![[Table of Contents]](/icons/up.gif){kind=icon}
Many implications can be derived from this study. Probably the most important one is that school-university partnerships can have a significant impact on the improvement of educational practices. It is also notable that there is no one "right" way to go about it. Many factors, including the social and political context, the participants, the needs and goals of various organizations, and the resources available, determine the organizational structure that is most appropriate in a given situation. The study suggests that there are many alternative paths that seem to work.
In each site, the most obvious benefit was the professional growth of teachers through increased training, exposure to a variety of new ideas and instructional approaches, opportunities to collaborate with peers, and new leadership roles. However, when mutual involvement from all sectors is intense and sustained, a variety of more substantial and systemwide benefits can be achieved. This happened when each party in the collaboration felt that they were getting something substantial from the experience. When the rewards of participation were not clear for one side or the other, the level of investment in the partnership tended to decline.
Benefits to universities included increased understanding by faculty of the operational realities of schooling, improved practice teaching experiences for preservice teachers, more relevant connections between theory and practice, and in a few cases, improvements in the quality of university instruction.
We have also seen that universities are steeped with tradition, and changing the culture of higher education is more difficult to achieve than changing the culture of schools (which is no easy task!). In order to increase the commitment to change on the part of the university, the partnership needs to critically examine the benefits that can be derived for each of the partners, including university faculty. The needs of university faculty and programs have not been as strong a priority as developments in the K - 12 system up to this point.
Yet, there is a persistent need to address faculty development in the areas of teaching skills, course content, and comfort with working in schools. In addition, graduate programs are needed that provide stronger preparation for future teacher educators so that new faculty entering the profession will have the knowledge and skills necessary to work effectively with schools.
Leadership must be developed among tenured university faculty. In each of these cases, young faculty members have played a significant role in these initiatives, but at a significant risk. It is critical to get the commitment of tenured faculty to not only demonstrate the importance of these initiatives, but also to provide support to junior faculty members. Attention must be paid to how research and evaluation activities can be melded with service activities of faculty members. The reward structure also needs to provide incentives to encourage investment in fieldwork and teaching. The same kinds of meaningful professional development activities that are being attempted to support teacher development in the schools also need to be developed to support faculty development within the university.
At the school/school district level, there is a need to build in mechanisms to support educator learning, including opportunities to connect with colleagues within and beyond one’s own institution. These times need to become a routine part of an educator’s work, not an add-on to an already hectic full-time profession.
All new enterprises have special start-up costs and continuing costs. The strength of the initial infrastructure is critical to sustaining the partnership. Long-term support issues must be addressed in some way, i.e., there should be a realistic prospect that long-term funding can be arranged through the reallocation of resources from all organizations or through the generation of new revenues by the partnership to support ongoing development.
The prominence of professional development in current reform efforts could provide the support needed to sustain these partnerships. Policymakers in state and federal government need to be informed of the potential power of these arrangements for supporting coherent reforms across institutions. A few states in the United States have developed a funding structure to support collaborative school-university partnerships, but most states have not. In some places where there is political support for such ventures, there are not available funds to support it on a consistent basis. Goals 2000 resources, which are to be dispersed through state structures, are an important potential source of support for school-university partnerships. Critical evaluation data will be necessary to gain political support, just as it is to acquire foundation or business support.
-###-
[Implications for Needed Research]