Page 96 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 96 of 231 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
87
planned on a master calendar. The research team members responsible for each
observation obtained the meeting agendas and used field notes as a means for
recording observations. These dated accounts contained key information to describe
the event, i.e., attendees, physical setting, activities, and what people said to
demonstrate the “emic perspective” (Fetterman, 1989:30 as cited in Patterson, 2002).
Emic perspective refers to the language and categories used by the people in the
setting being studied, as opposed to the etic approach, which refers to categories
created by researchers based upon their analysis of cultural distinctions (Patton,
2002). The research team was aware of some of the limitations of observations
which include: possibility of the observer affecting the situation being observed;
distortion of data by the selective perception of the researcher; atypical behavior by
participants who know that they are being observed; focus on only external
behaviors; and the limited sample of the activities being observed (Patton, 2002).
Interviews
“The purpose of interviews is to allow [the researchers] to enter into the other
person’s perspective” (Patton, 2002, p. 341). Interviewing is based on the
assumption that the perspective of others is meaningful. The interviews the
researchers conducted enabled them to learn about events, feelings, thoughts, and
intentions that we are not able to observe. The interview questions were designed to
ascertain the interviewee’s attitudes, knowledge of, and experiences with the
partnership. The information contributed a rich body of data about the formation of
the partnership and the resulting attributes within the second and third year of
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 96 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 87 planned on a master calendar. The research team members responsible for each observation obtained the meeting agendas and used field notes as a means for recording observations. These dated accounts contained key information to describe the event, i.e., attendees, physical setting, activities, and what people said to demonstrate the “emic perspective” (Fetterman, 1989:30 as cited in Patterson, 2002). Emic perspective refers to the language and categories used by the people in the setting being studied, as opposed to the etic approach, which refers to categories created by researchers based upon their analysis of cultural distinctions (Patton, 2002). The research team was aware of some of the limitations of observations which include: possibility of the observer affecting the situation being observed; distortion of data by the selective perception of the researcher; atypical behavior by participants who know that they are being observed; focus on only external behaviors; and the limited sample of the activities being observed (Patton, 2002). Interviews “The purpose of interviews is to allow [the researchers] to enter into the other person’s perspective” (Patton, 2002, p. 341). Interviewing is based on the assumption that the perspective of others is meaningful. The interviews the researchers conducted enabled them to learn about events, feelings, thoughts, and intentions that we are not able to observe. The interview questions were designed to ascertain the interviewee’s attitudes, knowledge of, and experiences with the partnership. The information contributed a rich body of data about the formation of the partnership and the resulting attributes within the second and third year of |
