Search results

The purpose of this viewpoint article is to share the reflections of school and university leaders on the success of their emerging school–university partnership for the preparation of middle school teachers.

The article is a reflective paper in which the leaders of the school–university partnership discuss the benefits of establishing the initial school–university partnership and reflect on what has helped the partnership experience success in the partnership's first five years of existence.

While the authors describe their school-university partnership as emerging, both the school and the university have experienced successes. Upon reflection, the authors discuss four specific essential elements to their initial partnership success. Communication and collaboration among all stakeholders ensure all voices are heard and valued. Allowing the university to have a physical presence in the middle school encourages the building of trusting relationships. For partnerships to succeed, partners must allow time for the partnership to mature and grow. Finally, when the middle school hires graduates from the partnering university, this benefits both the school and university partners.

As teacher preparation moves further away from the university campus to engage more closely with schools, there are lessons to be learned. Reflection is an essential component of growth. The partners in this school–university partnership believe sharing the partners' experiences will enhance the effectiveness of the partners' own partnership and encourage others that choose to begin this journey.

Collaborations between universities and industry to develop and deliver customised corporate education programs are increasing. The purpose of this paper is to assist managers to make an informed decision on the structure and approach to their corporate education programs by exploring a range of qualitative factors in university‐corporate education partnerships.

This paper presents the findings of a series of qualitative interviews with six senior corporate managers from diverse industries and three university managers on the factors they regard as important in university‐corporate education partnerships.

The research highlights the needs for both universities and corporations to take the time to learn and understand the requirements and expectations of each other and, as in any good relationship, provide flexibility to accommodate these requirements and expectations. The research findings are intended to provide a starting‐point for understanding the nature of the working relationship between universities and corporations in order to successfully develop and deliver corporate education programs in industry.

Most papers on university‐corporate education partnerships are based on opinion or case studies. The originality of this research provides an objective insight into factors that influence the success of university‐corporate education partnerships.

School–university partnerships are important in teacher education to ensure PK-12 preservice teachers gain teaching experience prior to becoming teachers of record. Drawing on Ball and Cohen’s (1999) concept of “practice-based teacher education,” this three-year qualitative study examines the results of an intentionally reciprocal school–university partnership centered on a practice-based learning, field-based course. The following question guided this research: Having designed and facilitated a school–university partnership centered on reciprocity, what factors contributed to and/or took away from this commitment?

The current study examined three data sources, namely: (1) seven semi-structured focus group interviews with a teacher educator, sixth-grade teachers (n = 4) and a principal; (2) eight question/answer sessions between preservice teachers and partnering secondary teachers and (3)one focus group between the two authors. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.

This study’s findings highlight the reciprocal nature of the school–university partnership, showcasing the positive outcomes and challenges faced by stakeholders. Clear communication and ongoing dialogue were identified as key elements to establishing and maintaining a reciprocal relationship. Additionally, emphasis on shared learning experiences between partners were found valuable and important to maintaining benefit to all partners. Relationship development also remained an important and positive outcome of this partnership. Additionally, there were challenges related to time, and schedule constraints were evident in the partnership. Moreover, ongoing reflection and a willingness to adjust and change based on experiences and lessons learned ensured participants recognized the importance of ongoing iteration and calibration to address challenges and enhance the partnership.

Because of the chosen research approach, the research results may lack generalizability.

The paper includes implications for the development of other school–university partnerships that prioritize reciprocity, highlighting an often assumed, but not always examined, component necessary to the success of school–university partnerships.

The purpose of this action research study was to design, implement and evaluate interventions that enhanced the induction program for new teachers in a P-12 school district. At the outset, we hoped the study would provide new teacher support resulting in improved teaching practices, increased job satisfaction and/or increased teacher retention among the target population. With this in mind, our research question was: What structures and supports from a school-university partnership facilitate capacity-building among university teacher education faculty, school and district leaders, mentor teachers, and new teachers in the context of an induction program?

This study used an intervention-centered mode of action research methodology that aims to make systems-level change. This type of action research intends to solve real organizational problems with a focus on conducting “research in action” rather than “research about action” (Coghlan and Brannick, 2014, pp. 5–6). This approach necessitates that data collection and analysis are iterative processes, occurring throughout the research process, instead of solely at the end stages of the research process. Our action research process used Coghlan and Brannick’s (2014) action research cycle model. The cyclical four-step process includes constructing (verifying the problem in the local context), planning action, taking action and evaluating action. Facilitated by the interim director of a Professional development schools (PDS) partnership in the Southeastern United States, a team of co-researchers which included three university teacher education faculty and four school district administrators used action research methodology to create systemic change that enhanced the district’s induction program. We collected data through multiple qualitative methods, including surveys, focus groups, observations and interviews during the course of three action research cycles. These data and our theoretical framework (complex adaptive systems theory and social network theory) informed two major interventions that supported new teachers during the challenging first year of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.

The interventions and the research process were mutually beneficial for both institutions and contributed to professional learning and growth at the individual, group and system levels. The three major findings described include: (1) engaging in collaborative action research is mutually beneficial for both schools and universities; (2) induction programs benefit from university resources; (3) learning communities build all educators’ professional capacity.

Our research recommendations are: (1) more research is needed on the benefits of school-university partnerships to induction programs; (2) school-university partnerships should leverage action research to improve systems; (3) within school-university partnerships, the connection between collaborative leadership and sustainability requires further research. One limitation was that this study was conducted in a single school-university partnership context involving a large public university and a mid-sized public school district that had a well-established partnership. More induction-centered research is needed in different types of school-university partnership contexts that have varying levels of longevity and partnership structures.

Our recommendations for practice include (1) school-university partnerships should leverage collaborative learning communities to catalyze individual, group and systems-level learning and change, and (2) school-university partnerships must prioritize induction support to strengthen the teaching profession.

Since Hunt’s (2014) literature review on induction support in PDS partnerships, very few empirical studies have been conducted in this research area. This study, which examined induction support in a PDS partnership over a two-year period, makes a significant contribution to the scholarly literature on induction teacher support in school-university partnership contexts. Facilitated by the interim director of a PDS partnership, a team of co-researchers, which included three university teacher education faculty and four school district administrators, used action research methodology to create systems-level supports that enhanced the district’s induction program.

The chapters in this book focus on how university-school partnerships can be used to foster academic and program development. The introductory chapter is oriented around three key questions: How do we define innovative international university partnerships? Do these innovative international university partnerships really work? What factors contribute to the success of these collaborations? In addressing these questions, this chapter presents a framework that addresses a taxonomy for innovative programs, elements to develop partnerships, ideas for sustaining collaboration, and challenges that might surface during implementation. In this volume a range of perspectives is presented using case studies and empirical research on how university partnerships are being implemented internationally. These findings suggest that university partnerships have great potential to enhance and even transform colleges and universities.

An ever-increasing emphasis is being placed on the concept of cross-institutional educational initiatives. Among these are university–school partnerships, seen as possessing immense multidimensional potential. The model of university–school partnership espouses distinctive advantages: it promotes close collaboration on an array of pedagogical elements, a manifold of opportunities for inter-professional learning, a unique course delivery, and the development of innovative curriculum materials. There is a consensus that effective teaching calls for more than possession of craft skills and knowledge, but should go beyond traditional pedagogical bounds, in which the innovation in new educational models is embedded in a nexus of relationships involving close multi-faceted, cross-institutional collaborations, incorporating elements of informal education. The proposed chapter aims to address the theoretical discourse and practical application of such partnerships, guided by the conviction that an effective partnership constructs new enabling structures that span the boundaries of school/university, placing an increased focus on learning for all stakeholders. It aims to supplement the existing theoretical discourse by presenting an implemented cross-institutional partnership as a case-study – a university class of intercultural competence – undertaken in cooperation among the Institute of European Studies, Jagiellonian University, and High School No. 8 in Kraków. The case study aims to illustrate how a cross-institutional partnership contributed to the development and implementation of innovative and active teaching methods, placing a particular emphasis on elements of informal education. Through a variety of methods, such as outgoing seminars, peer-mediation, and city games, the outlined partnership model serves as an effective example of innovative practices in higher education.

University partnerships have been promoted and implemented a good deal in Europe since the approval of the Bologna Declaration of June 19, 1999 (Bologna Declaration, 1999). Over the past two decades, the University of Prishtina has developed many bilateral and multilateral initiatives to strengthen cooperation and partnership among universities from different countries and regions (University of Prishtina, 2004, p. 2). The University of Prishtina embraced the Bologna Declaration in 2001, and since then has established several partnerships aimed at strengthening its capacities and improving the quality assurance of its higher education (Brunnhofer, 2010, p. 107). In the recent years, the University of Prishtina has given priority to the area of research, aiming to increase the quality and quantity of research conducted by its faculty. The quality and relevance of the international partnerships of the University of Prishtina is the main focus of this paper, including the current state of research among the faculty. The researcher used a qualitative method for conducting this research. It shows the institutional and individual benefits of those partnerships. Finally, it presents the impact of cooperation on developing research and improving the quality of education in Kosovo.

Partnerships between universities and secondary schools are highly valued for a range of pedagogical, transition and outreach benefits to students, teachers and more broadly, society. Teachers in schools provide a rich insight into how university teaching staff can better engage students and provide them with deeper learning experiences. Universities can provide on-campus student incursions for learning activities, work experience opportunities, research projects with academics and lectures by specialist researchers. This chapter describes the range of benefits arising from a partnership, established in 2009, between the John Monash Science School (JMSS) and Monash University, co-located in outer suburban of Melbourne, Australia. The JMSS–Monash partnership has generated a number of innovative and dynamic educational programmes, which have positively impacted the learning and engagement of students across geographic divides. The partnership is rich, and has broadened and deepened as the partners have learned more about each other’s capacities, and envisioned what is possible in an educational landscape bereft of innovation and challenge to existing norms. By thinking creatively and acting bravely, the partners have shone a light on a brighter future in science for Australian students.

Post-COVID-19, public K–12 schools are still facing the consequences of the years of interrupted learning. Schools serving minoritized students are particularly at risk for facing challenges with academics, behavior and student social emotional health. The university counseling programs are in positions to build capacity in urban schools while also supporting counselors-in-training through service-learning opportunities.

The following conceptual manuscript demonstrates how counselor education counseling programs and public schools can harness the capacity-building benefits of university–school partnerships. While prevalent in fields like special education, counselor educators have yet to heed the hall to participate in mutually beneficial partnership programs.

Using the multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) and the components of the university–school partnerships, counselor educators and school stakeholders can work together to support student mental health, school staff well-being and counselor-in-training competence.

The benefits and opportunities within the university–school partnerships are well documented. However, few researchers have described a model to support partnerships between the university counseling programs and urban elementary schools. We provide a best practice model using the principles of university–school partnerships and a school’s existing MTSS framework.

Educational partnerships between universities and public schools have existed for over 100 years. During this time, especially the last decade, many educational partnerships were formed, only to fizzle shortly thereafter. When educational partnerships have been formed to provide only temporary band‐aid solutions to very complex and multifaceted problems, they, like other trends, have faded away. Yet, some educational partnerships have continued to shine and to become viable coalitions. Successful partnerships focused on complex issues related to staff development, teacher training and school leadership require extensive collaboration, reflection, and continued revision. The purpose of this article is to explore some of the tenets that lead to the success and demise of school/university partnerships. In addition, this article describes a collaborative process employed by a university department of educational leadership, a regional consortium, and three school systems to design and offer a principal preparation program, delivered entirely in the field.