Designing Partnerships for Learning and Improvement: Lessons From a Longitudinal Study of Research Alliances in the United States

• In Event: Saturday Roundtable Session 11:25 am
  In Roundtable Session: Transforming Educational Systems to Support Organizational Learning and Improvement: A Cross-National Comparison of Opportunities and Obstacles (Table 36)

Abstract

Objectives:
In the United States, research-practice partnerships (RPPs) are a widely-used approach to supporting continuous learning and improvement in local school systems (Coburn & Penuel, 2016; Farrell et al., 2021). RPPs are typically partnerships between research- and practice-focused organizations, and are therefore tasked with integrating the divergent demands, expectations, and understandings faced by these organizations. In this study, we focus on a predominant form of RPP, the research alliance (RA), and examine the following research question: (1) What organizational, social, and political factors shape RAs’ ability to foster learning in local education systems?

Theoretical Framework:
We draw on two theories to conceptualize the complexity of relationships that span organizational and epistemic boundaries and that are nested within local environments. New institutionalism sheds light on the social and political environments that press on RAs to meet multiple, competing demands while simultaneously providing resources that mediate RAs’ capacity to respond to these demands. Inter-organizational learning theory illuminates the relational, structural, and technical elements that can accelerate improvement within cross-organizational partnerships.

Data and Methods:
Data come from a four-year multiple-case study focused on two research alliances situated in large, urban settings in the United States: District-Research Collaborative (DRC) and University Research Team (URT) (pseudonyms). These alliances were purposefully sampled to maximize variation on alliance design, partner organization characteristics, and local contexts. Data included over 100 semi-structured interviews, 13 observations of meetings and dissemination events, and over a dozen documents from each alliance. Our analysis consisted of iterative processes of code development and coding cycles, case analysis meetings, analytic memo writing, and member checking (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Miles et al., 2020; Saldaña, 2016).

Results:
Three interrelated factors shaped RAs’ ability to support learning among district partners. The first was RA design and its position within its environment. For example, one RA in our sample relied on tenure-track faculty, for whom traditional academic standards for tenure and promotion often outweighed their commitment to supporting district improvement. A second factor was the role that funders played in shaping RPP goals and activities. Funder priorities were often misaligned with those of district practitioners, again diverting researchers’ time and attention from work better aligned with district learning goals. A third factor was district capacity. Districts with fewer professional capabilities and more urgent needs placed greater pressure on their research partners, often making demands that exceeded researchers’ resources. These three factors-- RA design and position, misaligned funder priorities, and district capacity-- interacted in ways that both enhanced and curtailed opportunities for learning and improvement.

Scholarly Significance:
Our research shows that while research alliances face significant tensions in their work, alliances that are structured in ways which attend to researchers’ incentives and district capacity can best support system learning and improvement.

Authors

• Matthew Shirrell, The George Washington University

• Megan Duff, UNC Chapel Hill

• Joshua L. Glazer, The George Washington University