed tech. [Keynote presentation]. 35th Annual Distance Teaching and Learning Conference, Madison, WI, United States.
3.
AndersonK. (2018). Mutuality matters: How you can create more opportunity, adventure, and friendship with others. [Ebook]. Amazon.com Services LLC. https://www.amazon.com
4.
AndersonL. W.KrathwohlD. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives (1st ed.). Longman.
5.
AshS.ClaytonP. (2009). Generating, deepening, and documenting learning: The power of critical reflection in applied learning. Journal of Applied Learning in HIgher Education, 1, 25–48.
Association of American Colleges and Universities (2020, February). Value. http://www.aacu.org/value
8.
BattistoniR.GelmonS.SaltmarshJ.WerginJ.ZlotkowskiE. (2003). The engaged department toolkit. Campus Compact. https://compact.org
9.
BoyerE. (1994). Creating the new American college. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 41, 48A.
10.
BringleR.ClaytonP.PriceM. (2009). Partnerships in service learning and civic engagement. Partnerships: A Journal of Service Learning and Civic Engagement, 1(1), 1–20.
11.
BringleR.HatcherJ. (1999). Reflection in service-learning: Making meaning of experience. Educational Horizons, 77, 179–185.
12.
Bringle, R., & Hatcher, J. (1995). A service-learning curriculum for faculty. Michigan Journal of Community Service-Learning, 2, 112–122.
13.
BrizeeA.Pascual-FerraP.CarananteG. (2019). High-impact civic engagement: Outcomes of community-based research in technical writing courses. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 0(0), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047281619853266
14.
BurnettR.CooperL. A.WelhausenC. A. (2013). What do technical communicators need to know about collaboraton? In Johnson-EilolaJ.SeiberS. A. (Eds.), Solving problems in technical communication (pp. 454–478). University of Chicago Press.
15.
BuysN.BursnallS. (2007). Establishing university-community partnerships: Processes and benefits. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 29(1), 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800601175797
CarriereA. (2006, September). Community engagement through partnerships. [Paper presentation]. HEQC/JET Conference on Community Engagement in Higher Education, Cape Town, South Africa.
Cress, C. M., Collier, P. J., Reitenauer, V. L., and Associates. (2013). Learning through serving: A student guidebook for service-learning and civic engagement across academic disciplines and cultural communities (2nd Ed.). Stylus Publishing.
21.
DaftR. L.LengelR. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554–571. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554
22.
DumlaoR. (2009). Service-learning in the capstone course: Adopting the American Red Cross. In WorleyD. W.WorleyD.HugenbergB.ElkinsM. (Eds.), Best practices in experiential and service-learning in communication. Great River Technologies/Kendall Hunt.
23.
DumlaoR. (2018, October). A guide to collaborative communication for service-learning and community engagement partners. Stylus Publishing. https://styluspub.presswarehouse.com
24.
DumlaoR.JankeE. (2012). Using relational dialectics to address differences in community-campus partnerships. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 16(2), 79–103. https://openjournals.libs.uga.edu/jheoe
EllisonJ.EatmanT. (2008). Scholarship in public: Knowledge creation and tenure policy in the engaged university. Imagining America.
27.
EylerJ.GilesD.SchmiedeA. (1996). A practitioner’s guide to reflection in service-learning: Student voices and reflections. Vanderbilt University Press.
28.
FitzgeraldH.AllenA.RobertsP. (2010). Campus-community partnerships: Perspectives on engaged research. In FitzgeraldH.BurackC.SeiferS. (Eds.), Handbook of engaged scholarship: Contemporary landscapes, future directions, vol. 2, community-campus partnerships (pp. 5–28). Michigan State University Press.
29.
FreemanE. R.BruggeD.Bennett-BradleyW. M.LevyJ. I.CarrascoE. R. (2006). Challenges of conducting community-based partici- patory research in Boston’s neighborhoods to reduce disparities in asthma. Journal of Urban Health, 83(6), 1013–1021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-006-911-0
30.
HayesE.CubanS. (1997). Border of pedagogy: A critical framework for service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 4, 72–80. http://www.eric.ed.gov
31.
HeathR.FreyL. (2004). Ideal collaboration: A conceptual framework of community collaboration. In KalbP. (Ed.), Communication yearbook 28 (pp. 189–232). Lawrence Erlbaum.
32.
HeathR.IsbellM. (2017). Interorganizational collaboration: Complexity, ethics, and communication. Waveland Press.
Higher Education Research Institute (1996). A social change model of leader- ship development (Version III). University of California Los Angeles Higher Education Research Institute.
35.
HollandB. (2005). Reflections on community-campus partnerships: What has been learned? What are the next challenges? In PasqueP.SmerekR.DwyerB.BowmanN.MalloryB. (Eds.), Higher education collaboratives for community engagement and improvement (pp. 10–17). National Forum on Higher Education for the Public Good.
36.
HunsingerR. P. (2006). Culture and cultural identity in intercultural technical communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 15(1), 31–48. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15427625tcq1501_4
37.
JacobyB. (2015). Service-learning essentials: Questions, answers and lessons learned. Jossey-Bass.
38.
JankeE. (2009). Defining characteristics of partnership identity in faculty-community partnerships. In MoelyB.BilligS.HollandB. (Eds.), Advances in service-learning research, Vol. 9. Creating our identity in service-learning and community engagement (pp. 75–101). Information Age.
JankeE. M.DumlaoR. (2019). Developing communication repertoires to address conflict in community engagement work. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 23(1), 35–56. https://openjournals.libs.uga.edu/jheoe
41.
Johnson-EilolaJ.SeiberS. A. (2013). Solving problems in technical communication. University of Chicago Press.
42.
Kellogg Commission on the Future of State and Land-Grant Universities (2001). Returning to our roots: Executive summaries of the reports of the Kellogg Commission on the future of state and land-grant universities. http://www.aplu.org
43.
KeytonJ.StallworthV. (2003). On the verge of collaboration: Interaction processes versus group outcomes. In FreyL. R. (Ed.), Group communication in context; Studies of bona fide groups (2nd ed., pp. 235–260). Lawrence Erlbaum.
44.
Kuh, G. D. (2013). Taking HIPs to the next level. In G. D. Kuh, & K. O’Donnell (Eds.), Ensuring quality and taking high-impact practices to scale (pp. 1–14). Association of American Colleges and Universities.
45.
LewisL. (2006). Collaborative interaction: Review of communication scholarship and a research agenda. In BeckC. S. (Ed.), Communication yearbook 30 (pp. 297–247). Lawrence Erlbaum.
46.
LilleyK.BarkerM.HarrisN. (2015). Exploring the process of global citizen learning and the student mind-set. Journal of Studies in International Education, 19(3), 225–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315314547822
MarkovaD.McArthurA. (2015). Collaborative intelligence: Thinking with people who think differently. Speigel and Grau/ Random House.
49.
MartinL.CrosslandS. (2017). High-quality community–campus partner- ships: Approaches and consequences. In DostilioL. (Ed.), The commu-nity engagement professional in higher education: A competency model for an emerging field (pp. 161–178). Stylus.
50.
MattessichP. W.Murray-CloseM.MonseyB. R., & the Wilder Research Center. (2001). Collaboration: What makes it work (2nd ed.). Fieldstone Alliance.
51.
McConnellK. D. (2013). Rubrics as catalysts for collaboration: A modest proposal. European Journal of Higher Education, 3(1), 74–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2013.778043
OlaniranB. (2010). Group communication and conflict management in an electronic medium. International Journal of Conflict Management, 21(1), 44–69. https://doi.org/10.1108/10444061011016623
54.
PigzaJ. (2010). Developing your ability to foster student learning and development through reflection. In JacobyB.MutascioP. (Eds.), Looking in, reaching out: a reflective guide for community service-learning professionals (pp. 110–120). Campus Compact.
55.
ReimerL.SchmitzC.JankeE.AskerovA.StrahlB.MatyokT. (2015). Transformative change: An introduction to peace and conflict studies. Lexington Books.
56.
SaltmarshJ.HartleyM.ClaytonP. (2009). Democratic engagement white paper. New England Resource Center for Higher Education.
57.
SandyM.HollandB. A. (2006). Different worlds and common ground: Community partner perspectives on campus-community partnerships. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 13(1), 30–43. http://www.eric.ed.gov
58.
SiegelD. (2010). Organizing for social partnership; Higher education in cross --sector collaboration. Routledge.
59.
SlatteryD.O'BrienM. (2014). Using service learning and virtual team projects to broaden the curriculum and enhance the student experience. Currents in Teaching and Learning, 6(2), 43–54.
60.
St.AmantK. (2013). Finding friction points: Rethinking the flat earth model of globalization. Connexions: International Professional Communication Journal, 1(1), 125–132.
61.
St.AmantK. (2017). Of friction points and infrastructures: Rethinking the dynamics of offering online education in technical communication in global contexts. Technical Communication Quarterly, 26(3), 223–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2017.1339522
62.
St.AmantK.RifeM. S. (2010). Legal issues in global contexts: Reconsidering content in an age of globalization. Technical Communication, 57(3), 249–250.
63.
Starke-MeyerringD.DuinA. H.PalvetzianT. (2007). Global partnerships: Positioning technical communication programs in the context of globalization. Technical Communication Quarterly, 16(2), 139–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572250709336558
64.
StewartT.WebsterN. (2011). Exploring cultural dynamics & tensions within service-learning. Information Age Publishing.
65.
StoeckerR.TryonE. (2009). The unheard voices: Community organizations and service learning. Temple University Press.
66.
StoneD.PattonB.HeenS. (2010). Difficult conversations: How to discuss what matters most. Penguin Books.
Ting-ToomeyS.ChungL. (2012). Understanding intercultural communication (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
69.
TorresJ. (2000). Benchmarks for campus/community partnerships. Campus Compact.
70.
WoodJ. (2007). Interpersonal communication (5th ed.). Thomson/Wadsworth.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
