Page 176 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 176 of 231 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
167
Consistencies and Inconsistencies with Theoretical Framework
The realm of parental engagement during Year Two of the partnership is not
consistent with the theoretical framework constructed by the literature because
parent invitations for participation were limited to workshops and meetings. The
data demonstrated no evidence of concrete roles for parents within the school.
Furthermore, they were not offered an opportunity to work with the school in an
effort for transformation until the end of Year Two, in which three were given seats
on the UEAT Board. However, the relationship between parents and the partnership
had been damaged due to the amount of time it took for them to gain representation
on the Board.
Parent Engagement During Year Three
Although there was a regression in the level of parent engagement during
Year Two, there is evidence of parental engagement moving towards a new cultural
model during the partnership’s third year. Three parents have been elected to the
UEAT Board, and they have had some involvement in the early conceptualization of
the Ford Foundation grant. However, it is noteworthy that the spectrum of parental
engagement is still limited. At the end of Year Two, parents were elected to the
UEAT Board. As previously mentioned, this had been a two-year contention
between parents and Board representatives. Ms. Cosby noted that parents felt that
their voices would be better heard once they had representation on the UEAT Board.
However, when the Year Two research team observed a UEAT meeting, the parent
Board members spoke for no more than five minutes of a meeting that was over a 60
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 176 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 167 Consistencies and Inconsistencies with Theoretical Framework The realm of parental engagement during Year Two of the partnership is not consistent with the theoretical framework constructed by the literature because parent invitations for participation were limited to workshops and meetings. The data demonstrated no evidence of concrete roles for parents within the school. Furthermore, they were not offered an opportunity to work with the school in an effort for transformation until the end of Year Two, in which three were given seats on the UEAT Board. However, the relationship between parents and the partnership had been damaged due to the amount of time it took for them to gain representation on the Board. Parent Engagement During Year Three Although there was a regression in the level of parent engagement during Year Two, there is evidence of parental engagement moving towards a new cultural model during the partnership’s third year. Three parents have been elected to the UEAT Board, and they have had some involvement in the early conceptualization of the Ford Foundation grant. However, it is noteworthy that the spectrum of parental engagement is still limited. At the end of Year Two, parents were elected to the UEAT Board. As previously mentioned, this had been a two-year contention between parents and Board representatives. Ms. Cosby noted that parents felt that their voices would be better heard once they had representation on the UEAT Board. However, when the Year Two research team observed a UEAT meeting, the parent Board members spoke for no more than five minutes of a meeting that was over a 60 |
