Developing social capital for collaboration in a research-practice partnership

Abstract

Purpose -The ever-increasing pressure for school improvement has led to a related increase in research-practice partnerships (RPPs) that address problems of practice. Yet, little research has centered on how the myriad challenges to such partnerships can be overcome, such as bridging the cultural divide between universities and their school-based partners. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to examine how social capital was developed among the members of a steering committee in a RPP between a university and a 12-district consortium of predominantly rural, high-poverty school districts to develop and implement a professional development initiative for rural school leaders. Design/methodology/approach -Data for this phenomenological single case study were collected over a one-year period through participant observations, document analysis and semi-structured interviews with ten steering committee members. Data were inductively and deductively coded through multiple rounds of analysis, which drew on the structural and cognitive elements of social capital (Uphoff, 2000). Findings were triangulated and member checked for trustworthiness. Findings -The analysis of the data revealed three key ways in which social capital was developed among members of the steering committee to overcome the cultural challenges of RPPs to develop and implement a professional development initiative for rural school leaders: providing an open but focused structure, ensuring inclusive and respectful discussion and negotiating roles and ideas. Originality/value -The findings provide a fine-grained illustration of how intentional efforts to develop social capital among members in a co-design team can assist in bridging the cultural boundaries often encountered in RPPs.

Facilitating Leadership Coach Capacity for School Leadership Development: The Intersection of Structured Community and Experiential Learning

“…In this way, the members of the partnership were able to develop high levels of trust and ameliorate the potential for cultural misalignment that can occur in research–practice partnerships. The members of the codesign team met monthly throughout the school year to discuss the lessons learned during a 2-year leadership development pilot study that had recently concluded and to determine the format of the subsequent initiative, which came to be known as the LLC (see Buskey et al, 2018; Klar et al, 2018 for more information about the development of the steering committee as a codesign team). During this year of planning, the facilitators took the lead in all aspects of the LLC, including developing criteria and materials for selecting LLC coaches and leaders.…”

“…The process began with prospective coaches being nominated by their superintendents. Each prospective coach was then invited to apply to participate as a coach in the LLC by the LLC Steering Committee, which was composed of 10 representatives from the consortium and the partnering universities (Buskey et al, 2018; Klar et al, 2018). The application process required coaches to describe their specific interests in participating in the LLC, their previous experiences developing other leaders, and their commitment to enhancing student learning through school leadership.…”

Equity and Social Justice in Research Practice Partnerships in the United States

“…• RPPs can explicitly use equity-centered frameworks, such as social capital (Klar et al, 2018) and organizational theory with transformative agency (Ishimaru & Takahashi, 2017) to frame research questions and design, inform analysis, and interpret findings.…”

Boundary Spanning Roles and Power in Educational Partnerships

“…Boundary work requires critical reflexivity that makes roles explicit, a process of identification which is itself a boundary spanning practice. Scholars have developed strategies to overcome cultural challenges and facilitate collaboration in partnerships, but this requires an inclusive environment open to difficult conversations and hybridization of cultural scripts (Gutierrez et al, 1995; Klar et al, 2018). Adopting practices to support boundary spanning may be difficult for researchers (Muñoz & Jeris, 2005).…”