scholarly journals Learn, Engage, and Act to Advance Age Inclusivity in Higher Education

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 224-225
Author(s):  
Joann Montepare
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Community Partnerships ◽  
Social Structures ◽  
Campus Community ◽  
Campus Leaders ◽  
Professional Needs ◽  
Aging Populations ◽  
Guiding Principles ◽  
Personal Interests

Abstract Shifting age demographics are reshaping our social structures with far-reaching implications for higher education. Aging populations mean more older adults are looking to higher education to meet their professional needs and personal interests, and the longevity economy is calling for a trained workforce to provide services to support the health and functioning of individuals as they age. As well, there is a need to improve students’ aging literacy, along with developing synergistic age-friendly campus-community partnerships to address aging issues. How can institutions explore, create, develop, and sustain more age-friendly programs, practices, and partnerships? This presentation will introduce the toolkit specially designed by the GSA-AGHE Workgroup for use by faculty, students, administrators, and other campus leaders, and will provide an overview of the Age-Friendly University (AFU) initiative and its 10 guiding principles for creating more age-inclusive campuses.

scholarly journals Age-Friendly Universities (AFU): Necessary Partners for Age-Friendly Communities

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 99-100
Author(s):  
Joann Montepare
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Community Partnerships ◽  
Institutions Of Higher Education ◽  
Campus Community ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Aging Populations ◽  
Age Segregation ◽  
Intergenerational Connections

Abstract The pioneering Age-Friendly University (AFU) initiative, endorsed in 2016 by GSA’s Academy for Gerontology in Higher Education (AGHE), calls for institutions of higher education to respond to shifting demographics and the needs of aging populations through more age-friendly campus programs, practices, and partnerships. The case will be made that AFU institutions can also play vital roles in helping neighboring communities develop, launch, assess, and sustain their age-friendly efforts through research and related endeavors that engage students and faculty. In addition, AFU campus-community partnerships can play a critical role in breaking down age-segregation that fuels ageism, building intergenerational connections, and increasing aging literacy among rising community members - all of which are necessary steps for building age-friendly communities.

scholarly journals A Toolkit for Advancing Age Inclusivity in Higher Education

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 224-224
Author(s):  
Joann Montepare ◽  
Kimberly Farah
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Global Network ◽  
Institutions Of Higher Education ◽  
Campus Leaders ◽  
Aging Populations ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Guiding Principles

Abstract The pioneering Age-Friendly University (AFU) initiative, endorsed by GSA’s Academy for Gerontology in Higher Education (AGHE), calls for institutions of higher education to respond to shifting demographics and the needs of our aging populations through more age-friendly programs, practices, and partnerships. Over 70 institutions have joined the AFU global network and adopted the 10 AFU guiding principles. In support of the initiative, a GSA-AGHE-AFU workgroup was organized to develop strategies to help GSA members and their campuses explore how they can be more age-inclusive and create pathways to joining the AFU network. One outcome of the workgroup’s efforts was the creation “Tools for Advancing Age Inclusivity in Higher Education”, designed with support from AARP. In this symposium, workgroup members describe this suite of tools which can be used by faculty, students, administrators, and other campus leaders. Montepare will introduce the symposium with an overview of the AFU network and the workgroup’s goals. Morrow-Howell and Schumacher will discuss tools for “Making the Case” with examples from efforts on their campuses. Porter and Bergman will describe tools for “Getting Started” and how campuses can begin to mobilize age-friendly efforts. Andreoletti and June will share tools for “Gaining Momentum” with tips for creating age-friendly campus connections and collaborations. Silverstein and Gugliucci will describe tools for “Assessing and Tracking Success” that can be used at any stage of the process for exploring a campus’s age-friendliness. Information about joining the AFU network will be provided.

scholarly journals Older Adults as Teaching Allies: Opportunities for Age-Friendly University Innovation

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 546-547
Author(s):  
Joann Montepare ◽  
Kimberly Farah
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Adult Students ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Oral Communication ◽  
State University ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Educational Mission ◽  
Aging Populations ◽  
Older Adult Students

Abstract Changing age demographics are reshaping societies and challenging institutions of higher education to consider how they can respond to aging populations through new approaches to teaching, research, and community engagement. As well, institutions are facing a range of challenges as they look to respond to the contemporary needs of traditional-aged students. The pioneering Age-Friendly University (AFU) initiative, endorsed by GSA’s Academy for Gerontology in Higher Education (AGHE), offers a framework within which institutions can begin to address these issues through more age-friendly programs, practices, and partnerships. This symposium will feature AFU advocates discussing innovate ways in which older adults can serve as teaching allies and support the educational mission of higher education. Farah (Lasell University) will discuss how older adults can engage in diverse teaching and learning activities with examples as crime scenario developers in a forensics class, conversation partners in an international oral communication class, and professional interviewers in an internship skills class. Kaye (University of Maine) will discuss how older adults can serve as citizen scientists performing critical functions in participatory research and in community-based test-beds and co-design laboratories. Ermer (Montclair State University) will discuss how older adults can engage students in discourse as guest speakers and panel participants in classes across the curriculum. Manoogian (Western Oregon University) will describe the innovative ways that older adult students (for credit or audit) mentor and engage younger student peers in course activities as well as increase their own understanding of the aging process.

scholarly journals Supporting Student Success in the New Normal

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-65
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Distance Education ◽  
Student Success ◽  
Student Learning ◽  
Physical Capital ◽  
Institutions Of Higher Education ◽  
Campus Community ◽  
Remote Work ◽  
New Normal ◽  
Campus Leaders

The new normal in higher education can mean different things on varied campuses. The new normal, which occurred because of the COVID-19 pandemic, is the current atmosphere across the higher education landscape. This has meant more technology at many institutions of higher education (IHE) in numerous areas on campus. Other post-pandemic changes include a new financial reality, finding new ways to support student learning and campus community, and a new reality for many campus programs. This version of higher education looks hauntingly similar yet vastly different than the old vision of the higher education landscape. The COVID-19 pandemic caused many institutions of higher education to hit the fast forward button on implementing innovations and change. This change not only meant a move toward distance education using current methods in new ways but also activating plans for other innovation, such as streamlining paperwork, advocating for remote work, and offering traditional coursework in a new format. Campus leaders may need to redeploy human, financial, and physical capital in alignment with their new operating models (Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America [TIAA], 2020).

Social Glocalisation and Education

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Hobelsberger
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Social Work ◽  
Practical Theology ◽  
Social Structures ◽  
Local Effects ◽  
Local Identities ◽  
The Social ◽  
The World ◽  
Work Health

This book discusses the local effects of globalisation, especially in the context of social work, health and practical theology, as well as the challenges of higher education in a troubled world. The more globalised the world becomes, the more important local identities are. The global becomes effective in the local sphere. This phenomenon, called ‘glocalisation’ since the 1990s, poses many challenges to people and to the social structures in which they operate.

1. The Neoliberal Logic of Service-Learning

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan Snider Bailey
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Service Learning ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Community Partnerships ◽  
Market Forces ◽  
Community Based ◽  
University Partnerships ◽  
Economic Changes ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Relationship

<?page nr="1"?>Abstract This article investigates the ways in which service-learning manifests within our neoliberal clime, suggesting that service-learning amounts to a foil for neoliberalism, allowing neoliberal political and economic changes while masking their damaging effects. Neoliberalism shifts the relationship between the public and the private, structures higher education, and promotes a façade of community-based university partnerships while facilitating a pervasive regime of control. This article demonstrates that service-learning amounts to an enigma of neoliberalism, making possible the privatization of the public and the individualizing of social problems while masking evidence of market-based societal control. Neoliberal service-learning distances service from teaching and learning, allows market forces to shape university-community partnerships, and privatizes the public through dispossession by accumulation.

scholarly journals Association of Affect and Gait Performance in Dual-Task Walking in Non-Demented Older Adults

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 287-287
Author(s):  
Deepan Guharajan ◽  
Roee Holtzer
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Negative Affect ◽  
Positive Affect ◽  
Dual Task ◽  
Task Demands ◽  
Gait Velocity ◽  
Positive And Negative Affect ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Aging Populations ◽  
Task Conditions

Abstract Aging populations are at increased risk to experience mobility disability, which is associated with falls, frailty, and mortality. Previous studies have not examined the concurrent associations of both positive and negative affect with gait velocity. We examined whether individual differences in positive and negative affect predicted dual-task performance decrements in velocity in a dual-task (DT) paradigm in non-demented older adults. We hypothesize that positive affect would be associated with lower DT costs, and negative affect would be associated with higher DT costs. Participants (N = 403; mean age, = 76.22 (6.55); females = 56%) completed the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) and a DT paradigm that involved three task conditions: Single-Task-Walk (STW), Alpha (cognitive interference requiring participants to recite alternate letters of the alphabet), and Dual-Task-Walk (DTW) requiring participant to perform the two single tasks concurrently. Gait velocity was assessed via an instrumented walkway. As expected, results of a linear mixed effects model (LME) showed a significant decline in gait velocity (cm/s) from STW to DTW (estimate = -11.79; 95%CI = -12.82 to -10.77). LME results further revealed that negative affect was associated with greater decline in gait velocity from STW to DTW (ie., worse DT cost) (estimate = -0.38; 95%CI = -0.73 to -0.03). Positive affect did not, however, predict DT costs in gait velocity (estimate = -0.09; 95%CI = -0.23 to 0.05). These findings suggest that increased negative affect interferes with the allocation of attentional resources to competing task demands inherent in the DT paradigm.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document