Reorganizing a Research Practice Partnerships After a 10-Year Test Run: Baltimore

• In Event: The Promise of a Long-Term Commitment to Research Practice Partnerships in Education

Abstract

Purpose: The Baltimore Education Research Consortium (BERC) original mission was to “be a constructive part of the efforts and public conversation surrounding the education of children in Baltimore.” We have spent energy trying to evaluate ourselves with mixed results (Wentworth, Mazzeo, Connolly, 2017) which has led us to look to how we are organized. This study will describe what happened as BERC used its Theory of Change (See Figure 1), stakeholder feedback and two frameworks from organizational development to move towards a learning organization. The study asks: Did the reorganization of BERC result in the desired outcomes?

Framework: BERC is a place-based, multi-sector research-practitioner partnership (RPP) (Coburn, Penuel & Geil, 2013), but is also one that has struggled to provide empirical proof of the partnership’s value (Schneider, 2018). While many researchers are focusing on understanding research use in RPPs, we went in a slightly different direction, borrowing from organizational development. We blended two frameworks. The first from The Fifth Discipline (Senge, 1990) which describes learning organizations as places “where people continually expand their capacity to create the results they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning how to learn together” (Senge, 1990, p. 1). The second was Adaptive Leadership (Heifetz, Grashow, Linsky, 2009) which presses partners into productive zones of disequilibrium (see figure 1). Using these two new frameworks, we re-thought the organization of BERC to increase the opportunity for disequilibrium, deeper thinking and move towards a learning organization. For example, rather than look for technical solutions, one -size-fits-all, we hope to push practitioners and researchers into an uncomfortable productive zone of disequilibrium. We believe this will produce more research-based policy and practice. This will also develop the capacity of researchers and practitioners to think differently, challenge assumptions and respond.

Methods: We use a case study methodology to understand the experience of the reorganization as well as the unintended consequences, and possible creation of new structures that meet the district and researchers needs (Yazan, 2015). We examine organizational survey data collected by the district, process data from a sample of projects conducted under the new structures, and narratives from the researcher and practitioner side (authors). Through this work we hope to understand if the district is exhibiting more of the characteristics of a learning organization over time.

Results: This paper will document how an urban RPP re-organized in an attempt to create a learning organization. By monitoring organizational and process data, we identify changes, that will provide a model other RPPs can use to re-think their structure as a means to increase use of research. The case studies will provide context and examples.

Significance of the study or work: As the value of RPPs is challenged, RPPs can look to their organization to determine if there are opportunities to make changes that will increase effort and time in organizational productive zones. This paper will include several possible metrics for thinking about the work.

Authors

• Marc L. Stein, Johns Hopkins University

• Christopher Wohn, Baltimore City Public Schools

• Theresa D Jones, Baltimore City Public Schools