Teaching Community-Engaged Courses (updated Spring 2025)

By Michael Lehman

A primary mission of the public university system is to engage with surrounding communities in service to the public good. Toward this end, Georgia Tech’s current strategic plan promotes becoming an anchor institution and partner in sustainable development across Atlanta and the broader Georgia region by developing a regional network of collaborations that engage students, faculty, and staff in amplifying Georgia Tech’s impact on the sustainable human and environmental development of the local community (Strategic Plan).  Integrating community-engaged pedagogy into the curriculum is a direct way to bring this vision to life, giving students opportunities to apply disciplinary knowledge to authentic challenges identified by local partners. During the fellowship, you can pursue opportunities to teach community-engaged courses. This document aims to act as a starting point for instructors who wish to collaborate with community partners and stakeholders in their courses.

For the purposes of this guide, community-engaged learning is defined as learning in which students collaborate with community stakeholders on projects that address partner-identified needs while attending to the ethics of representing historically underserved groups (Yancey 2018, 61). Collaborating with community partners allows students to practice reflexive awareness as they consider how texts and technologies circulate, who they are representing, and the voices that will be amplified. The Writing and Communication Program’s (WCP) focus on multimodality affords students opportunities to “communicate successfully within the digital communication networks that characterize workplaces, schools, civic life, and span traditional cultural, national, and geographical borders” (Selfe and Takayoshi 2007, 3), a bridge between academic knowledge and public impact. Deliverables such as infographics, social-media toolkits, pitch decks, website design and redesign, or data visualizations sharpen students’ multimodal literacy and provide community partners with tangible, shareable assets to advance their missions.

While community-engaged courses can differ from standard sections of ENGL 1101, ENGL 1102, and LMC 3403, it is important to maintain the course’s focus on rhetorical principles and multimodal design. Projects should be grounded in rhetorical practice with a keen focus on transfer across the disciplines while simultaneously meeting partner needs. To align with WCP focus on rhetoric and multimodality, students should consider:

  • Who are the audiences within the partner organization and the broader public?
  • In what contexts will the deliverables circulate?
  • What purpose and argument will best serve both the partner’s goals and the course’s learning outcomes?
  • Which rhetorical appeals, modes, and media will persuade most effectively?

Foregrounding audience, context, purpose, organization, and design enables instructors to iterate artifacts and deliverables that are socially responsive and rhetorically sound.

The following sections outline practical strategies for selecting partners, designing collaborative projects, and implementing community-engaged courses that align with WCP learning outcomes.

Selecting a Partner

Partner selection is an important aspect of teaching community-engaged courses. Georgia Tech has established partnerships, and it is best practice to collaborate with a partner that has worked with Georgia Tech, or even with the WCP. To align with the WCP learning outcomes, it is important to consider the types of deliverables that would benefit both the partner and students, specifically assignments that help communicate the partner’s mission to the broader community or redesigning some of the partner’s current digital or outreach materials. Georgia Tech’s pre-established relationships with community stakeholders make finding funding opportunities easier to design community-engaged courses.

The first point of contact to discuss developing courses with a partner is Dr. Sarah Brackmann, the Director of Community-Based Learning. For courses specific to sustainability research and education, Dr. Ruthie Yow, the Associate Director of the Center for Sustainable Communities Research and Education, can help introduce established partners to instructors. Additionally, Dr. Rebecca Hull, Assistant Director of Center for Teaching and Learning, has experience with community-based learning and an advocate for sustainability education across disciplines.

After discussing potential partnerships with the internal contacts listed above, request that they make the initial introduction on your behalf. If you are seeking to work with a partner with a preestablished relationship with Georgia Tech, then an introduction by someone who has worked with them before signals to the organization that the course partnership aligns with existing priorities and saves the partner from fielding duplicate or misaligned requests. These liaisons can also clarify expectations before the first partner meeting. Once the initial connection is established, the instructor can follow up directly with the partner to co-design deliverables that align with both the organization’s needs and the course learning outcomes.

Working with a Partner

Once the partnership is in place, the focus shifts from matchmaking to collaboration. Community partners add the greatest value when they supply authentic problems, contextual expertise, and provide or act as an audience that enhances students’ understanding of communication and provides a forum for them to practice their skills. In terms of course design, the theme of the course can be adapted to fit the partner’s area of expertise, or a specific module or section of the course can focus on the partner’s subject area.

As an example of how to implement community partners into course planning, the following rough schedule can be used:

  • Reach out to set-up partnership the semester before planned implementation
  • 1-2 planning calls to discuss course goals and partner needs before the semester begins
  • Intro class visit for partner to present problem to be addressed with students (preferably in-person)
  • Student project pitch to partner (preferably in-person)
  • Student final presentation to partner (preferably in-person)
  • Deliverables provided to partner
  • Ask partner for feedback on projects for evaluation of student work

It is important to note that if a site-visit is planned, it needs to be planned well in advance and noted in the course description. Additionally, flexibility needs to be built in the course schedule as partner schedule may change during the course of the semester.

Finding Support

While not all partnerships require funding, compensating partners who contribute significant time and expertise to course activities is considered bast practice and demonstrates institutional commitment to developing and sustaining collaborations. Georgia Tech has several funding opportunities that run yearly, usually in the Spring for the following academic year. These include the Transformative Teaching and Learning (TTL) Initiative (up to $12,000) and Undergraduate Sustainability Education Innovation Grants (up to $10,000) which can be used for class expenses, partner pay, and supplemental pay for instructors. Additional funding opportunities may be available and can be discussed with Dr. Brackmann, and guidance on compensating partners can be found here. As of writing this document, the Office of Community-Based Learningwebsite is still being built out and is a repository of information on developing partnerships and community-based learning.

Georgia Tech’s Center for Teaching and Learning offers pedagogical support for community-based approaches in the classroom. Rebecca Hull leads a yearly Community of Practice on Transformative Teaching that meets bi-weekly or monthly through the Fall and Spring semesters. The Community of Practice is open to faculty interested in sustainability education and community-based learning, offering a forum for interdisciplinary research and teaching interests including topics like designing courses and projects with community partners, cross-disciplinary collaborations, sustainability education research, and asset-based teaching and learning.

Course Design

When designing a community-engaged course, instructors generally follow one or two models. In a partnership-centered arc, the collaboration frames the entire semester from syllabus to assessment. In contrast, a partnership module situates the collaboration inside a shorter unit within an otherwise traditional section of ENGL 1101/1102 or LMC 3403. Deciding on the model to adopt depends on the number of partners the instructor wishes to involve, the partner’s availability, the scope of the partner’s needs, and the time commitment both the instructor and students are prepared to make.

A partnership-centered arc begins with listening to the partner’s needs and adapting them to the learning objectives of the course. Early meetings with the partner are used to establish the organizations and class priorities to ensure that the partnership is mutually beneficial. Each project follows a recurring scaffolding framework, including a proposal, outline of team member responsibilities, pitch to partner, drafts, final presentation to partner, and final deliverable. One process document that can be very important is an implementation guide, which students create to explain how digital assets can be implemented by the partner. Working with one or more partners for an entire semester can be difficult, so it is important to break the work into two-three separate sections with the deliverables addressing different partner needs.

The partnership-module model condenses a similar reciprocal framework into a focused segment of the term. After students work through concepts of rhetoric and multimodality, one specific team project can be designed as the deliverable. For example, a data visualization for the partner’s website or a social-media toolkit that advances the partner’s mission. Whether the instructor weaves partnerships through the whole semester or only with a specific module, success depends on aligning assignments with partner needs and course learning outcomes, scaffolding projects and assignment, and foregrounding multimodality.

Project Design

Typically, when designing deliverables for community partners, team-based projects provide the strongest connection between academic goals and career preparation. Working in small teams of four to five students mirrors the workplace and academic classrooms while giving each student enough responsibility to demonstrate individual learning. It also provides four to five unique deliverables for the community partner, as each team project may address partner needs in different ways. The structure of a project needs to remain flexible, giving students creative freedom to use their collective skills and knowledge to deliver polished materials. Each project can follow a typical course project, which can include a document that outlines team member responsibilities and internal deadlines, a work plan or log to be updated as the project progresses toward completion, proposal, needs analysis, pitch to partner, draft, final presentation to partner, final deliverable, and potentially a letter to the partner detailing how to implement the materials created.

Below are two sample team project descriptions from a LMC 3403 section that show how the scaffold outlined above can translated into partner-driven assignments.

Example Project 1: Data-Visualization for the Black Farmers Network.

For this assignment, you will work in teams to complete data visualization projects for the Black Farmers Network (BFN), a digital repository for rural, African-American farmers to share stories, products, and services. Your team will propose a project after meeting with the community partner, then complete the project which should serve as usable work product for BFN. These will be digital projects, as the projects will potentially be housed on the BFN website. Deliverables must 1) promote BFN mission; 2) load seamlessly in WordPress; 3) use accessible, audience-appropriate design; 4) speak to both the general public and policy makers. The assignment is graded on process—proposal, pitch, draft, and implementation guide—rather than solely on the final product.  

Example Project 2: Integrated Marketing and Educational Toolkit for WunderGrubs

For this project, you will be working with WunderGrubs, a local startup that produces sustainable protein from mealworms, to develop a marketing campaign and Educational Toolkit for middle-school students. The partner explains:

We recently relocated our grub shed to a local farm in Stone Mountain, Dekalb County. It will be housed at the farm for some time to be used as an educational resource for their elementary Spring Break and Summer Camps, as well as feed for their small livestock and fertilizer for crops. Mealworms are easy and fun to raise. They are low-maintenance, and the perfect introduction to lifecycles for young scientists. Studying mealworms gives kids a chance to observe, care for, and experiment with living creatures in a hand-on way.

Your project, then, is two-parts. First, develop an integrated marketing campaign that promotes WunderGrubs’ partnership with Dekalb County Schools, highlighting the upcoming summer camp programs, and positions mealworms as a fun, sustainable protein source. Assets can include social media posts, one-sheets or flyers for parents and teachers, or short promotional videos. Second, create an “Educational Toolkit” for the grub shed that provides at least two print or digital infographic that explain the mealworm life cycle and the mealworm production system. All materials must be brand consistent, visually accessible, and ready for use across media platforms. Deliverables will include: Proposal, work-plan, needs analysis, mid-project pitch to partner, draft assets, and revised final materials and presentation to partner.

Evaluation will emphasize usefulness of materials, meaning the final materials meet the organizations objectives and are ready to be utilized.

Both sample projects work well because each one builds in flexibility to accommodate the unpredictable nature of community partnerships. Each project offers multiple deliverable options. For example, data visualizations that can draw from various sources for BFN, or modular marketing and educational components for WunderGrubs, that can be weighted differently based on partner availability. Embedding the partner’s real needs inside a repeatable scaffold that foregrounds rhetoric and design ensures that students demonstrate learning through transferable communication skills regardless of how the partnership evolves. Most importantly, when direct partner input becomes limited, or if the collaboration does not progress as planned, students can still create meaningful work using publicly available research or data that aligns with the partner’s mission.

Final Considerations

Community-engaged courses offer instructors and students opportunities to connect the WCP’s focus on rhetoric and multimodality with authentic collaboration with community stakeholders toward public impact. Success depends on thoughtful partner selection, flexible project design, and maintaining focus on transferable communication skills. When considering incorporating community partnerships into the classroom, begin by reaching out to Dr. Sarah Brackman, Dr. Ruthie Yow, or Dr. Rebecca Hull for ideas and to explore existing relationships and funding opportunities. These efforts help sustain the network of reciprocal, community-centered learning that Georgia Tech’s strategic plan envisions, demonstrating how thoughtful rhetoric and multimodal design can effect change well beyond the classroom.

Teaching Resources

References

“Amplify Impact.” n.d. Strategic Plan. https://strategicplan.gatech.edu/focus/impact.

Selfe, Cynthia L., and Takayoshi, Pamela. 2007. “Thinking about Multimodality.” Multimodal Composition: Resources for Teachers, by Cynthia L. Selfe: 1-12.

Yancey, Kathleen Blake. 2018. “‘With Fresh Eyes’: Notes toward the Impact of New Technologies on Composition.” The Routledge Handbook of Digital Writing and Rhetoric, 61- 72.