Page 181 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 181 of 231 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
172
stakeholders in the partnership through an in depth look at how parents feel about
their existing roles in the school transformation process.
Research Questions
1) What evidence of ongoing processes, including co-construction, does a
community-school-university partnership demonstrate as it continues to work
toward school improvement beyond its first year of operation?
1a) What are the barriers that persist in co-constructing and sustaining a
community-school-university partnership created to improve an urban
school?
1b) What are effective strategies are in place that demonstrates the ability to
overcome the persistent barriers in community-school-university partnerships
seeking to improve student achievement in an urban school?
2) How can the community-school-university partnership influence the
development of a new cultural model leading to parental engagement in the
interest of school transformation?
Major Findings
Major Findings for Research Question One
The major finding regarding co-construction was that the partnership has
regressed in its co-constructive practices amongst the network partners during the
partnership’s second year. Instead, the network partners, individually, engage in a
process of co-construction with the school, but to a lesser degree than in Year One.
The major finding regarding dialogue is that the network partners had regressed in
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 181 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 172 stakeholders in the partnership through an in depth look at how parents feel about their existing roles in the school transformation process. Research Questions 1) What evidence of ongoing processes, including co-construction, does a community-school-university partnership demonstrate as it continues to work toward school improvement beyond its first year of operation? 1a) What are the barriers that persist in co-constructing and sustaining a community-school-university partnership created to improve an urban school? 1b) What are effective strategies are in place that demonstrates the ability to overcome the persistent barriers in community-school-university partnerships seeking to improve student achievement in an urban school? 2) How can the community-school-university partnership influence the development of a new cultural model leading to parental engagement in the interest of school transformation? Major Findings Major Findings for Research Question One The major finding regarding co-construction was that the partnership has regressed in its co-constructive practices amongst the network partners during the partnership’s second year. Instead, the network partners, individually, engage in a process of co-construction with the school, but to a lesser degree than in Year One. The major finding regarding dialogue is that the network partners had regressed in |
