Page 98 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 98 of 231 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
89
Interviews were conducted with representatives of each stakeholder group
within the partnership. Overall, the research group interviewed a total of twenty-seven
stakeholders. Although this number may seem unwieldy, the advantage of a
thematic dissertation group is that all members shared the responsibility of data
collection. We interviewed three board members from the United Education Action
Team, included the past and current Executive Director as well as current board
members. From Prep High, we interviewed six faculty members, three school
administrators, three counselors, and four parents. Also, within the community at
large, not including the specific organizations within the partnerships, the team
interviewed at least five additional stakeholders, such as community members and
school alumna. In addition, the research team interviewed five Westside University
participants.
Communication and Structure
The research team sought potential interviewees by announcing the purpose
of the study and desire to conduct interviews at specified meetings attended by
potential interviewees, such as Board meetings, faculty meetings, and parent
organization meetings. In order to ensure effective communication, the research
team also inserted flyers in staff members’ mailboxes to inform them of the research
plan and interview schedule. Initial contact with community members was via
telephone or email; their information was shared with the group through snowball
referencing from other interviews. The interviews were conducted in-person and
were digitally recorded with the permission of the interviewees. The researchers also
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 98 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 89 Interviews were conducted with representatives of each stakeholder group within the partnership. Overall, the research group interviewed a total of twenty-seven stakeholders. Although this number may seem unwieldy, the advantage of a thematic dissertation group is that all members shared the responsibility of data collection. We interviewed three board members from the United Education Action Team, included the past and current Executive Director as well as current board members. From Prep High, we interviewed six faculty members, three school administrators, three counselors, and four parents. Also, within the community at large, not including the specific organizations within the partnerships, the team interviewed at least five additional stakeholders, such as community members and school alumna. In addition, the research team interviewed five Westside University participants. Communication and Structure The research team sought potential interviewees by announcing the purpose of the study and desire to conduct interviews at specified meetings attended by potential interviewees, such as Board meetings, faculty meetings, and parent organization meetings. In order to ensure effective communication, the research team also inserted flyers in staff members’ mailboxes to inform them of the research plan and interview schedule. Initial contact with community members was via telephone or email; their information was shared with the group through snowball referencing from other interviews. The interviews were conducted in-person and were digitally recorded with the permission of the interviewees. The researchers also |
