"Without us there is no project": Drifting away in an RPP as a risk of failure, and how to be on track again

• In Event: Learning from “failure”: Exploring challenges in unsuccessful research-practice partnerships

Abstract

Purpose
This paper discusses a key finding from a study of a Research-Practice Partnership (RPP) between a research university and a district leadership team in central Chile. The partnership aimed to collaboratively develop a district-wide pedagogical framework. The finding highlights a form of drift, not a breakdown, but a deviation from the original collaborative intent. This led us to ask: What situations might signal a drift from an RPP’s joint purpose? And how can an RPP respond to such drift to sustain a healthier, more equitable collaboration?

Theoretical perspectives
The intersection of research and practice can foster educational improvement. Partnerships that bring together researchers and practitioners have shown promise in supporting teacher development (e.g., Hadar & Baharav, 2025). However, sustaining alignment and shared focus is challenging. RPPs, as dynamic structures, often face tensions that may compromise coherence. Since their early conceptualization (Coburn et al., 2013; Coburn & Penuel, 2016), scholars have called for attention to moments of perceived failure as critical opportunities for learning and reflection.

Context and participants
The study examines the initial phase of an RPP launched in 2021 between a local school district (SLEP) and a research university. The partnership supports the implementation of Chile’s Public Education System, introduced in 2018. District participants include the head of teacher professional development and instructional coaches; university participants are faculty and researchers from the School of Education.

Data and analysis
We conducted a qualitative content analysis (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005) of transcripts from semi-structured interviews with district participants and internal meetings among university researchers. Through in-depth analysis, we identified emergent themes and extracted illustrative quotes from participants’ discourse. Our analysis was guided by frameworks distinguishing RPPs from other forms of research (Farrell et al., 2021), along with scholarship on partnership conditions, health, and effectiveness (Henrick et al., 2023). We paid particular attention to identifying and characterizing what we term “drift situations”—moments when the partnership appeared to move away from its original collaborative vision.

Results
The analysis revealed several “drift situations,” reflected in discourse that signaled a distancing from the RPP’s joint purpose: co-constructing the district’s pedagogical framework. One particularly salient moment emerged when a district leader reflected on the nature of authority and control within the partnership. Emphasizing the district’s role in granting access to schools and shaping implementation, she stated: “If we're not there, if we're not involved, there's no project, there's nothing. (…) Maybe you'll provide certain guidelines, I don't know, but those guidelines are discussed, because we are the ones who best understand our reality, because we're here.” This quote illustrates a reframing of the partnership dynamic, revealing underlying tensions about roles, ownership, and expertise that can lead to subtle but consequential shifts in how the RPP operates. The researchers' team often feels like consultants instead of true partners.

Scholarly Significance
While RPP literature often highlights the conditions for success, less attention has been paid to early-stage tensions or less successful experiences. This study contributes by identifying challenges that may emerge in the initial phases of RPPs and offering insights into practices for navigating and addressing them.

Authors

• Florencia Gomez Zaccarelli, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile

• Javiera Marfán, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile

• Susana Mendive, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile