Systemic Framework Supports Sustainability:University – Elementary School Partnership Projectto Raise Academic Achievement for Children Living in Poverty

Beth Rajan Sockman Ph.D.Instructional TechnologyEast Stroudsburg University of Pennsylvania

Regina Sayles Koilparampil M.Ed. Instructional TechnologySinger/Song Writer

Abstract• When applying for grants, funders often require

sustaining plans beyond the project’s funding period. Systemic theory provides a framework for sustainability through analysis of the systems that influence the interventions’ effectiveness proposed by the grant. This presentation reviews a specific grant, Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA), that uses a systemic theory framework to inform implementation. The VISTA grant funds collaboration between a university and an elementary school focused on raising academic achievement with children living in poverty.

Grant funding problem• How do you raise academic achievement of

children living in poverty within three years in a university – school partnership?

Problem

• What are the ways to use systemic thinking for sustainability of a positive initiative that is grant funded?

• How do you get a school to buy-into a partnership?

• How do you get university leaders to buy into a partnership?

SYSTEMS THEORY

“Systems not only change in response to the environment, but the environment changes in response to the system within it” (Hutchinson).

Perspective - Banathy• interconnectedness between the supra-

system ,sub systems, and peer systems.

Supra-system

Sub-systemSub-system

Sub-systemSub-

system

Peer

Syste

ms

Peer

Syste

ms

Systems Perspective • interconnectedness between the supra-

system ,sub systems, and peer systems.

School District University

Peer Systems

Peer Systems

Departments Elementary School

STRATEGIES USING SYSTEMS THINKING

3 strategies discussed in this presentation

1.Stakeholder involvement in order to build ownership (Havelock, 1995), leadership (C.M. Reigeluth & Karnopp, 2013),

Strategy – Stakeholder Involvement

Key stakeholders

•University • Administration• Faculty• Departments• Students

•School• Board• Principal• Teachers• Parents• Students

What it sometimes feels like if you don’t get communication …

2. Strategy – Shared Leadership

School University

Shared leadership (C.M. Reigeluth & Karnopp, 2013

ADVISORY BOARDPrincipalTeachersFacultyParent University Student

Communication & Collaboration• Lastly, groups need to have tools for

communication and collaboration (Le Cornu & Peters 2009), which can be effectively used for the purpose of developing trust, awareness, and contextualization. With today’s technology collaboration tools, selecting the most beneficial tool for the project is easy as long as contextual elements are understood. Coordinated action requires communication and supportive tools which are vital to planning and executing joint action (Banathy, 1996).

3. Strategies Shared Incentives & Leverage Points

SYSTEM incentives Supra Systems & Sub Systems – Peer Systems• What are the primary concerns for the school?• What are the skills that university students

need to develop? • It is valuable for both parties to be open to the

needs of the other?

Leverage & Incentive

School District- AYP - Technology

University – AACU -

Enrollment

Peer Systems

Peer Systems

Departments – Faculty Enrollment

Research

Elementary School – AYP – Exams - Technology

PACC - VISTA

National Goals & Concerns

VISTA Grant

• GOAL of VISTA • Wrote a VISTA grant to get help

with the• VISTA would help establish the

programs in order to make the work sustainable.

PACC - VISTA – Goal• Fight Poverty• AACU –

Crucible Moment: College Learning & Democracy’s Future, 2012

• PACC – VISTA - Increase academic achievement of students living in poverty

Supra System Children living in Poverty• Locally and nationally, the academic needs of

students who live in poverty have been voiced (Darling-Hammond, 2010). – Super systems• Northwestern 2009 study – Dropout

High School 63 times more likely to incarcerated • 2012 Study: Lack of 3rd literacy + Poverty =

Increase risk for high school dropout

• School – Keystone Exam Annual Yearly Progress• School - 66% of its students are receiving free or

reduced lunch

Elementary School… Systems• Supra-system of the elementary school desires

academic achievement where the students reach adequate yearly progress with greater numbers of children attaining proficient on the standardized test.

• The Mega-system of the school districts has an industrial age model of instruction with self-contained classes within the elementary school. Also, the district has invested in technology with some support of technology integration. Low income parents are rarely involved in students progress. 66% Free & Reduced Lunch

University …System • Supra-system American Association of

Colleges and Universities, accreditation and measures of institutional effectiveness espousing a strong relationship with the community by espousing “theory into practice” http://www.aacu.org/bringing_theory/.

• Low Enrollment• High impact practices• The Mega-system – Social Capital - has a

strong education department, cultural events, and learning facilities for students. The vast social capital available for tutoring and programs available was systematically used to address specific goals established by the elementary school community

MULTIPLE APPROACHES TO COLLABORATION

Stakeholders & Needs – Agreed on leadership stakeholders

Shared LeadershipAdvisory & Technology Night Board

University Students College Professor - Reading

Math

LA Literacy Tutoring Elementary

Students

University Students College Professor – Elementary Math

Elementary Students &4-6 TEACHERS

Technology Night

University Students (few)Technology Professor

Elementary Students MANY TEACHERSPARENTS - Families

Four Prong Interventions – that was supportive and respectful1.) Language/literacy tutoring: Happen after school with University student volunteers.2.) Math tutoring: conducted with University student small group in-class sessions that work directly with a schoolteacher.

Indirect academic achievement interventions: 3.) Family Technology Night: Once a year to encourage the teachers use of technology, with university support. The hope is to slowly bridge the gap of the digital divide, college access, and encourage positive parent/guardian involvement their children’s education. The event brings together the mega-system in a positive experience. 4.)Advisory board: Encourages communication with shared leadership through members composition from both communities who oversee implementation.

TRUST

Not stepping on each other’s shoes- and allowing each to help the other

DOES NOT WORK

Key Players – Trust Builders• Principal• VISTA (Recruiting and collaborating to stay on

task)• PI on Grant (Focus and sustainability – cost/ratio

benefit)• Graduate Student • Teacher - leaders

Interview: Graduate Student – on Advisory Board• What was your role in the school before you

began the partnership?• How did change when you became a graduate

student? • What was the technology advisory board like

for you as a graduate student?• How did you leverage you role to gain trust?

MOTION PICTURE MODELUsed to think about

Traditional Input – Output Model

Motion Picture Model – Model of General Systems

Input OutputTransformation

Feedback & Adjustment

Motion Picture Model (Banathy, 1973)• Input Processing is identified as the first step, which

addresses the interaction system and the environment or supra-systems.

• The second operation is the Transformation Intervention, implying operations that support conditions in which the input will be “transformed into output.”

• The third operation is Output, which provides identification and assessment of the environment to then inform the new input. The model then becomes dynamic as the iterations provide evidence for new input that stimulates growth, which can potentially transform the organization. The iterative nature becomes a renewing process, the essence of a learning organization (Senge, 1990, 2000; Senge & Lannon-Kim, 1991).

Motion Picture Model – Determined by InputInput -

Students -Curriculum – Faculty- Parents

Output – Increase

Test Score – Trust – Increase Involvem

ent

Transformation – Tutoring –

Mentoring– Advisory Board

Feedback (Observation -

Formative Evaluation &

Advisory Board) Adjustment

HOW IS THIS WORKING?Output

SHARED LEADERSHIP Advisory Boards

Spring 2013

Spring 2014

Elementary School Faculty & Administrators

4 5

University Faculty 2 4

University Students 0 2

Parent 1 1

STAKEHOLDER Involvement –Elementary School

Spring 2013 Spring 2014

Elementary Students for tutoring

26 45

Technology Night – Elementary School

75 (total) 69 (total)

Teachers work with Graduate students for technology projects

0 4

STAKEHOLDER Involvement University

Spring 2013 Spring 2014

University Tutors

15 18

University Faculty

3 (3 Departments)

5 (5 Departments)

University Grad Students

3 6

Lesson Learned for Sustainability

• Keep modifying to be sustainable – VISIT GOALS & Leverage Points

• Keep building trust – from both sides• Keep value added• Keep looking for incentives and

rewards• Keep mutual respect - compassion

ReferencesAbell, S. K. (2000). From professor to colleague: Creating a professional identity as collaborator in elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 548-562. doi:10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:6<548::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-DBanathy, B. H. (1996). Conversation as a medium for change in education. Educational Technology, 36(1), 39-41.Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2003). Trust in Schools : A Core Resource for School Reform What Is Relational Trust ?, 60(6), 40-45.Butcher, J., Bezzina, M., & Moran, W. (2010). Transformational Partnerships: A New Agenda for Higher Education. Innovative Higher Education, 36(1), 29-40. doi:10.1007/s10755-010-9155-7Cornu, R. L., & Peters, J. (2009). Sustaining School-university Collaboration for Reciprocal Learning. International Journal, 16(9).Ertmer, P. A., Hruskocy, C., & Technology, E. (1999). Impacts of a university-elementary school partnership designed to support technology integration. Text.Linn, M. C., Shear, L., Bell, P., & Slotta, J. D. (1999). Organizing principles for science education partnerships : Cas studies of stu ... Education.Peel, H. a., Peel, B. B., & Baker, M. E. (2002). School/university partnerships: a viable model. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(7), 319-325. doi:10.1108/09513540210448077Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusions of innovations (4th ed.). NY: Free Press.Zelleramayer, M., & Margolin, I. (2005). Transitions to school-college partnership: a phenomenological inquiry. Journal of Educational Change, 6(2), 147-176. doi:10.1007/s10833-004-2203-2  Banathy, B. H. (1973). Developing a Systems View of Education: The Systems Model Approach. Belmont, CA: Fearon Publishers.Darling-Hammond. (2010). The flat world and education: How America's commitment to equity will determine our future NY: Teachers College Press Duffy, F. M. (2010). Dream! Create! Sustain! Mastering the art and science of transforming school systems. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.Goodman, J. (1995). Change without Difference. Harvard Educational Review, 65(1), 1-32. Hargreaves, A. (2006). The sustainability of innovative schools as learning organizations and professional leaning communities during standardized reform. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 124-156. Havelock, R. G. Z. S. (1995). The change agents guide (2 ed.). Englewood

Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.Reigeluth, C. M. (1993). Principles of educational systems design. In C. M. Reigeluth, B. H. Banathy & J. R. Olson (Eds.), Comprehensive systems design: A new educational technology. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.Reigeluth, C. M., & Karnopp, J. R. (2013). Reinventing schools: It's time to break the mold. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.Sarason, S. (1990). The predictable failure of educational reform: Can we change course before it's too late? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. NY: Bantam Double Day Dell Publishing.Senge, P. (2000). Schools that learn: A Fifth discipline fieldbook for educators, parents, and everyone who cares about education. NY: DoubleDay.Senge, P., & Lannon-Kim, C. (1991). Recapturing the spirit of learning through a systems approach. The school administrator. Stringer, E. (2007). Action research Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.