





































Authors
LATOSHA ROWLEY  
Urban Education Studies 
Ph.D. program, Cohort 5, 
IUPUI  

SUSAN KIGAMWA   
Urban Education Studies 
Ph.D. program, Cohort 8, 
IUPUI 

Speaking up, Speaking out  
Urban doctoral students voices 

LATOSHA ROWLEY AND SUSAN KIGAMWA

doing community- 
engaged work as  
doctoral students 
Latosha Rowley: As a third-
year doctoral student in the IUPUI 
Urban Education Studies program, 
and a graduate assistant in the 
IUPUI Office of Community En-
gagement (IUPUI OCE), I engaged 
in an inquiry-based, collaborative 
relationship with a local commu-
nity partner in a study designed 
to explore the effectiveness of their 
center’s programming. In addition 
to my research work with a local 
community center, I have the privi-
lege of working with and engaging 
in research around a middle school 
mentoring program with two Indi-
anapolis Public Schools, Girl Talk, 
where I facilitate the mentoring 
connection between IUPUI un-
dergraduate student mentors and 
middle school girl mentees.  

Susan Kigamwa: As a first-
year doctoral student in the IUPUI 
Urban Education Studies program 
and a development officer in the 

IUPUI Office of Community En-
gagement (IUPUI OCE) I have the 
enviable role of linking innovative 
proposals and research opportu-
nities to the appropriate funding 
resources.  In my doctoral studies, I 
am developing an inquiry approach 
to examining and understanding 
the communities that we serve.  

reflection on the 
community-engaged 
scholarly values 
Our research is led by values of 
democratic voice, equity through 
reciprocity, social justice, commu-
nity self-determination, and shared 
space for dialogue. These five IUPUI 
Office of Community Engagement 
scholarly values drive our under-
standing and practice of communi-
ty-engaged activities.  

Democratic voice is foundational 
in successfully exercising communi-
ty-engaged research. We have found 
that recognizing every person’s 
ideas, perspectives and thoughts are 
critical to fostering better commu-
nication and deeper relationships 

R O W L E Y  A N D  K I G A M W A

77 VO L .  1 ,  I S S U E  2



with the communities we serve.  One of the key 
components of our community-engaged work is 
having opportunities to hear and actively listen to 
community voices about issues and solutions.  

Latosha: In my recent inquiry study, IUPUI 
OCE staff and a local urban community center 
partnered to create a road map for a study to 
improve the center’s services and programming. 
We worked together with an intentional focus on 
the goals and needs of improving the community 
center’s programming. Through this collaborative 
partnership, the center’s leadership actively par-
ticipated in creating with us the survey and inter-
view questions to seek valuable information from 
community partners.  We brainstormed ideas 
with the center board members as well as staff 
and were able to experience the power of demo-

cratic community voice.  Our joint contribution 
in creating this tool was essential to support the 
community center leaders’ needs for information. 
I conducted surveys with parents, caregivers, and 
other family members at the community center’s 
Family Unity Night celebration. Their responses 
helped us examine experiences, strengths, and 

The work of communi-
ty-engaged research has a 

completely different approach that 
begins with understanding the people, 

the history of the community, their 
assets, and priorities.  

Urban Education Studies doctoral students Latosha Rowley and Susan Kigamwa discuss their research.  
Photo credit: Annie Goeller 

S P E A K I N G  U P

ENGAGE!  |  i u p u i  b i c e n t e n n i a l  e d i t i o n 78



challenges in the center’s programming. Based on 
the feedback received from survey responders we 
improved the survey and provided opportunities 
for more community input and voice regarding 
the leaders’ information needs.     

Equity through reciprocity is recognizing 
that there exists a fair exchange of information. 
Historically, universities have been notorious 
for embracing a one-way, top-down approach 
with fixed research agendas for their community 
partnerships.  The work of community-engaged 
research has a completely different approach that 
begins with understanding the people, the history 
of the community, their assets, and priorities. Un-
derstanding these key factors about communities 
helps to identify common areas of interest, and 
results in a win-win relationship.  

Susan: An example of reciprocity of equity was 
demonstrated in the creation of a university-based 
theater company.  It was formed to focus on Black 
diaspora theatre as an inspired vision of the In-
dianapolis community. The theater is focused on 
increasing affordable access to performing arts for 
the local community; and showing productions 
with themes, stories and actors that reflect Black 
experiences. This partnership with the univer-
sity offers access to opportunities for arts-based 
student learning experiences in the community 
as well as evidence-based research strategies. 
The Black theatre initiative is a direct outcome 
inspired from community participation in the 
Indiana Avenue Cultural District’s revitalization 
discussions.  The rich history of Indianapolis’ 
Indiana Avenue with Black culture is well un-
derstood and treasured, making this partnership 
opportunity an ideal connection. 

Social justice guides our inquiry approach as we 
seek to ensure fair and just community-engaged 
research with a focus on the equitable distribution 
of wealth, opportunities, and social privileges.  

Latosha: Social justice action is evident in our 
research with the IUPUI sponsored Girl Talk 

mentoring programming in two different middle 
schools in the Indianapolis Public School dis-
trict. Our Girl Talk mentoring program serves to 
address social justice by supporting girls' self-ef-
ficacy and academic achievement in underserved 
student populations.  The girls increase their 
knowledge and awareness of possible solutions to 
their school and life challenges as they successful-
ly transition into high school, college, and careers.  

The focus of the community self-determina-
tion value is evident when we prioritize partner-
ships that focus on the well-being of communities. 
An example of this kind of partnership is the 
Quality of Life plans developed by neighborhoods 
reflecting the priorities of residents, non-profits, 
schools, churches and other stakeholders in a 
community. Most Quality of Life plans provide a 
framework to address education, health, safety, 
workforce and economic development that aligns 
the university with the community’s interests. 
Reflected in these plans are neighborhood assets, 
gaps, and opportunities for improvement. Com-
munities in Central Indiana demonstrate self-de-
termination consistently and send the message 
that they do not need external entities telling 
them what is needed in their own neighborhoods.  

Susan:  I have participated in grant writing part-
nerships where a community partner positioned 
themselves as lead applicants to ensure their 
needs could be fully met in alignment with their 
quality of life plan. To me this is a demonstration 
of their own clear-sighted ability to get what they 
need from the partnership.   

A final value of community-engaged work is 

These values are support-
ed by trust, a component that 

facilitates connecting with communi-
ty partners in authentic and productive 

relationships.   

R O W L E Y  A N D  K I G A M W A

79 VO L .  1 ,  I S S U E  2



the shared space for dialogue in a co-working 
relationship between the university and the commu-
nity partners with a focus on diversity and building 
bridges for differences.   

Latosha: Community conversations accomplished 
ways to maintain the culture and history of the 
neighborhood while meeting the community’s needs. 
I had the opportunity to attend a community conver-
sation event where community members and IUPUI 
staff engaged in dialogue about the social, histori-
cal, personal and organizational values of the local 
neighborhood. This community conversation was 
purposeful and allowed opportunities for all stake-
holders to collaboratively rethink solutions together. 
Being present with community members, especially 
during community conversations is a powerful way 
to build mutually beneficial relationships between 
the community and the university (Born, 2012).  

These values are supported by trust, a component 
that facilitates connecting with community partners 
in authentic and productive relationships.  As these 
trusting relationships have continued to grow, we 
have had the privilege of participating, as well as wit-
nessing opportunities to challenge, disrupt, and resist 
economic, social and racial inequity in our  
local communities.  

reflections 
Examining community engagement through the 
prism of the Office of Community Engagement’s 
scholarly values has been insightful and central for 
our professional growth and development. Reflecting 
on our research, we realize there will be challenges 
such as ambiguity and lack of structural support in 
the field. However, we can come alongside commu-
nity to co-create rewarding and sustainable change.   

Our experience as doctoral students in the Office of 
Community Engagement has given us opportunities 
to engage in inquiry mentored by veteran research-
ers to co-learn and navigate such challenges and 
gain deeper understanding of urban spaces as places 
of opportunity and transformation (Sutton and 
Kemp, 2011).  

References

Born, P. (2012). Community conversa-
tions: Mobilizing the ideas, skills, and 
passion of  community organizations, 
governments, businesses, and people. 
(2nd ed.). Toronto and New York: BPS 
books. 

Sutton, S. E. & Kemp, S. P. (Eds.). 
(2011). The paradox of urban space: 
Inequality and  transformation in mar-
ginalized communities. New York, NY: 
Palgrave Macmillan.   

ENGAGE!  |  i u p u i  b i c e n t e n n i a l  e d i t i o n 80

S P E A K I N G  U P


