Page 209 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 209 of 231 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
200
8. To what degree do you feel the school is an equal partner in the United
Education Action Team?
9. I’m going to read to you the definition of co-construction. A process in
which two or more parties engage in an interactive and equitable
relationship to create shared understanding and agreed upon outcomes.
After hearing it, please explain to what extent you believe the partnership has
followed a process of co-construction.
10. Provide some examples that there is or is not trust amongst the stakeholders
in the partnership.
11. In what ways has the partnership influenced the culture of the school?
12. Please describe how the school has changed, under the influence of the
partnership, in the way it operates and in the kinds of relationships that have
been developed between students and adults in the school? Have they been
positive, negative or mixed? What are the potential benefits of those changes
(to the school)?
13. To what degree do you feel the school is an equal partner in the United
Education Action Team? Does the partnership treat the school as a co-constructor
or equal decision maker in its attempt to transform the school?
14. To what degree do you think the network partnership can play a role in
providing a greater support to the quality of teaching and learning at Prep?
Do you have recommendations?
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 209 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 200 8. To what degree do you feel the school is an equal partner in the United Education Action Team? 9. I’m going to read to you the definition of co-construction. A process in which two or more parties engage in an interactive and equitable relationship to create shared understanding and agreed upon outcomes. After hearing it, please explain to what extent you believe the partnership has followed a process of co-construction. 10. Provide some examples that there is or is not trust amongst the stakeholders in the partnership. 11. In what ways has the partnership influenced the culture of the school? 12. Please describe how the school has changed, under the influence of the partnership, in the way it operates and in the kinds of relationships that have been developed between students and adults in the school? Have they been positive, negative or mixed? What are the potential benefits of those changes (to the school)? 13. To what degree do you feel the school is an equal partner in the United Education Action Team? Does the partnership treat the school as a co-constructor or equal decision maker in its attempt to transform the school? 14. To what degree do you think the network partnership can play a role in providing a greater support to the quality of teaching and learning at Prep? Do you have recommendations? |
