Understanding District-Charter Collaboration Grants: Promising Practices and Lessons Learned

• In Event: Lessons Learned About Instructional Practice Sharing Between District and Charter Schools

Abstract

Objectives
Between 2013 and 2015, the Gates Foundation invested in innovative partnerships between traditional public school districts and the charter school sector in seven cities: Boston, Denver, Hartford, New Orleans, New York, Philadelphia and Spring Branch. Each city received a three-year, multimillion-dollar grant to facilitate specific cross-sector collaborations.

This study examined the implementation of the grants to address two key research questions:
1. How do educators and administrators perceive the usefulness and impacts of the collaboration grant activities?
2. What are the lessons learned from grant implementation about cross-sector collaboration and practice sharing? What activities were perceived as most successful? What were the primary obstacles?

Theoretical framework
The theory of action for the grants posited that successful implementation of collaborative activities—including cross-sector sharing of effective school- and classroom-level instructional practices—would lead to citywide outcomes such as improved teacher quality in existing schools and the opening of new schools using effective teaching practices. In turn, achieving these intermediate outcomes would increase the supply of effective schools within the city, resulting in improved student achievement.

Most grant activities aimed to improve the quality of instructional leadership and practice through cross-sector coaching or training and school partnerships. This study examined the implementation of grant activities to assess their impacts on intermediate outcomes—as perceived by stakeholders—as well as the role of contextual factors.

Data and Methods
The study used a mixed-methods approach, collecting and analyzing qualitative and quantitative data from central office administrators, principals, and teachers in all seven grantee sites throughout the implementation period (from late 2013 through late 2015). Study samples included respondents from all sectors involved in each city’s partnership. Specifically, the data used in the study included: (1) two rounds of semi-structured interviews with 296 administrators, school leaders, and teachers, (2) observations of 15 collaboration activities, and (3) surveys of 156 principals and 486 teachers.

Findings
RQ1:
• Cross-sector collaboration activities were more successful in facilitating practice sharing among principals than among teachers, who were most impacted by structural barriers.
• Participants in collaboration activities reported expansions in their cross-sector professional networks, which most often led to increases in informal practice sharing.
• Educators and administrators perceived collaboration activities as having a positive impact on instructional quality, but on a small scale.
RQ2:
• Cross-sector leadership programs were widely viewed as the most successful collaboration grant activities, particularly in improving instructional quality.
• Collaboration activities were perceived as too limited in scope and duration to yield widespread impacts and hindered by a lack of clarity around goals.
• Future collaboration initiatives should incorporate a broader and longer-term perspective, better alignment with specific school and teacher needs, and improved messaging around effective collaboration mechanisms.

Scholarly significance
Descriptive findings from this study can help inform policymakers and practitioners seeking effective approaches for cross-sector practice sharing. This study also contributes to the nascent literature on cross-sector collaboration, documenting the experiences of seven cities. Future research should further examine pathways from practice-sharing activities to instructional practices and student outcomes and attempt to rigorously estimate impacts.

Authors

• Moira McCullough, Mathematica Policy Research, Inc

• Christina Clark Tuttle, Mathematica Policy Research, Inc

• Scott Richman, Mathematica Policy Research, Inc

• Kevin Booker, Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.