What Does it Mean to be a Community School? Voices From Kentucky

• In Event: Expanding Our Understanding: Research on Rural Community School Implementation

Abstract

Objective. In 2023, a Kentucky nonprofit organization began the five-year implementation of a large, federally funded grant project across 20 public-school districts and 40 schools to support the growth of full-service community schools (Blinded for review). Our team provides yearly reports and formative feedback for the organization and pursues research studies including but not limited to fidelity of implementation and impact (Blinded for review). One project component involves measuring the four pillars of community schools (Oakes et al., 2017) that the organization seeks to embed into schools while also tailoring to local contexts and utilizing evidence-based decision-making. Since implementation, a qualitative team has been working across sites to build access and trust and conduct ongoing interviews and observations at the state-, district-, and school-levels. Recurring sensemaking questions and thoughts about what it “means” to be a community school and who gets to take part in decision-making processes have been evolving. This paper examines how participants across the grant are thinking about “community schools,” both generally and when specifically asked.

Framework. Many definitions of community schools exist (see, for example, In the Public Interest et al., 2024; Maier et al., 2017). While specific programs vary, Oakes et al. (2017) found four common pillars: integrated student supports, expanded and enriched learning time and opportunities, family and community engagement, and collaborative leadership and practices. As community schools “scale up” (Coalition for Community Schools at the Institute for Educational Leadership, 2020), it is helpful to think about policy as both co-constructed and reflexive through a dynamic interplay of structure, culture, and agency (Datnow et al., 2002). Further, individuals’ goals and positionality, and systemic issues related to power, rurality, race, politics, voice and more matter, and a community’s culture, history, and knowledge should be centered (Crumb et al., 2023; Yosso, 2005).

Data and Methods. This study observes three community school definitions previously created from an analysis of thirty participant interviews (including principals, family resource coordinators, and project team members) from the project’s first year. The study also includes ten interviews from the second year of data collection in two rural districts, purposefully chosen because of geographic location, and reflective memos from researcher visits to those districts. Data coding occurs alongside a codebook created according to the pillars and is periodically reviewed by the qualitative team.

Initial Results. Three community school definitions created from a psychometric analysis of first-year interviews revealed that individuals spoke about holistic support systems, collaborative governance, equity in access and opportunity, expanded learning opportunities, and community and family engagement. Reflective memos and interview data from the rural districts in the second year highlight how the ethnographic approach being utilized helps to capture nuances related to trust and power as participants navigate community school decision-making processes, and what and why they choose to share information with researchers.

Significance. This paper is important for a holistic discussion around the scaling-up efforts of full-service community schools and for the centering of participant voices in both design and implementation.

Authors

• Amanda U. Potterton, University of Kentucky

• Zitsi Mirakhur, University of Kentucky

• Shannon O. Sampson, University of Kentucky

• Kelly D. Bradley, Marshall University

• Isaiah Moore, University of Kentucky