Building School-Community Partnerships

Collaboration for Student Success

Mavis G. Sanders

• Publisher: Skyhorse
• Year: 2015
• Print ISBN: 9781632205490
• eBook ISBN: 9781632209665
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Art Techniques

This current era of high stakes testing, accountability, and shrinking educational budgets demands that schools seek bold and innovative ways to build strong learning environments for all students. Community involvement is a powerful tool in generating resources that are essential for educational excellence. Building School-Community Partnerships: Collaboration for Student Success emphasizes the importance of community involvement for effective school functioning, student support and well-being, and community health and development. This sharp, insightful book serves as an excellent resource for educators seeking to establish school-community partnerships to achieve goals for their schools and the students, families, and communities they serve. Schools can collaborate with a wide variety of community partners to obtain the resources they need to achieve important goals for students' learning. Some of these partners may include: - Businesses and corporations
- Universities and other institutions of higher learning
- National and local volunteer organizations
- Social service agencies and health partners
- Faith-based organizations and institutionsWork successfully with community partners to improve school programs and curricula, strengthen families, and expand your students' learning experiences!

1	Community Involvement
	Why and What?

The notion that the community has a role to play in the education of youth is long standing in the United States. From Dewey’s concept of community schools at the turn of the twentieth century to calls for community control from parents and community activists in the late 1960s, community involvement has been a central theme in educational reform. Today, community involvement has taken on renewed significance in configurations and discussions of school improvement. Federal, state, and local educational legislation; political slogans; professional addresses; and casual conversations about schooling are likely to include references to the role or responsibility of the community. Why has community involvement had such longevity in educational reform and discourse? I see four compelling reasons, described in the following discussion.

RATIONALES FOR COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN SCHOOLS

Within the theoretical and conceptual literature, a number of rationales for community involvement in schools exist. Proponents of such involvement emphasize its importance for effective school functioning, economic competitiveness, student well-being, and community health and development. When describing the importance of community involvement for effective school functioning, proponents most often focus on the mounting responsibilities placed on schools by a nation with children and youth who are increasingly placed “at risk.” According to Shore (1994),

Too many schools and school systems are failing to carry out their basic educational mission. Many of them—both in urban and rural settings—are overwhelmed by the social and emotional needs of children who are growing up in poverty. (p. 2)

Proponents argue that schools need additional resources to successfully educate all students and that these resources, both human and material, are housed in students’ communities (Epstein, 1995; Melaville, 1998; Waddock, 1995). They contend that the traditional isolated way that many schools have functioned is anachronistic in a time of changing family demographics, an increasingly demanding workplace, and growing student diversity (Ascher, 1988; Crowson & Boyd, 1993; Heath & McLaughlin, 1987, 1996; Kirst & McLaughlin, 1990). Ascher (1988), for example, called for an expanded vision of those who should participate in the task of educating our nation’s students. This vision calls for schools that are open to involvement by the local and wider community and that are responsive to community needs.

Arguments for community involvement to improve school functioning are closely linked to those that emphasize the importance of community involvement for U.S. economic competitiveness. Proponents of this view argue that a primary responsibility of schools is to prepare the nation’s workforce. A well-educated workforce is seen as vital to economic productivity and expansion. This view of the role of schools is generally accepted in the United States and has been central to national educational legislation and policy for decades.

Community involvement is seen as one way to help schools produce a more capable workforce. According to proponents of this view, jobs in the twenty-first century exist in increasingly complicated environments and require workers who are competent beyond a basic skills level. Students need advanced language, technical, and communication skills to succeed in the kinds of jobs that are currently available. Proponents argue that school-community partnerships, specifically those that involve businesses, are critically important because business leaders, managers, and personnel are uniquely equipped to help schools prepare students for the changing workplace (Fitzgerald, 1997; Hopkins & Wendel, 1997; Nasworthy & Rood, 1990).

Merz and Furman (1997) described this reform perspective as gesellschaftlich in nature because the schooling process is viewed from an instrumental perspective. That is, schools are seen primarily as a means to serve national economic interests by preparing students for the workplace. They contrast this perspective with gemeinschaft reform values that emphasize relationships, interpersonal connections, and providing students with a sense of purpose and belonging in society. For many of its proponents, community involvement is seen as one way to restore gemeinschaft values to the schooling process. These values are viewed as fundamental to creating schools that nurture the well-being of children and youth.

Proponents of community involvement for student well-being argue that because of changes in the structure and function of U.S. families and neighborhoods, many children and youth, regardless of socioeconomic background, are growing up without the social capital necessary for their healthy development. Social capital is created and exchanged through positive, caring relationships in which knowledge, guidance, and values are shared (Coleman, 1987, 1988). Proponents of community involvement for student well-being argue that schools can increase students’ social capital through their connections with students’ communities (Benson, 1996; McLaughlin, Irby, & Langman, 1994; Toffler & Toffler, 1995). They contend that through a variety of community volunteer and service integration programs, schools can become islands of hope for students whose social environments are increasingly stressed and fragmented (Dryfoos, 1998, 2002, 2003; Nettles, 1991).

Finally, some proponents argue that community involvement in schools is important for building and maintaining healthy communities. When discussing the role of school-community collaborations in rural communities, Combs and Bailey (1992) argued that as often the largest and most visible institutions, schools should be involved in rural economic development. They contended that the educational, social, and recreational needs of the adult rural population can be enhanced by utilizing local school facilities and expertise. In turn, they argued, schools can use the community as a learning resource.

Keith (1996) similarly argued for a new conceptualization of community involvement in schools. She argued that schools should develop horizontal ties with the community to foster the “social networks, educational, and economic opportunities and cultural richness” (p. 254) that is central to social and economic growth. Benson (1996) also suggested that community development should be a goal of school-community collaborations, because such collaborations require healthy communities in order to be successful in serving youth. Benson defines healthy communities as those that have not only strong socioeconomic and service infrastructures but also are rich in social capital.

COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN SCHOOLS: FORM AND FASHION

Community Partnership Foci

The different rationales for community involvement can be realized through a variety of partnership activities. School-community partnerships can be student centered, family centered, school centered, community centered, or any combination of these. Student-centered activities include those that provide direct services or goods to students: for example, student awards and incentives, scholarships, tutoring and mentoring programs, afterschool enrichment programs, and job shadowing and other career-focused activities. Family-centered activities are those that have parents or entire families as their primary focus. This category includes activities such as parenting workshops, GED and other adult education classes, family incentives and awards, family counseling, and family fun and learning nights. School-centered activities are those that benefit the school as a whole, such as beautification projects or the donation of school equipment and materials, or activities that benefit the faculty, such as staff development and classroom assistance. Community-centered activities have as their primary focus the community and its citizens: for example, charitable outreach, art and science exhibits in community venues, and community revitalization and beautification projects (see Table 1.1).

Survey research of 443 school members of the National Network of Partnership Schools (NNPS) in 1998⁵ revealed much about the focus of schools’ partnership efforts. Overall, most schools reported that their community partnership activities were student centered. This finding suggests that schools may focus their partnership activities too narrowly. Schools may not have fully explored collaborative activities to benefit the total school program or to assist in providing adults in students’ families with primary services, skills training, or other parental supports. Such school-centered and family-centered partnership activities might be especially important for high-need, resource-poor schools.

Table 1.1 Foci of Partnership Activities

Activity Focus	Sample Activities
Student-centered	Student awards, student incentives, scholarships, student trips, tutors, mentors, job shadowing, and other services and products for students
Family-centered	Parent workshops, family fun nights, GED and other adult education classes, parent incentives and rewards, counseling and other forms of assistance
School-centered	Equipment and materials, beautification and repair, teacher incentives and awards, funds for school events and programs, office and classroom assistance
Community-centered	Community beautification, student exhibits and performances, charity and other outreach

SOURCE: Adapted from Sanders (2001).

The community-centered category was the least represented of the four, indicating that many schools had not developed partnership activities that served the larger community. Developing two-way or reciprocal school-community partnership activities is a key challenge for schools as they work to improve and expand their programs of school, family, and community partnership (Epstein et al., 2002). Through community-focused activities, schools, families, and students can contribute to the larger community and serve as catalysts for community action and development.

Potential Community Partners

Schools can collaborate with a variety of community partners to plan and implement partnership activities. The survey of NNPS schools helped to generate the categories of partners identified in Table 1.2. These partners include (a) large corporations and small businesses, (b) universities and educational institutions, (c) government and military agencies, (d) health care organizations, (e) faith-based organizations, (f) national service and volunteer organizations, (g) senior citizen organizations, (h) cultural and recreational institutions, (i) media organizations, (j) sports franchises and associations, (k) other groups such as fraternities and sororities, and (l) community volunteers that can provide resources and social support to youth and schools (see Table 1.2).

The over 400 NNPS school members surveyed reported 817 school-community partnership activities. Of these, the greatest proportion (366 or 45%) involved one or more business partners. These included small and large local businesses, such as bakeries, groceries, barbershops, funeral homes, beauty salons, banks, utility companies, and florists, as well as national corporations and franchises, such as LensCrafters, IBM, State Farm Insurance, General Motors, Wal-Mart, AT&T, Pizza Hut, Burger King, and McDonald’s.

Seventy-seven (9%) of the reported activities included universities, colleges, and other educational institutions, including neighboring schools. Health care organizations, including hospitals, mental health facilities, and health foundations, were involved in 68 (8%), while government and military agencies were partners in 62 (8%) of the activities. Examples of government and military agencies include fire and police departments, chambers of commerce, and other state and local agencies and departments.

National service and volunteer organizations, including Rotary Club, Lions Club, AmeriCorps, Concerned Black Men, Inc., the Urban League, and Boys and Girls Clubs, were involved in 49 (6%) of the partnership activities described by schools in the National Network. Faith organizations, su...

Table of contents

• Front Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Foreword
• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• About the Author
• 1. Community Involvement: Why and What?
• 2. A Closer Look at Common Community Partnerships
• 3. Components of Successful Community Partnerships
• 4. Building Capacity for Successful Community Partnerships: A Vignette
• 5. Bringing the Community In: An Elementary School Story
• 6. Creating Closer Community Ties: A High School Study
• 7. Promising Practices for Community Partnerships
• 8. Preparing Educational Leaders for Community Partnerships: A Workshop Agenda
• 9. Concluding Thoughts
• Resource A: Sample Activities
• Resource B: Sample Letters
• Endnotes
• References