Scholars’ engagement with the community can enhance their own scholarship and teaching while expanding the influence of their research for the public good. My experience demonstrates the positive effects of this model of scholarship and the institutional support needed to practice it. Universities under pressure to demonstrate their public value are encouraging more public scholarship “that addresses important civic issues while simultaneously producing knowledge that meets high academic standards” (Bridger and Alter Reference Bridger and Alter2011) or scholarship of application in which researchers’ engagement with society inspires and produces knowledge for the public good (Boyer Reference Boyer1990). In a PS symposium on this same topic, Bullock and Hess (Reference Bullock and Hess2021) defined “civically engaged research” as “the systematic and rigorous production of knowledge through reciprocal partnerships with people beyond the academy that contributes to the improved governance of social and political problems.”

Community engagement is the “collaboration between institutions of higher education and their larger communities (local, regional/state, national, global) for the mutually beneficial exchange of knowledge and resources in a context of partnership and reciprocity” (Carnegie 2015). It is obvious that although this collaboration often occurs at the institutional level, it also can occur at the individual level by researchers and their partners in the community. Community-engagement activities by faculty can include service-learning courses, public forums, civic-education programming, and community-engaged research.

My own community engagement as a state-legislative scholar has taken many forms, including service-learning teaching, community-engaged research, and public scholarship. This engagement has many benefits but also challenges, and it requires substantial institutional support to be successful. This type of scholarship is both incredibly rewarding and labor intensive. This article explores all of these facets so that faculty members who are interested in pursuing this path or are under pressure from their institution to do so are aware of the costs and benefits. Furthermore, I share recommendations from experts about how institutions can reform incentive structures to recognize and value this work by faculty. In addition, extensive work must be done by universities and professional associations to protect public scholars who are threatened by the public or politicians for disseminating their research.

When it is successful, both researchers and community members benefit from an academic project that centers real-world problems that are analyzed using methodically sound techniques and with high ethical standards. My research agenda is invigorated by my civic participation. For example, I serve on the Women’s Policy and Research Commission for the State of Louisiana. This commission advises the governor on potential policy solutions to problems that disproportionately affect women. Members of the commission include university researchers, community leaders, state employees, and public officeholders. In 2018, this commission formed a sexual-harassment subcommittee to inform the state’s response to high-profile accusations. One of the prominent actions being debated was mandatory training for public employees. Having observed this same debate in higher education and knowing the inadequacy of this response without additional interventions, I was inspired to learn how other states were addressing this issue. Subsequently, I coauthored with two undergraduate students a 50-state analysis of state-legislative sexual-harassment policies. My experience as an insider in Louisiana’s response led to an important policy study that I previously had not considered. Involving undergraduate students in this project was particularly valuable because they were able to connect their own study of political science to a real-world challenge in their community.

I also am a member of Women United, an auxiliary group of the United Way of Southeast Louisiana. This nonprofit organization has a robust legislative advocacy agenda. A primary concern is equal pay. Attending many legislative committee hearings with this group and witnessing how little progress was being made, I was motivated to determine which measures adopted by legislatures had the most significant impact on closing the gender wage gap. Watching tireless advocates with few resources make no progress made me want to know how they should be spending their precious time and effort. Therefore, I am currently working with coauthors on another 50-state analysis of equal-pay legislation to answer this difficult question. As a political scientist, I am aware of how difficult the policy-making process is and that systems were designed for slow deliberation. Witnessing these effects on an organization’s advocacy efforts in real time inspired a research question that answers an important policy concern while also providing valuable information to practitioners.

Both of these studies are rigorous and worthy of academic attention. Policy studies are valuable to the discipline and, in my case, immediately valuable to the practitioners trying to improve the quality of life for people in Louisiana. Without my community engagement, I may not have identified these issues as research priorities for myself, and I certainly would not have been aware of how needed they were by the community (Jackson, Shoup, and Williams Reference Jackson, Shoup and Williams2021).

Doing this work, I can practice feminist research methods that value community contributions to knowledge production and require researchers “to develop special relationships with the people studied” (Reinharz and Davidman Reference Reinharz and Davidman1992). My community-engaged work is richer because of the trust established with research subjects and the advantage of participant observation granted to me as a consequence of my engagement (Udami and Dobbs Reference Udani and Dobbs2021).

Community engagement also has benefits for my students and my institution. Service-learning courses are one type of scholarly community engagement, and my partnership with Women United means that so far 21 students have been able to work with this organization as it advocates for its policy agenda. One student even testified before a committee about her experience with the minimum wage. This opportunity for her to develop her political voice was possible because of my facilitation of the course and Tulane University’s commitment to public service. Sydnor, Commins, and Reyna (Reference Sydnor, Commins and Reyna2021) argued that civically engaged research with undergraduate students not only invests in the protection of democracy by producing informed, engaged citizens but also is particularly vital for incorporating marginalized students into political life.

Following Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Tulane University President Scott Cowen created the Center for Public Service. This commitment included a curricular requirement for students and a large infrastructure to enable faculty to create and sustain service-learning courses. My student’s experience is the hoped-for outcome of this endeavor. She performed 20 hours of service to Women United by researching minimum-wage laws across the country, considered how Louisiana law was affecting certain populations, and ultimately shared her own experience as a citizen before a legislative committee. It was both an academic exercise and civic participation—the culmination of what a political science education should be.

President Cowen and his successor, President Mike Fitts, have expressed repeatedly the importance of Tulane’s engagement with the City of New Orleans. Because of our history, that commitment—although sometimes fraught and certainly not perfect—established Tulane’s reputation as a leader in public service in higher education. That reputation is dependent on faculty members’ support of this project; as such, significant financial resources have been allocated to support them.

Community engagement, however, also has potential challenges and always should be conducted with critical analysis (Reyna et al. Reference Reyna, Villegas, Simrak and Kwakwa2021). Even with substantial institutional support, this type of work is extremely labor intensive. It requires skills not formally taught in graduate school, such as relationship building and logistical execution. It requires researchers to be able to communicate in various ways beyond jargon and peer-reviewed publications. Community groups do not work on the academic calendar, which can lead to fraught expectations and disappointments that require careful planning and maintenance (Udami and Dobbs Reference Udani and Dobbs2021).

This type of work also is not always valued by the discipline and often is perceived as subjective or biased. Moreover, this work often is done by marginalized scholars who have a deep commitment to community but may not be supported within their academic community (Brown Reference Brown2021; Strum et al. Reference Strum, Eatman, Saltmarsh and Bush2011). When this work is attributed to the larger institution, it can conceal that institution’s reputation and obscure racist, sexist, ableist, homophobic, and/or transphobic histories. Faculty members who engage in this work must balance these concerns while working for a more just allocation of labor in higher education and for recognition and repair of past injustices—not only on campus but also in the community. We must not replicate harm through the research process (Reyna et al. Reference Reyna, Villegas, Simrak and Kwakwa2021).

Because this work is so important to universities, it is worthy of their investment. Although some academic disciplines may incorporate training for community-engaged research and public scholarship, most faculty members do not have experience doing this type of work. Additional training to learn different writing styles and the ethics of responsible engagement across racial, class, ability, sexuality, and gender boundaries is necessary. Organizations that already are doing this type of work include the Scholars Strategy Network and The People’s Institute for Survival and Beyond. Sections or working groups in professional organizations also may be a source for peer-to-peer education. For example, the American Political Science Association recently established the Institute for Civically Engaged Research. However, universities must invest in and support collaborations between their faculty members and these organizations because this work should not come at a cost to local communities.

Another way that institutions can support this type of work is by revising their tenure standards (Dobbs et al. Reference Dobbs, Hess, Bullock and Udani2021; Ellison and Eatman Reference Ellison and Eatman2008; Strum et al. Reference Strum, Eatman, Saltmarsh and Bush2011). Recommendations that define community-engaged research include a value statement acknowledging its value to the institution, developing criteria to evaluate work to reward faculty members who engage in it, allowing for recognition of alternative publication venues, and considering community members as potential peer reviewers for appropriate projects. It is obvious that time—in the form of course releases, child care support, and other professional leave—is a critical resource. Likewise, evaluating the impact on the local community should be a consideration. Community-engaged research must recognize the community as an equal partner and not only as part of the process (Udami and Dobbs Reference Udani and Dobbs2021). In doing so, the structure of universities must be reformed. Finally, many publicly engaged scholars have called on universities to develop plans that respond to threats against academic freedom targeting disproportionately marginalized academics (Cantwell, Meehan, and Rubio Reference Cantwell, Meehan and Rubio2021). Being a state-politics scholar in this particular political moment complicates engagement because of contemporary threats to public funding of public institutions and job security for faculty members by some politicians. Public scholarship may be discouraged rather than encouraged by institutions dependent on the state and resistant donors.

This type of work is not for everyone, but I realize that my early educational experiences made it inevitable. I received my masters in women’s studies in 2004 from the University of Alabama, where I was mentored by women faculty members who had studied and participated in the Civil Rights Movement. This education predisposed me to question academic norms and expectations around legitimate research methodologies and the relationship of universities to the communities in which they reside. I obtained my PhD in political science at Rutgers University–New Brunswick because it was the home of the Center for American Women and Politics (CAWP) at the Eagleton Institute of Politics. CAWP’s mission, “to promote greater knowledge and understanding about the role of women in American politics, enhance women’s influence in public life, and expand the diversity of women in politics and government,” inspired all of my subsequent scholarly work (Center for American Women and Politics). At CAWP, pollsters, candidates, and elected officials were all part of the intellectual community, not merely subjects to be analyzed. All of this training prepared me for my first full-time academic position at the Newcomb Institute at Tulane University. Sally Kenney, executive director of the Newcomb Institute and Newcomb College Endowed Chair Professor, created a position that enabled me to do the type of academic work that met high academic standards while respecting the community as a partner in the production of knowledge. As described by Jackson, Shoup, and Williams (Reference Jackson, Shoup and Williams2021), I was motivated by a concern for “unequal operations of power…to build community…a commitment to justice…and better, more grounded, and more accessible political science.”

Because of my educational background and nontraditional appointment in an academic center where this work is valued, I am able to develop a research agenda that does not have to adhere to traditional tenure expectations. I can choose to do work that has both academic value and local impact. For example, my book on women’s caucuses in state legislatures is not only a rigorous academic examination of state-level factors associated with women’s collective action within state legislatures but also a useful guide for legislators and their staff about how to create women’s caucuses and pitfalls to avoid (Mahoney Reference Mahoney2018). Moreover, my work with Clare Daniel and Mirya Holman on characteristics of legislators engaging in the sex-education debate is useful not only for policy studies but also for advocates on either side of that debate to identify potential allies. The careers of community-engaged scholars appear different from those who do not engage in these practices. Institutions must wrestle with these differences and the potential benefits in order to support their faculty members.

I was fortunate to be offered my position by a mentor who is genuinely dedicated to public scholarship at an institution also committed to community engagement. Not all scholars work in this environment. For those interested in soliciting support from hesitant or disinterested departments and administrators, I suggest demonstrating the value for the institution within your own context. If the current challenge is attracting diverse graduate students, I suggest making the connection between scholars publicly engaging with relevant scholarship and communities as a way to recruit more effectively. If the focus on campus is the H index, highlighting the heightened citations for scholars who promote their work via social media may convince administrators that this type of engagement is a valuable investment for scholars (Klar et al. Reference Klar, Krupnikov, Ryan, Searles and Shmargad2020). Perhaps experiential-learning and postgraduation-employment statistics are important to administrators. Focusing on the undergraduate benefits from these engagements may be the approach to take. Time, training, and support are what institutions can provide. Financial investment as well as public backing of scholars and their work are institutional-level necessities.

All types of community engagement can enhance state-legislative research. This article discusses the activities that shaped my research and my students’ experiences—but there are endless possibilities. By identifying the challenges, I hope we all can be more vigilant practitioners, constantly assessing the risks and rewards of such engagement. Finally, because I appreciate its value to the community as well as the university, I hope to encourage further institutional support for this intellectual practice that enhances higher education, the student experience, and the communities in which we live and work.