The Ebb and Flow of Using Survey Measures As Research-Practice Partnerships Evolve

• In Event: Are There Stages to This? The Case For (and Against) Research-Practice Partnership Developmental Trajectories

Abstract

Objectives: Since the research-practice partnership (RPP) between DISTRICT A and UNIVERSITY B was established in 2009, the leaders of the RPP used surveying as a tool to progress monitoring its goals. Early on, the leaders wanted to use the survey to identify essential RPP practices (Author et al., 2011; Author et al., 2014) and analyze which practices were effective (Author et al., 2017; Farrell et al., 2021). In this study, we explore why the use of surveys to monitor progress towards RPP goals waxed and waned during the evolution of the partnership and discuss implications for the field of education RPPs.

Theoretical Frameworks: RPPs help researchers conduct useful research (e.g. Gutierréz & Penuel, 2014; McLaughlin & London, 2013). RPPs also help school district leaders use research in their decision-making (e.g., Penuel et al., 2017; Finnigan & Daly, 2014). Finally, RPP activities evolve over time based on their composition, that is the people involved and their roles. The DISTRICT A-UNIVERSITY B Partnership went through “stages” of evolution and surveying practices based on variation in its composition (Farrell et al., 2021).

Method and Data: This study uses a participant observer methodology (Merriam and Tisdell, 2015) to build a case study (Yin, 2018) of the director's use of surveys in RPP improvement efforts. Data was collected by the director through meeting minutes, memos, and document analysis. This study uses grounded theory where data collection and analysis proceed simultaneously to support discoveries (Charmaz, 1983; Taylor and Bogdan, 1998).

Substantiated conclusions: In stage 1 of this RPP, the director used surveys to explore the RPP activities and effectiveness. In stage 2, with the help of other RPP leaders, the Director developed a survey with more complex constructs. For example, a stage 2 construct focused on“working together in the RPP” while a stage 1 construct focused on “communication.” In stage 3, the survey maintained complexity, but more specificity. Survey questions were asked to a purposeful sample of teams working on projects (Kipnis et al., 2020). Finally, survey measures were used sparsely during later stages and only used to collect event feedback. The RPP director may use a survey during stage 4 with teams based on the Henrick et al. (2023) constructs.

Significance: As an RPP evolves , the RPP’s composition changes, which changes the need for using surveys to monitor progress of an RPP. Interestingly, this RPP has had the same RPP director since it started, so the use of surveys might differ with more leader turnover and less resources. Given the field of RPPs talk about challenges with turnover (Klein & Gannon-Slater, 2023; Klein, 2023) and other contextual factors like politics (Yamashiro et al., 2023), these factors may limit the field’s ability to generalize specific developmental milestones for RPPs and require RPP evaluation tools to be more flexible and adaptive to changes in context and composition.

Author

• Laura P. Wentworth, California Education Partners