Jillian Lederhouse, Ph. D. and Sally Morrison, ed. d. Wheaton College Essentials for Creating and Maintaining a Flourishing School Partnership Jillian Lederhouse, Ph. D. and Sally Morrison, ed. d. Wheaton College

A Bit of Background Cleveland Elementary Partnership—21 years Chicago Public School, Pre-K-8 88% Low-Income 81% Hispanic, 7% White, 6% Asian, 3.4% Black, 1.4% Am. Indian Spring Trail Partnership—21 years Elgin Public School, K-6 34% Low-Income 49% White, 20% Hispanic, 18% Asian, 5% Black, 6.4% 2+ Races

From a university perspective, what components are essential to establish a partnership that prepares effective teachers?

From a school/district perspective, what components are necessary to establish a partnership that prepares effective teachers?

Once an effective partnership has been established, how is it maintained?

We have found the following 6 aspects to be critical: Realistic context Relational foundation Reciprocal contributions Rigorous in its curriculum Research-based in its instructional models Responsive to the learning community and larger community

Realistic context Site mirrors conditions in which most graduates will work. Ethnically diverse student body and faculty Linguistically diverse student body

Relational foundation Danielson (2007) and Marzano, Marzano, & Pickering (2003) emphasize the importance of developing strong relationships between students and faculty. Marlow & Nass-Fukai (2000) stress the importance of building relationships between school, university and community members to create long-lasting partnerships. All parties must value the contribution of others and trust one another. This requires reestablishing trust and demonstrating the value of others each time faculty, administrators, or university faculty change. Preservice teachers placed in schools with higher stay-ratios stayed longer themselves in difficult-to-staff positions (Ronfeldt (2012).

Reciprocal contributions Schools provide a strong cadre of mentors University faculty serve the school and district in tangible ways: Parent workshops Faculty workshops RTI instruction District-wide committee work Formal and informal consulting

Rigorous in their curriculum Core curriculum is standards-based. School has high academic and social-emotional expectations (Craig, 2016; Durlek et. al., 2015; Luster & Luster, 2017). All students are challenged (Boaler, 2016; Dweck, 2006; Hattie, 2011) Curriculum includes opportunities for cross-disciplinary connections. Faculty and administrators seek opportunities for continuous professional learning.

Research-based in their instructional models Literacy and math instructional models offer both structure and flexibility. Teacher preparation program is equally committed to evidence- based methodologies. Models promote universal accessibility. Faculty have adequate professional development for implementation of instructional changes.

Responsive to the learning and larger community Students’ cultural backgrounds and communities serve as a contextual foundation for learning. Teacher preparation program has high expectations for candidates’ views of diverse learners.

What can universities require of schools in a partnership?

What can schools require of universities in a partnership?

How do universities get continuous buy-in from school faculty?

How do university faculty afford the time that effective partnerships require?