The Learning Coalition: Professional Development Schools in Partnership

Purpose The purpose of this action research study was to design, implement and evaluate interventions that enhanced the induction program for new teachers in a P-12 school district. At the outset, we hoped the study would provide new teacher support resulting in improved teaching practices, increased job satisfaction and/or increased teacher retention among the target population. With this in mind, our research question was: What structures and supports from a school-university partnership facilitate capacity-building among university teacher education faculty, school and district leaders, mentor teachers, and new teachers in the context of an induction program?Design/methodology/approach This study used an intervention-centered mode of action research methodology that aims to make systems-level change. This type of action research intends to solve real organizational problems with a focus on conducting “research in action” rather than “research about action” (Coghlan and Brannick, 2014, pp. 5–6). This approach necessitates that data collection and analysis are iterative processes, occurring throughout the research process, instead of solely at the end stages of the research process. Our action research process used Coghlan and Brannick’s (2014) action research cycle model. The cyclical four-step process includes constructing (verifying the problem in the local context), planning action, taking action and evaluating action. Facilitated by the interim director of a Professional development schools (PDS) partnership in the Southeastern United States, a team of co-researchers which included three university teacher education faculty and four school district administrators used action research methodology to create systemic change that enhanced the district’s induction program. We collected data through multiple qualitative methods, including surveys, focus groups, observations and interviews during the course of three action research cycles. These data and our theoretical framework (complex adaptive systems theory and social network theory) informed two major interventions that supported new teachers during the challenging first year of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.Findings The interventions and the research process were mutually beneficial for both institutions and contributed to professional learning and growth at the individual, group and system levels. The three major findings described include: (1) engaging in collaborative action research is mutually beneficial for both schools and universities; (2) induction programs benefit from university resources; (3) learning communities build all educators’ professional capacity.Research limitations/implications Our research recommendations are: (1) more research is needed on the benefits of school-university partnerships to induction programs; (2) school-university partnerships should leverage action research to improve systems; (3) within school-university partnerships, the connection between collaborative leadership and sustainability requires further research. One limitation was that this study was conducted in a single school-university partnership context involving a large public university and a mid-sized public school district that had a well-established partnership. More induction-centered research is needed in different types of school-university partnership contexts that have varying levels of longevity and partnership structures.Practical implications Our recommendations for practice include (1) school-university partnerships should leverage collaborative learning communities to catalyze individual, group and systems-level learning and change, and (2) school-university partnerships must prioritize induction support to strengthen the teaching profession.Originality/value Since Hunt’s (2014) literature review on induction support in PDS partnerships, very few empirical studies have been conducted in this research area. This study, which examined induction support in a PDS partnership over a two-year period, makes a significant contribution to the scholarly literature on induction teacher support in school-university partnership contexts. Facilitated by the interim director of a PDS partnership, a team of co-researchers, which included three university teacher education faculty and four school district administrators, used action research methodology to create systems-level supports that enhanced the district’s induction program.

The professional development schools (PDS) model has evolved in its 30-year history. Originating from the Holmes Group (1986), the PDS framework was designed to be “a new institution”—one that broke down the divide between PK–12 schools that educate youth and schools of education that educate future teachers—through the development and implementation of genuine and mutually beneficial partnerships. Three decades later, the PDS model is increasingly relevant to its various school and university constituents. Hundreds of school-university partnerships across the United States follow the model, and PDS has been highlighted as an exemplary approach to teacher education. In this chapter, we make the case for PDS as an exemplary format to consider in “rethinking school-university partnerships.” To make this case, partnerships based at four universities that follow the PDS model are featured in vignettes, presenting PDSs-in-action: George Mason University, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, University of South Florida, and SUNY Buffalo State. Each represents a different region of the United States and different levels of development toward the PDS model. The vignettes highlight the unique strengths and mutually beneficial elements of each PDS partnership by focusing on one NAPDS nine essentials (Brindley et al., 2008).

The article presents in its first part the partnership model – PDS (Professional Development School) for teacher education that developed in the 1970s in the United States following criticism and re- search findings that indicated lack of satisfaction with the traditional teacher education programs. In its second part the article presents findings and discussion of a multi-year study conducted over seven years, from 2010 to 2016, in the first and up till now the only PDS partnership incorporated into teacher training program in research university in Israel. The multi-year study focused on stu- dent teachers’ evaluation of the contribution of the teacher training components of the university- school partnership model (PDS) to their learning of teaching: the practice teaching in the school and the school mentors; the groups of student colleagues as learning communities and their weekly meetings and the university coordinators. From the perception of the PDS partnership as a dynamic and developing process and from the approach of evidence-based practice, the importance of this multi year study lies in the identification of the essential strengths in the process of the practical experience expressed in the partnerships for their empowerment. In addition the importance of this research is in the identification of the essential weaknesses and challenges, for the purpose of en- quiry and learning in the learning communities who take part in the PDS partnerships, and the rais- ing of the necessary courses of action and changes. The importance of the research study in the in-ternational aspect lies in the presentation of an additional profile of partnership for the extension of the shared discussion about dilemmas and challenges that arise from the implementation of different partnerships in the training of teachers.

The Professional Development School (PDS) partnership creates a unique environment in which the elementary education experiences for pre-service teachers (PSTs) can be enhanced through specialized approaches to traditional practicum courses taken during an education licensure program. However, over time, as both parties settle into their predetermined roles, these experiences may become stagnant and less impactful as school needs change, but the courses do not. The PDS partnership between a Midwest university and local school district provides the opportunity for distinctive platforms through innovative teaching approaches for both university and elementary faculty, as well as, for elementary education PSTs. Working specifically with a local elementary school, the authors collaboratively sought to develop a mutually beneficial approach that would purposefully place PSTs within the school while increasing consistency in the placement. The intent was to allow classroom teachers to better utilize the PSTs during their field experience hours, in addition to providing PSTs with more hands-on, minds-on learning opportunities. The decision to turn the courses into an extended learning immersive experience was determined early on in the planning process, along with the associated courses. This partnership began in Fall 2019 as a nine-hour block that included courses in instructional and behavioral engagement, literacy practices, and elementary science methods. Throughout the semester, feedback was periodically collected from participating faculty and PSTs in an effort to keep the immersive courses meeting the needs of the PSTs. Additional information was collected from diverse elementary student data within the PDS and from the principal.

PurposeThe following narratives describe how successful relationships between mentors and pre-service and inservice teachers go beyond observations and feedback. The purpose is to share the multifaceted approach mentors take to support teacher candidates in generative ways so they can develop their potential as practitioners and how they nurture a culture of professional respect and understanding about how the school–university partnership supports teachers and students across the school and beyond the individual placement classrooms.Design/methodology/approachThe article contains first-person experiences of the recent National Association for School–University Partnerships (NASUP) Exemplary Mentor Award Winners for 2023 and 2024.FindingsThe work of mentors facilitates the growth of pre-service and inservice teachers, empowering them to innovate and enjoy a sense of autonomy within their placement site and supports the growth of the university program, making the partnership more responsive to the needs of the pre-service and inservice teachers. These narratives are evidence of the power of the school–university partnership in growing teachers who exemplify the profession.Originality/valueA successful Professional Development Schools (PDS) partnership includes exemplary mentors who support pre-service teachers, in-service teachers and teacher candidates as they prepare for the profession.

The views of university faculty and public school personnel toward collaborative research in the second year of a professional development schools (PDS) partnership were compared by means of a survey and a structured interview. Although participants were involved in a collaborative partnership, they subscribed to a traditional, rather than a collaborative, conception of educational research. Whether a collaborative model of research can flourish in a PDS depends on participants’ ability (a) to develop a common mindset about what collaborative research is and how it relates to practice and (b) to achieve a positive balance of its costs and benefits. It is important in the early stages of a PDS to identify whether school and university faculty have different views about research so they can develop a common research perspective that will enable collaboration to flourish over the long term.

Race continues to be a critical, complex, and pervasive issue in America. Teacher education is not immune to its influence. Schools, colleges, and departments of education (SCDEs) are under increasing attack for failure to address issues of racial diversity (Parker & Hood, 1995). Criticisms have ranged from failure of programs to recruit and retain graduate students of color to courses in the teacher preparation curriculum largely devoid of content and knowledge about various racial groups in the United States (Holmes Group Forum, 1990). The Holmes Partnership and other reform initiatives (e.g., Project 30) have recognized the need to recruit university faculty and students of color as essential to achieving cultural diversity and developing more viable programs. Although Holmes acknowledges that several schools and universities have recruited and retained minorities, one Holmes position paper states these [steps] may not be sufficient as the current situation calls for radical action by universities, colleges of education, school systems, and Professional Development Schools (Holmes Group, 1990, p. 40). The presence and contributions of minorities in higher education have foci of interest for many researchers (Darling-Hammond, 1996; Fuller, 1992; Gollnick, 1992; Renner, 1998). Research findings reveal a problem of critical magnitude. The National Center for Education Statistics (1995) estimates that about 13% of full-time college and university faculty were minorities in 1992-1993; the majority were White males. The American Association for Employment in Education's (1998) Teacher Supply and Demand in the United States: 1997 Report reported that the opportunities for people of color in education are inviting. Almost all educators, employers, and policymakers recognize the disparity between the number of teachers of color and the number of minority students in schools. Major efforts are under way to attract minorities to teaching. This apparent disparity between the cultural representativeness of educators and students is at the heart of the supply-and-demand issue. Researchers predict that by 2000, the teaching workforce will be overwhelmingly composed of educators who are White and female (Hawkins, 1994). Smith and Tyler (1994), in a survey of members of the Higher Education Consortium in Special Education (HECSE), found that 268 (20%) of 1,341 students currently enrolled in doctoral programs were minorities. Among the minority students, 45% (120/268) reported that they might seek jobs in higher education, an average of only 24 per year for the next 5 years. Educators in all segments of the profession are generally focusing attention on the changing profile of the U.S. national population and specifically on the changing profile of students in preschool through secondary settings. By 2000, demographers estimate that a minimum of one third of the school population will be minority, special needs, and economically disadvantaged students (Hodgkinson, 1986). In contrast, the population of preservice and inservice P-12 educators remains primarily European American female. Additionally, the professoriate is overwhelmingly dominated by European American males, with varying but relatively small percentages of females and minority faculty represented (Fuller, 1992). There are, of course, exceptions. But the rule is one of underrepresentation of America's diverse groups (Fuller, 1992). As Ducharme and Kluender (1990) observe, the overwhelming `maleness' of the faculty is likely to decrease, but the `whiteness' factor will continue to grow (p. 46). According to the Hudson Institute, approximately 80% of the new entrants into the labor force over the next decade will be women and minorities. This has particular relevance for higher education, where the pool of minority faculty applicants is shrinking while the demand for new minority faculty grows. Demographic data indicate that the majority of women and minority faculty are concentrated at less prestigious 2- and 4-year colleges; even in those institutions, they are at the lower end of the faculty ranks or in non-tenure-track positions (Olsen, Maple, & Stage, 1995). …

Professional development schools: Prospects for institutionalization

PurposeIn 2022, the Baltimore professional development school (PDS) partner schools, John Ruhruh Elementary/Middle School (JREMS) and Notre Dame of Maryland University (NDMU) received funds through a Maryland Educational Emergency Revitalization (MEER) grant to determine (a) to what extent additional resources and professional development would increase JREMS teachers’ efficacy in technology integration and (b) to what extent NDMU professional development in the form of workshops and self-paced computer science modules would result in greater use of technology in the JREMS K-8 classrooms. Results indicated a statistically significant improvement in both teacher comfort with technology and integrated use of technology in instruction.Design/methodology/approachSurvey data were collected on teacher-stated comfort with technology before and after grant implementation. Teachers’ use of technology was also measured by unannounced classroom visits by administration before and after the grant implementation and through artifacts teachers submitted during NDMU professional development modules.FindingsResults showing significant increases in self-efficacy with technology along with teacher integration of technology exemplify the benefits of a PDS partnership.Originality/valueThis initiative was original in its approach to teacher development by replacing required teacher professional development with an invitation to participate and an incentive for participation (a personal MacBook) that met the stated needs of teachers. Teacher motivation was strong because teammates in a strong PDS partnership provided the necessary supports to induce changes in teacher self-efficacy.

The reemergence of the professional development school movement in North America may mark the beginning of a paradigm shift in clinical teacher education. Conceptual and structural obstacles to student teacher learning in practicums that must be addressed if the professional development school is to achieve its goals are discussed. The conceptual barriers result from inadequate conceptions of reflection that neglect teachers' practical theories, values, the social conditions of schooling, and the social aspects of reflection. The structural barriers include the placement of student teachers in single classrooms rather than schools, the selection of placements, supervisory relations, and the lack of multicultural placements. Professional development schools offer an opportunity to overcome these obstacles by altering the power and role relationships in the practicum.

My experiences with school-university partnerships began over 15 years ago, when as a principal and then Director/Superintendent of a University Laboratory School, I found myself living in two worlds--one as a university employee and department chair within the College of Education, and the other as an educational administrator in a K-12 school system. I believe this experience has given me a unique perspective and an ability to understand and operate in both cultures with ease. I see the strengths and weaknesses of them both, and I often find myself exhilarated by the possibilities I see for establishing Professional Development School (PDS) relationships between them. Yet I also frequently feel frustrated by the seemingly overwhelming barriers that keep us from achieving the kind of interdependence that would renew and enhance our individual capacity to educate and the joint capacity of our profession to succeed in its multiple roles and tasks. I am presently an Associate Professor in Educational Leadership and Director of the Truman Pierce Institute at Auburn University. My role as director of the Institute involves facilitating the creation of PDS relation-

True education occurs when teachers become learners and learners become teachers (Freire, 2000). This epistemological ideal was achieved through reciprocal learning experiences of a successful Professional Development School (PDS) partnership between one high school and a local university. This chapter presents a model for a PDS relationship that: a) promotes a professional community of learners, b) engenders reciprocal teaching and learning, c) encourages mentoring at multiple levels, and d) positively impacts student and candidate learning. Data analyses indicate significant benefits to all participants due to the unique opportunities created by the partnerships in learning embedded within a PDS setting.

This chapter investigates the principles and practices which have guided the highly regarded Professional Development School (PDS) partnerships at Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas, USA, and analyzes them in relation to the STEPS Interpretive Framework. The analysis is undertaken as a dialogue between an insider from Trinity University seeking to articulate the significant features of their partnerships and an outsider teacher educator making connections to the STEPS Interpretive Framework. Trinity partnerships have emphasized principles, including education as “transformation,” the centrality of “relationships,” and strong university leadership. Analysis of Trinity approaches in terms of the STEPS Framework suggests that faithfulness to overriding partnership principles has promoted strength and resilience in its partnerships with schools, indicating that the framework is justified in proposing principles and practices which can guide successful partnership development no matter where it takes place.

PurposeThe overarching purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of “boundary-spanning” roles, terms and structures in order to move closer to a foundational definition of boundary-spanning in school–university partnerships (SUPs) and Professional Development Schools (PDSs).Design/methodology/approachThis conceptual context study analyzed 27 chapters from an edited book on boundary-spanning in SUPs and PDSs in an attempt to synthesize the roles, terms, structures and benefits of boundary-spanning in practice.FindingsOur study offered an emerging definition of the “boundary-spanner,” an analysis of seven terms common to boundary-spanning and an exploration of three necessary boundary-spanning structures. Finally, we identified common challenges and benefits to boundary-spanning within SUPs and PDSs.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough the data for this analysis were drawn only from one manuscript, the chapters represent a comprehensive collection of cases of boundary-spanning in practice, and the analysis of these chapters revealed persistent variance in definitions and conceptualizations indicating that even within one collection, the practice remains ill-defined.Practical implicationsWhile attempting to formally delineate the difference between “common” partnerships and “true” boundary-spanning could become an act of pedantry, we believe our analysis of these 27 cases might move the field of teacher education toward a more common understanding of the concept and its related practice. And the result might be that we all become better boundary-spanners within our own contexts and communities.Originality/valueDecades of theoretical frameworks and foundational literature have laid the groundwork for boundary-spanning in theory, but the majority of the chapters collected in the volume that served as our data set were empirical. By analyzing these chapters as examples of boundary-spanning in practice, we began to identify themes of boundary-spanning in practice – beyond theory – across multiple educational contexts even outside of traditional PDSs and SUPs.

Professional Development School (PDS) partnerships offer a powerful leverage point for the improvement of student learning in the K-12 sector and a unique opportunity to experiment with new forms of online learning for the adults who work in and with schools. In this paper we present lessons learned in the design and delivery of online courses to teacher educators, classroom teachers, support personnel, and student teachers associated with the Virtual Professional Development School Consortium (VPDSC). This paper describes the NetSeminar model that is evolving through this work and considers implications for further development.