Page 152 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 152 of 231 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
143
about upcoming events; yet, the effort is still limited because there was only one
newsletter produced. However, it has been noted that the partnership needs to
develop innovative methods for advertising and communication. Dr. Grupe noted an
absence of innovation during the second year, and Mr. Ali commented that the
partnership needed to treat itself as a brand and rely on new methods other than
newsletters and word of mouth. In an interview conducted by the Year Two research
team with Mr. Gutter, a community member, he made reference to the absence of
outreach programs between the partnership and the Prep community. Also, in an
interview conducted by the Year Two research team with Gonzalez, a parent on the
UEAT board, he also mentioned the need for public meetings, separate from UEAT
meetings, to increase communication between the partnership and the school
stakeholders. He also recommended using flyers in teachers’ mailboxes as a method
for communicating with instructional personnel. Ultimately, the partnership, during
its second year of operation, struggled to establish concrete communication
structures. Thus, the limited communication regarding meetings, activities and
events remained the same as the previous year.
Lack of Trust
The data reveal another commonly coded barrier was a lack of trust. The
Year One Study did not code their “lack of trust” data as a separate code but instead
included it within their other codes. The Year Two research team felt that the topic
was identified so frequently that it merited its own code. Within the interviews,
members from all stakeholder groups repeatedly used words such as mistrust,
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 152 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 143 about upcoming events; yet, the effort is still limited because there was only one newsletter produced. However, it has been noted that the partnership needs to develop innovative methods for advertising and communication. Dr. Grupe noted an absence of innovation during the second year, and Mr. Ali commented that the partnership needed to treat itself as a brand and rely on new methods other than newsletters and word of mouth. In an interview conducted by the Year Two research team with Mr. Gutter, a community member, he made reference to the absence of outreach programs between the partnership and the Prep community. Also, in an interview conducted by the Year Two research team with Gonzalez, a parent on the UEAT board, he also mentioned the need for public meetings, separate from UEAT meetings, to increase communication between the partnership and the school stakeholders. He also recommended using flyers in teachers’ mailboxes as a method for communicating with instructional personnel. Ultimately, the partnership, during its second year of operation, struggled to establish concrete communication structures. Thus, the limited communication regarding meetings, activities and events remained the same as the previous year. Lack of Trust The data reveal another commonly coded barrier was a lack of trust. The Year One Study did not code their “lack of trust” data as a separate code but instead included it within their other codes. The Year Two research team felt that the topic was identified so frequently that it merited its own code. Within the interviews, members from all stakeholder groups repeatedly used words such as mistrust, |
