0.3 Angelle, a., wilson, n., & Mink, g. (april 2011). building  (Page 7/10)

The perspective of the practitioner partners supported the concept of bridging theory with practice. Common responses indicated that “having a practitioner partner allows students to experience firsthand what it is like ‘in the trenches’ so that they can apply their academic knowledge to the reality of the coursework” (PP 5) and “what a practitioner is able to do is come in and show you working models of how they base things on theory [the students] have already learned” (PP 1).

Emphasis on the application of textbook theory to everyday practice was successful because of the level of collaboration between the instructors. The cooperative efforts from all instructor participants were evident, as supported by interview responses.

Teaching collaboration

Collaboration between practitioners and professors progressed from program initiation to data collection for this study. During the early days of professors and practitioner partners in the same classroom, there was little consistency across coursework in how the partnership worked. In some classes, the practitioners were guest speakers in a specific content area. The belief was that “more in-depth collaboration [might] occur in year two and three” (PP 3). University professor 5 stated that he

gave her [the practitioner partner] a copy of the course outline and asked her what areas she felt most comfortable with and what areas she might like to present in and I kind of organized the rest of the materials around what she is interested in doing.

As the program has evolved, the role of the practitioner has developed into that of a co-teacher. Through team teaching, professors and practitioners are able to collaborate on course content, timelines, and expectations as well as instruction, class activities, and within class and web-based discussions. Respondents cited specific strategies for co-teaching, such as “we divided the class in half where I introduced the topic, and then he followed up with the application to the school level” (UP 1). Another professor stated that “We looked at the four pillars or elements of school data….he kind of took the lead role in three and I took the lead in the student performance” (UP 5).

While university professors and practitioner partners worked collaboratively in construction and delivery of the coursework, the department faculty reached out to the districts surrounding the university, whether students from these districts participated in the leadership preparation program or not. Faculty from ELPS realized that feedback and attempts to meet the needs of the regional school systems widened the net of collaboration for all involved.

Steering committee perceptions

Interviews were conducted with university partners from local school systems. Respondents included regional school system superintendents, or their representatives, from the group charged with serving as the advisory board to the program’s leadership preparation program, known as the Steering Committee (SC). Superintendents responded that the partnerships are unique in that Local Education Agencies (LEA) surrounding the university have not had the opportunity to collaborate with a university in this capacity. Partner superintendents also agreed that the unique nature of the partnership extended beyond the boundaries of the regional area as they were not aware of other school districts participating to the extent that they have. Collaborating partners were pleased with the opportunity to contribute to the training of aspiring leaders, to see the university as a resource to their districts, and to participate in this collaboration as a pathway to build camaraderie between districts. The work of the SC was viewed as a way to learn from the university and each other. One respondent stated that “I see it as something that will be a real plus for all of us in terms of us steering our people in that direction [more effective development] and having the opportunity to learn and grow new leaders” (SC 4), while another perceived the partnership as “a wonderful resource and asset to the region as far as leadership development” (SC 2).