This paper aims to assess who benefits from community–university engagements and if a Participatory Action Research (PAR) methodology can fulfill its well-known objectives. Reflections on a studio-based project facilitated with residents—from two informal settlements located in Gugulethu, Cape Town—show that under certain circumstances it cannot be assumed that community partners benefit from PAR-led engagements. Findings spotlight some of the limitations of service learning and PAR that warrant identifying recommendations to better equip students for future engagements. Findings also highlight some of the difficulties of working with “gatekeepers” for information and of facilitating partnerships with economically stressed communities.
AngottiT.DobleC.HorriganP., eds. 2011. Service-Learning in Design and Planning. Oakland: New Village Press.
2.
ARG Design. 2007. Concept Proposals for the Redevelopment of Kanana: A disused Landfill Site. Unpublished consultant’s report prepared for the City of Cape Town. September. Cape Town: Observatory.
3.
ArgyrisC.SchönD.1974. Theory in Practice: Increasing Professional Effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
4.
BalassianoK.2011. “Tackling ‘Wicked Problems’ in Planning Studio Courses.” Journal of Planning Education and Research31 (4): 449–60.
5.
BaumH.2000. “Fantasies and Realities in University-Community Partnerships.” Journal of Planning Education and Research20:234–46.
6.
BeardV.2003. “Learning Radical Planning: The Power of Collective Action.” Planning Theory2 (1): 13–35.
7.
BellS.2012. “Educating Professionals for Practice in a Complex World: A Challenge for Engineering and Planning Schools.” Planning Theory and Practice13 (3): 475–79.
8.
BenderG.2008. “Exploring Conceptual Models for Community Engagement at Higher Education Institutions in South Africa.” Perspectives in Education26 (1): 81–95.
9.
BoreA.WrightN.2009. “The Wicked and Complex in Education: Developing a Transdisciplinary Perspective for Policy Formulation, Implementation and Professional Practice.” Journal of Education for Teachers35 (3): 241–56.
10.
BournerT.2010. “A Compatible Partnership? Student-Community Engagement and Traditional University Education.” Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement3:139–54.
11.
BowlM.2010. “The Complexity of Collaboration: Opportunities and Challenges in Contracted Research.” Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement3:38–54.
12.
BoyerE.1996. “The Scholarship of Engagement.” Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences49 (7): 18–33.
13.
BringleR.HatcherJ.2002. “Campus-Community Partnerships: The Terms of Engagement.” Journal of Social Sciences58 (3): 503–16.
14.
Brown-LuthangoM.2012. “Community-University Engagement: The Philippi CityLab in Cape Town & the Challenge of Collaboration across Boundaries.” Higher Education. doi:10.1007/s10734-012-9546-z.
15.
ButinD.2010. Service-Learning in Theory and Practice: The Future of Community Engagement in Higher Education. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
16.
CampbellH.2012. “Planning to Change the World: Between Knowledge and Actions Lies Synthesis.” Journal of Planning Education and Research32 (2): 135–46.
17.
ChamberlinJ.1997. “A Working Definition of Empowerment.” Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal20 (4): 43–46.
18.
CheckowayB.1997. “Reinventing the Research University for Public Service.” Journal of Planning Literature11 (3): 307–19.
19.
CheckowayB.2001. “Renewing the Civic Mission of the American Research University.” Journal of Higher Education72 (2): 126–47.
20.
Community Organization Resource Centre (CORC). 2010. “Barcelona and Europe Household Enumeration Report.” April. Unpublished Report. Cape Town: CORC.
21.
CuthillM.2010. “Working Together: A Methodological Case Study of ‘Engaged Scholarship.’” Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement3:20–37.
22.
DewarM.IsaacC.1998. “Learning from Difference: The Potentially Transforming Experience of Community-University Collaboration.” Journal of Planning Education and Research17 (4): 302–11.
23.
FainsteinS.2010. The Just City. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
24.
ForesterJ.1989. Planning in the Face of Power. Berkeley: University of California Press.
25.
ForesterJ.1999. The Deliberative Practitioner. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
26.
FriedmannJ.1987. Planning in the Public Domain. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
27.
FriedmannJ.2011. Insurgencies: Essays in Planning Theory. London: Routledge.
28.
GibbonsM.LimogesC.NowotnyH.SchwartzmanS.ScottP.TrowM.1994. The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Society. London: Sage.
29.
GuzzettaJ.BollensS.2003. “Urban Planners’ Skills and Competencies: Are We Different from Other Professions? Does Context Matter? Do We Evolve?” Journal of Planning Education and Research23:96–106.
30.
HarperT.SteinS.2006. Dialogical Planning in a Fragmented Society. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers.
HealeyP.2009. “The Pragmatic Tradition in Planning Thought.” Journal of Planning Education and Research28:277–92.
33.
HochC.2007. “Pragmatic Communicative Action Theory.” Journal of Planning Education and Research26:272–83.
34.
HolstonJ.1998. “Spaces of Insurgent Citizenship.” In Making the Invisible Visible, edited by SandercockL., 37–56. Berkeley: University of California Press.
35.
HouJ.2011. “Differences Matter: Learning to Design in Partnership with Others.” In Service-Learning in Design and Planning, edited by AngottiT.DobleC.HorriganP.55–69. Oakland: New Village Press.
36.
HuchzermeyerM.2011. Cities with Slums: From Informal Settlement Eradication to a Right to the City in Africa. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.
37.
KaranjaI.2010. “An Enumeration and Mapping of Informal Settlements in Kisumu, Kenya, Implemented by Their Inhabitants.” Environment and Urbanization22 (1): 217–39.
38.
KeglerM.TwissJ.LookV.2000. “Assessing Community Change at Multiple Levels: The Genesis of an Evaluation Framework for the California Healthy Cities Project.” Health Education & Behavior27 (6): 760–79.
39.
KemmisS.McTaggartR.2005. “Participatory Action Research: Communicative Action and the Public Sphere.” In The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3rd edition, edited by DenzinN.LincolnY.559–603. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
40.
KolbD.FryR.1975. “Towards an Applied Theory of Experiential Learning.” In Theories of Group Processes, edited by CooperC. L.33–58. London: Wiley.
41.
LaskerR.WeissE.MillerR.2001. “Partnership Synergy: A Practical Framework for Studying and Strengthening the Collaborative Advantage.” Milbank Quarterly79 (2): 179–205.
42.
MaurrasseD.2002. “Higher Education-Community Partnerships: Assessing Progress in the Field.” Non-profit & Voluntary Sector Quarterly31 (1): 131–39.
43.
MiraftabF.2009. “Insurgent Planning: Situating Radical Planning in the Global South.” Planning Theory8 (1): 32–50.
44.
NelsonG.GriffinJ. OchockaLordJ.1998. “Nothing about Me, without Me: Participatory Action Research with Self-Help/Mutual Aid Organizations.” American Journal of Community Psychology26 (6): 881–912.
45.
NetshandamaV.2010. “Quality Partnerships: The Community Stakeholders’ View.” Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement3:70–87.
46.
NydenP.WiewelW.1992. “Collaborative Research: Harnessing the Tension between Researcher and Practitioner.” American Sociologist23 (4): 43–55.
47.
OchockaJ.JanzenR.2007. “Blending Commitment, Passion and Structure: Engaging Cultural Linguistic Communities in Collaborative Research.” In Researching with Communities: Grounded Perspectives on Engaging Communities in Research, edited by WilliamsonA.DeSouzaR.323–37. Auckland: Muddycreek Press.
48.
OchockaJ.MoorlagE.JanzenR.2010. “A Framework for Entry: PAR Values & Engagement Strategies in Community Research.” Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement3:1–19.
49.
OjaS.SmulyanL.1989. Collaborative Action Research: A Developmental Approach. New York: Falmer.
50.
PatelS.ArputhamJ.BurraS.SavchukK.2009. “Getting the Information Base for Dharavi’s Redevelopment.” Environment and Urbanization21 (1): 241–51.
51.
ReardonK.2000. “An Experiential Approach to Creating a Community/University Partnership That Works: The East St. Louis Action Research Project.” Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research5 (1): 59–74.
52.
ReasonJ.2006. “Choice and Quantity in Action Research Practice.” Journal of Management Inquiry15 (2): 187–203.
53.
RSA (Republic of South Africa). 1997. “Education White Paper 3: A Programme for the Transformation of Higher Education.” Department of Education. Pretoria: Government Gazette, 15August.
54.
RSA (Republic of South Africa). 1998. “The Prevention of Illegal Eviction from an Unlawful Occupation of Land Act (Act 19 of 1998).” Pretoria: Government Gazette, 18July.
55.
RittelH.WebberM.1973. “Dilemmas in the General Theory of Planning.” Policy Science4:155–69.
56.
RoakesS.Norris-TirrellD.2000. “Community Service Learning in Planning Education: A Framework for Course Development.” Journal of Planning Education and Research20:100–10.
57.
SagerT.2013. Reviving Critical Planning Theory: Dealing with Pressure, Neo-liberalism, and Responsibility in Communicative Planning. London: Routledge.
58.
SandercockL.2003. Cosmopolis II: Mongrel Cities in the 21st Century. London: Continuum.
59.
SchollB.2012. “Project-Based Learning: Core University Education in Spatial Planning and Development.” Planning Theory and Practice13 (3): 479–83.
60.
SchönD.1995. “Knowing-in-Action: The New Scholarship Requires a New Epistemology.” Change27 (6): 26–34.
61.
StanfordG.RoarkA. E.1974. Human Interaction in Education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
62.
StantonT.GilesD.CruzN.1999. Service-Learning: A Movement’s Pioneers Reflect on Its Origins, Practice, and Future. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Student Reflections. 2011. Unpublished Student Reflections. Studio A (APG4022F 2011). School of Architecture, Planning and Geomatics, University of Cape Town, South Africa.
65.
Student Reports. 2011. Unpublished Student Reports. Studio A (APG4022F 2011). School of Architecture, Planning and Geomatics, University of Cape Town, South Africa.
66.
TysonB.LowN.1987. “Experiential Learning in Planning Education.” Journal of Planning Education and Research7 (1): 15–27.
67.
WatsonV.2003. “Conflicting Rationalities: Implications for Planning Theory and Ethics.” Planning Theory and Practice4 (4): 359–407.
68.
WatsonV.2010. Community Self-surveys: Appropriating a Technology of Rule. Conference paper presented at the 24th AESOP Annual Conference. Aalto University, School of Science and Technology, 7–10 July, Helsinki, Finland.
69.
WinklerT.2009. “For the Equitable City Yet to Come.” Planning Theory & Practice10 (1): 65–83.
