What each organization brought to the partnership
Before you read this section, please first read the Introduction to this Guidebook.
The following describes the joint planning process undertaken by UM CoE and YPSD since spring 2006. Goals are aligned with our mission and were defined as results of the program. Objectives are steps toward achieving the goals. Flexibility and willingness to readily adapt to change are key elements in the process. As programs evolved, they provided a springboard from which increasingly more effective educational outreach programs could be constructed. We used a new protocol to identify program goals and objectives in the context of the YPSD / UM CoE Partnership.
Following the new protocol, leaders of the Ypsilanti Public School District (YPSD), now known as Ypsilanti Community Schools (YCS), conducted an internal investigation, which produced its vision to prepare all its students to be positive, contributing members in a changing society. Community partnerships formed subsequently supported the District’s emphasis on sustaining a safe, caring, learning environment that focuses on quality and equity.
District leaders, teachers and parents committed to encouraging all students to graduate, attend college, and participate in Michigan’s economic revival. To empower this vision, District leaders and teachers formed a long-term plan for positive change that incorporated research on 90/90/90 schools, which are schools that were identified because they are at least 90% combined minority, at least 90% free or reduced lunch qualified students, and at least 90% successful on standardized assessments. These schools appeared to be doing something unexpected that leads to a high level of student achievement under challenging circumstances. High achieving schools have five commonalities worth consideration: 1. A strong emphasis and focus on achievement. 2. Clear curricular choices 3. Frequent assessment and multiple chances for students to show improvement. 4. Strong emphasis on writing in all academic areas. 5. External scoring of student work.) YCS developed a new strategic plan that included strong partcipation by UM CoE faculty, scholars, students, and staff, in alignment with the 90/90/90 research.
Early in 2006, The University of Michigan’s College of Engineering (UM CoE) working group on K-12 outreach (now under the auspices of the Center for Engineering Diversity and Outreach or CEDO) also conducted an internal investigation. During the process, we identified potential partners in the community with both the desire and capability to respond to partnership development. Research on proximity to the College, demographics and available resources led working group members to YCS as a logical place to begin. After an initial introductory meeting and formal request to form a partnership by UM CoE’s Dean for Academic Affairs Tony England and his staff, a series of meetings with YCS Superintendent James Hawkins, Assistant Superintendent Richard Weigel, and a select group of science and mathematics master teachers were conducted during the following spring and summer. Ultimately both groups agreed to conduct a half-day workshop to explore mutual goals. A version of the Nominal Group Technique (Delbecq, A.L.; Van de Ven, A.H. and Gustafson, D.H. 1986) was used to prepare for the first workshop, so a significant amount of information was acquired in a very short period of time.
The first workshop
The purpose of the first workshop, held in August 2006, was to hold a discussion and build consensus-based answers to four key questions. We used the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) protocol to help us focus the discussion. The questions were:
From your perspective as a science and/or math teacher, please write your answers to the following four questions.
1. In the context of how UM CoE can support the YCS 9th grade Academy in the subject areas of math and science, what are your most urgent and important needs? Describe up to three.
2. How can you and YCS use UM CoE as a resource to meet those needs? Describe up to three examples.
3. What three challenges exist that may pose barriers to meeting those needs?
4. In your opinion, what three things could be done to increase the number of students choosing engineering or science as a career path?
Participants also explored some examples of strategies and programs at other institutions and in settings that may also work in the partnership.
Program Ideas
During brainstorming sessions, discussions and votes on priorities, workshop participants produced a set of poster-sized notes. The group voted on which ideas represented in the notes were the most feasible to pursue. The resulting priority list, which everyone co-owned, was used as the basis to construct the joint plan. Since this is an iterative process where CoE and YPSD participants actively educate each other, we took into account the organic nature of our learning communities, and allowed growth and change from year to year.
The next step we agreed on was to initiate those programs or projects commonly identified as having highest priority, with intentions to focus on simplicity, practicality, timeliness and cost-effectiveness. Andrews, Weigel and the volunteer group of UM CoE students and YPSD teachers continued discussions to flesh out details of pilot versions of the highest priorities.
A joint working agreement was executed for the initial pilot, and a 4-page color brochure was produced, which outlined the over-arching goals of the partnership. A scholarly paper on program development, the Teaching Fellows component of the program and early evaluation data was presented at the ASEE annual conference in June 2008.
Continued interaction allowed us to stay current with each other’s needs and to solicit advice and feedback. This iterative education process where both university faculty and K-12 teachers actively educate each other resulted in strengthening the partnership and expanding opportunities. The iterative process also advanced the concept of joint ownership.
No comments:
Post a Comment