Inquiry and practice related to community-campus partnerships are ever evolving, with significant current momentum toward democratic engagement. To inform the ongoing development of associated practitioner scholarship, we examine the development of a tool for assessing the quality of community-campus relationships, the Transformational Relationship Evaluation Scale (TRES), as a microcosm of some underlying dynamics in previous and current work. After an overview of its conceptual foundations, we present TRES, review examples of its uses across multiple contexts, and share lessons learned from critical reflection on those uses along with associated implications for the future development of such tools. Subsequent discussion focuses on shifts toward conceptualizing both partnerships themselves and processes of inquiring into them in terms of systems and co-creation. Seeking to support readers in operationalizing democratic engagement in their inquiry and practice, we share conceptual frameworks, tangible tools, guiding questions for research, and reflective critique on our experience as practitioner-scholars of partnerships.
To examine the mental health experiences of international graduate students of Color (IGSC) as they navigate through a multitude of systemic barriers, the researchers interviewed eight IGSC in the U.S. Adopting a critical race perspective, the researchers sought to address a persistent gap in the counseling literature, and explore how systemic influences of racism, xenophobia, and discriminatory policies impacted the mental health of IGSC. Three distinct themes emerged from phenomenological analysis of the participants' interviews in the current study: cross-cultural challenges, surviving racism and anti-immigrant sentiment, and mental health and wellness. Implications for how professional counselors can support IGSC as they navigate through multiple challenges are emphasized.
The challenges of the 21st century, post-industrial society are increasingly complex. They will not be solved by the actions of individual, "heroic" leaders; instead, they require the participation of diverse stakeholders in order to make progress. Through a discussion of the evolution of leadership theory, we demonstrate that theories emerging from a post-industrial paradigm highlight the collective dimensions of leadership in contrast to the leader-centric theories of the Industrial Era. We draw from this literature to problematize the leader-centric nature of community leadership programs in the United States by specifically examining their sponsorship, content, and structure. Finally, we offer a vision for how to re-imagine community leadership programs so that they are more responsive to the complexity of the 21st century by drawing upon collective leadership and postmodern curriculum theory.
Positioned at a unique intersection of managing academic pressures and embodying racial and ethnic minority identity status, international graduate students of color (IGSCs) are frequent targets of multiple stressors. Unfortunately, extant counseling literature offers counselors little information on the psychosocial strengths IGSCs employ (e.g., strong familial bond, friendships) to cope with such stressors. To address this gap, interviews with eight IGSC participants were conducted and analyzed using interpretive phenomenological analysis and the lens of the intersectionality framework. Five psychosocial strengths were identified—familial support, social connections, academic aspirations and persistence, personal growth and resourcefulness, and resistance and critical consciousness. Recommendations for employing an asset-based approach in counseling and counselor education are offered.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.