Page 49 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 49 of 231 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
40
Table 2.1: Synthesis of Specific Concepts Across the Disciplines--Needs for
Organizational Partnerships
Kanter (1994) Kezar (2007) Leiderman et al.
(2002)
Context
Concept
Business/Organizational
Partnerships
Educational
Partnerships (School-
University)
Educational
Partnerships
(Community-
University)
Individual
Excellence
o Both partners are
strong and have
something of value to
contribute to the
relationship
o Partners are assigned to
specific roles
o Developing roles
and
responsibilities
for all members
involved in the
partnership
o Eliminating the
hierarchal
structure
o Variety of roles
and based on
each partner’s
capacities and
resources
o Individual goals
based on specific
roles
o Diverse
representation
Importance o The relationship fits
major strategic
objectives of the
partners
o Long term goals in
which relationship
plays a key role
o Mutually
developed long
term goals
o Commitment to
shared values,
goals and
assumptions
o Shared vision,
resources, goals,
rewards and risks
Interdependence o The partners need each
other to accomplish
goals
o Partners begin to
develop working
relationships in order
to accomplish specific
goals
o Development of
a new culture
o Recognize the
ability to achieve
goals through
coordinated
approach
o Peer
relationships
among faculty
and management
and staff of
partner
organizations
Information o Communication is
reasonably open
o Create frequent
and ongoing
communication
o Both formal and
informal
communication
o Shared decision
making and
resource
allocation
o Consistent
communication
regarding
decisions
Integration o Partners develop
linkages and shared
modes of operation
o Partners become
teachers and learners
o Develop clear
policies and roles
o Key element of
creating a new
culture
o Attention to
building the
capacity of all
partner
organizations
Object Description
| Title | Co-constructing community, school and university partnerships for urban school transformation: Year two |
| Author | Woodyard, Savina M. |
| Author email | SavinaW@aol.com; savinaw@gmail.com |
| Degree | Doctor of Education |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Education (Leadership) |
| School | Rossier School of Education |
| Date defended/completed | 2011-03-22 |
| Date submitted | 2011 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2011-04-19 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Rousseau, Sylvia G. |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Stowe, Kathy Huisong Marsh, David D. |
| Abstract | Community-school-university partnerships represent a new model of urban education reform that incorporates the overlapping spheres of influence in the transformation process. Co-constructed relationships between communities, schools and universities have the potential reshape organizational hierarchy and enable all partners to develop a new cultural model capable of transforming K-12 urban schools. This study the second and third year of one co-constructed community-school-university partnership that attempted to transform the cultural model of one urban high school.; The aim of this study is to identify and analyze the extent to which a community-school-university partnership is able to sustain elements of co-construction and other ongoing processes that are beneficial to the partnership. Also, the study will identify the persistent barriers to co-constructions and effective strategies to overcome those barriers within a community-school-university partnership. This study expands on the research conducted during the first year of the partnership’s operation and will offer insight as to the sustainability of the co-constructed processes between the community-school-university partnership. This study will also identify the methods in which the community-school-university partnership can develop a new cultural model for parental engagement in the interest of school transformation. |
| Keyword | partnership; co-construction; urban school; transformation; parental engagement |
| Geographic subject (state) | California |
| Geographic subject (country) | USA |
| Coverage date | 2000/2010 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m3759 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Woodyard, Savina M. |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Woodyard-4509 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume62/etd-Woodyard-4509.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 49 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 40 Table 2.1: Synthesis of Specific Concepts Across the Disciplines--Needs for Organizational Partnerships Kanter (1994) Kezar (2007) Leiderman et al. (2002) Context Concept Business/Organizational Partnerships Educational Partnerships (School- University) Educational Partnerships (Community- University) Individual Excellence o Both partners are strong and have something of value to contribute to the relationship o Partners are assigned to specific roles o Developing roles and responsibilities for all members involved in the partnership o Eliminating the hierarchal structure o Variety of roles and based on each partner’s capacities and resources o Individual goals based on specific roles o Diverse representation Importance o The relationship fits major strategic objectives of the partners o Long term goals in which relationship plays a key role o Mutually developed long term goals o Commitment to shared values, goals and assumptions o Shared vision, resources, goals, rewards and risks Interdependence o The partners need each other to accomplish goals o Partners begin to develop working relationships in order to accomplish specific goals o Development of a new culture o Recognize the ability to achieve goals through coordinated approach o Peer relationships among faculty and management and staff of partner organizations Information o Communication is reasonably open o Create frequent and ongoing communication o Both formal and informal communication o Shared decision making and resource allocation o Consistent communication regarding decisions Integration o Partners develop linkages and shared modes of operation o Partners become teachers and learners o Develop clear policies and roles o Key element of creating a new culture o Attention to building the capacity of all partner organizations |
