ContributorsErin Anderson, Douglas W. Anthony, Cynthia K. Barron, Carole Basile, Michelle M. Beavers, Barnett Berry, Manuelito Biag, Regina Biggs, Anthony S. Bryk, Susan P. Carlile, Charoscar Coleman, Diana Cornejo-Sanchez, Shelby Cosner, Kathleen M. W. Cunningham, Kris DeFilippis, Mark E. Deschaine, Felice Desouza, David Eddy-Spicer, Segun Eubanks, Christina Flesher, Louis M. Gomez, Betsy Hargrove, Brian Harvey, Marni Herrington, Zipporah Hightower, Randy Hitz, David G. Imig, Janice Jackson, Julia Jacobsen, Sandra Lochhead, Peter Martinez, David Mayrowetz, Tania McKey, Kara Miley-Libby, Peter Moyi, Christine M. Neumerski, Margaret Terry Orr, Deborah S. Peterson, Meisha Porter, W. Bradley Roberson, David Rock, Natasha Saunders, Farnoosh Shahrokhi, Claire Silva, Jean Snell, Denise A. Soares, Elizabeth Leisy Stosich, Nicole L. Thompson, Steve Tozer, Samantha Viano, Sam Whalen, Tinkhani Ushe White, Paige Whitlock, Paul ZavitkovskyAbout the EditorsLouis M. Gomez works to help educators take a new perspective on design and educational improvement by catalyzing long-term, cooperative initiatives. The work gains its power through highly focused collaboratives called Networked Improvement Communities. He is a Professor of Education (and Information Studies) at the University of California, Los Angeles. Since 2008 he has also served as a Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Gomez received a B.A. degree in psychology from the State University of New York at Stony Brook and a Ph.D. in cognitive psychology from UC Berkeley.Manuelito Biag currently serves as the managing director of the Center for Postsecondary Innovation at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. In this role, he leads an international portfolio of projects aimed at increasing students' social and economic mobility. He also serves as senior associate and provides instruction, coaching, and research support in the area of networked improvement science. Prior, he served as senior researcher at the John W. Gardner Center for Youth and Their Communities at the Graduate School of Education at Stanford University. Biag earned a Ph.D. in education policy from UC Davis.David Imig holds emeritus status from the Teaching and Learning, Policy and Leadership program at the University of Maryland at College Park. He served as president and chief executive officer of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE) from 1980-2005. He is past chair of the National Policy Board for Educational Administration and the National Society for the Study of Education. He helped to establish the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED), serving as chair of the Board of Directors from 2010-2020. He serves as a senior fellow for the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. He holds three academic degrees from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and an honorary doctorate from Bridgewater State University in Massachusetts. He is the recipient of a Lifetime Achievement Award from the Universities Council for the Education of Teachers in the UK.Randy Hitz is Dean Emeritus of the College of Education at Portland State University. His higher education administrative experience spans three decades and includes dean positions at Portland State, the University of Hawaii at Manoa, and Montana State University. He currently serves as a Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching where he has been part of the iLEAD project for five years. Hitz served as Chair of the American Association for Colleges of Teacher Education and he chaired the Council for Accreditation of Education Professionals (CAEP) Commission as well as participating on CAEP’s Board of Directors. He earned a Ph.D. from Indiana State University.Steve Tozer is Professor emeritus and past university scholar in educational policy studies at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), where he was the founding director of the UIC Center for Urban Education Leadership. His collaborations with colleagues from UIC and Chicago Public Schools were continuously funded for 18 years by numerous foundations and the US Department of Education. He is the lead author of a textbook, School and Society, Historical and Contemporary Perspectives, 8th Edition (McGraw-Hill, 2020), and lead editor of The Handbook of Research in Social Foundations of Education (Routledge, 2011). Tozer earned his Ph.D. in educational policy studies from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

• Acknowledgments Foreword (Anthony Bryk)Introduction: Getting to Mutual–Benefit Partnerships (Louis M. Gomez and Manuelito Biag)Navigating the Tangles of Inter–Organizational Work “It Takes a Village” to Redress Inequities The Improvement Leadership Education and Development (iLEAD) Network Social Learning Theory and Culture Moving Beyond Transactional Relationships Trading Zones and Boundary Objects iLEAD’s Developmental Progressions Framework as a Boundary Object The Desiderata to Sustain Trading Zones Continuous Improvement Equity Coordination Capacity Building Conclusion References ContentsSECTION I: IMPROVEMENT METHODS, EQUITY, AND PROBLEMS OF PRACTICE IN LOCAL CONTEXT 1 Braiding Improvement into the Fabric of District Leadership Preparation and Practice: University of Virginia and Chesterfield County Public Schools (David Eddy-Spicer, Tinkhani Ushe White, and Michelle Beavers)Partnership Context University of Virginia Chesterfield County Public Schools An Educational Leadership Preparation Partnership Emerges The “Improvement Sandwich”: Cooperation into Coordination CCPS Strand: Focus on Programmatic Equity and School Improvement Planning UVA Strand: Redesigning the M.Ed. Program Field–Based Learning as Boundary Infrastructure Securing the Braid: Coordination into Collaboration Deepening Coordination Across School Levels and With Central Office in CCPS Collaborating across School Levels in CCPS Collaboration in Teaching and Learning at UVA Results: Organizational Practice and Partnership Conclusions and Lessons Learned CCPS Lessons Learned From Professional Development to Intrapreneurial Collective Learning UVA Lessons Learned A&S Faculty Collective Learning Partnership Lessons Learned: Co-Development of Leadership Pedagogies Essential Lessons of Partnership Work Questions for Discussion References 2 A University–School District Collaboration to Improve Equity– and Inquiry–Driven School Leadership: Fordham University and Bronx School Districts 9 and 11 (Margaret Terry Orr, Kris DeFilippis, Meisha Porter and Elizabeth Leisy Stosich)Context Problem Challenges, Solutions, and Evidence Development Advanced Leadership Preparation Redesigning Fordham’s EdD Program Creating a Bronx EdD Cohort in Equity–Focused Improvement Science Leadership Development Assistant Principal Math Networked Improvement Community Creating Positive Change through the Bronx Academic Response Team Initiative Principal Equity Improvement Networked Improvement Communities Conclusions and Lessons Learned Questions for Discussion References 3 Moving a Partnership from Itinerant to Integral: Using Improvement Science as a Catalyst for Change in Leadership Preparation & Induction: George Mason University and Fairfax County Public Schools (Samantha Viano, Farnoosh Shahrokhi, Regina Biggs, Natasha Saunders, Claire Silva, and Paige Whitlock)Context EDLE Program at GMU FCPS FCPS and GMU Partnering Prior to iLEAD Joining Together as iLEAD Partners Problems Stagnant Progress on School Improvement Mismatch Between EDLE Leadership Preparation and FCPS Practice Challenges, Solutions, and Evidence Improvement Science as Our Catalyzing Agent to Come Together Making Improvement Science EDLE’s Signature Pedagogy EDLE Faculty’s Introduction to Improvement Science Commitment to Improvement Science through Curriculum Development Diverse Approaches to Supporting the Use of Improvement Science in FCPS Professional Development Opportunities School–Based Leadership Induction Title I Comprehensive Needs Assessment Our Partnership Driven Initiative: Piloting an Improvement Science Approach to School Improvement Phase 1: Cultivating Cultures of Continuous Improvement, 2019–20 School Year Phase 2: Redressing Inequities, 2020–21 School Year Phase 3: Spreading What Works, 2021–22 School Year Showcasing Our Joint Efforts Synergy between Leadership Preparation and School Improvement Conclusions and Lessons Learned Starting with a Foundational Relationship to Build upon Garner Immediate Excitement about Improvement Science Leverage Eagerness and Capacity to Make Time for Collaboration Concluding Thoughts Attending to the Mission of our Partnership Work Questions for Discussion References 4 Using Improvement Science Principles for New–Teacher Support: High Tech High and High Tech High Graduate School of Education (Julia Jacobsen and Diana Cornejo-Sanchez)Context High Tech High & the High Tech High Graduate School of Education Problems Induction as a Lever for Teacher Retention Experimenting with Improvement in Teacher Induction Challenges, Solutions, and Evidence Challenge #1: Entry Planning that Incorporates Continuous Improvement Root Cause Analysis Plan-Do-Study-Act Cycles Sharing Learning Challenge #2: Operating in a One–Year Time Frame Challenge #3: Developing the Capacity of Improvement Coaches Deficit Thinking Compliance Orientation Improving Coach Development Facilitating Continuous Improvement for Equity Induction Improvement Coach Summit Impact Conclusions and Lessons Learned CI Can Be an Effective Framework for Adaptive Learning The Importance of Improvement Science in our own Program Processes Developing New Organizational Capacity for Continuous Improvement Teachable Moments How Might Improvement Processes Foster Connection and Belonging? How Can Both the Process and the Outcome of Improvement Efforts Support Equity? How Can We Develop Sustainable Improvement Efforts? How Can Improvement Science Help Organizations Grow Toward a Common Mission and Develop Concrete Understandings? Questions for Discussion References SECTION II: A NEW KIND OF PARTNERSHIP: CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AS AN ANIMATING FORCE 5 From a Transactional Relationship to a Transformational Partnership: University of Maryland College Park and Prince George’s County Public Schools (Primary authors: Segun Eubanks and Jean Snell; Additional contributors: Doug Anthony, Charoscar Coleman, Felice Desouza, Kara Miley-Libby, and Christine M. Neumerski)Context Not Your Father’s MOU The Back Story: People Building Trust, Institutions Leading Change A Change in Perspective PGCPS Initiates a Catalyst for Change—the EdD in School System Leadership UMD Initiates a Catalyst for Change: The CEii iLEAD Initiates a Catalyst for Change: Getting to the Work of Improvement Getting to Work: Our First Problem of Practice Problems A Shared Problem of Practice: Putting the “Improvement” in the School Improvement Process Leveraging the New Strategic Plan Challenges, Solutions, and Evidence Improvement Science as a Shared Methodology and “Solution” The Partnership “Solution” to the Challenge of District Capacity Building with SPPing Looking Forward to Future Work: The Launch of 2 Partnership Networked Improvement Communities Showing Evidence of Partnership Impact Evidence of Engagement and Commitment is Strong and Growing Growth in the iLEAD Developmental Progressions Emerging Data of Change in Systems Practice Lessons Learned Key Learning #1: Building Strong Relationships is the Starting Point Key Learning #2: Focus on Problems of Practice and Stay Prepared for Change Teachable Moments You’re Not Really Married if You Don’t Have the Paper Adapt, Don’t Abandon Shifts Happen Just Do Something References 6 Redesigning School Staffing Models through Team–Based Residencies: Arizona State University and Avondale Elementary School District (Betsy Hargrove, Christina Flesher, Nicole L. Thompson and Carole Basile)The Next Education Workforce: A Growing Idea Context: MLFTC and AESD Partnership Challenges, Solutions, and Evidence–Based Teacher Preparation Challenges for AESD Changes and Vision at MLFTC A Renewed Partnership Serendipity and Early Models Improvement Science: Planning, Doing, Studying Acting Residents Lead Teachers Site Lead Instructional Configurations Studying the Innovative Approach Lessons Learned Invested and Involved Leadership Systems and Structures Challenges of Teams Developmental Progressions and Growth in Collaboration Characteristics of Successful Teams Conclusion Afterword: Beyond Teacher Preparation Questions for Discussion References 7 District-University Partnerships for Continuous Improvement: How Can UM Help?: University of Mississippi and Oxford School District (Denise A. Soares, Mark E. Deschaine, W. Bradley Roberson, David Rock, Marni Harrington and Brian Harvey)Context: Beginning the Partnership Work The Achievement Gap Project Chronic Absenteeism PDSA Cycle Plan Do Study Act Building Capacity Spread and Scale Progress OSD Improvement Science Problems of Practice Passion Professional Development PDSA Cycle Plan Do Study Act Youth Truth Survey PDSA Cycle Plan Do Study Act UM–SOE Improvement Science Problems of Practice Graduate Studies Office PDSA Cycle Plan Do Study Act UM–SOE Dean’s Office Staff PDSA Cycle Plan Do Study Act UM–Developmental Progression The “How” of Partnerships (Partnership Mechanisms) Expectations, Sustainability, Norms & Routines Vision for the Future NCSUP Mission Lessons Learned Questions for Discussion References 8 Equity–Focused Improvement Science: Portland State University and Portland Public Schools (Susan P. Carlile, Deborah S. Peterson (co-first authors) and Tania McKey)Key Leaders Professor of Practice Susan Carlile Associate Professor Emerita Dr. Deborah S. Peterson Assistant Professor and Senior Director of Humanities Dr. Tania McKey Context of the PSU–PPS Partnership Portland State University Portland Public Schools Chronology of Improvement Science Efforts Networked Improvement Communities Partner Districts Newberg School District (NSD) Changes in the Partnership with the Newberg School District The New District Partnership: Portland Public Schools Challenges and Solutions Tools to Identify Next Steps Progress (Strengths) at the Partnership Level Progress (Strengths) at PPS Progress (Strengths) at the PSU Level Areas of Focus (Challenges) at the Partnership Level Areas of Focus (Challenges) in PPS Area of Focus (Challenge) in PSU Contextual Complexities Theory of Improvement Program Redesign Redesign PPS Practices for Principal Support Hire Scholarly Practitioners as Principal Preparation Cohort Leaders PPS Hires PSU Principal Licensure Completers Lessons Learned Next Steps Conclusion Questions for Discussion References SECTION III: PARTNERSHIPS AIN’T EASY: LEARNING FROM SHORT–TERM EFFORTS AND LONG–TERM SUSTAINABILITY 9 Shared Goals, Methods, and Learning: Partnering for Equity-focused, Systems-level Improvement: University of Denver and Denver Public Schools (Erin Anderson and Sandra Lochhead)Context Problem District Context Sustainable Improvement in the District Challenges, Solutions, and Evidence Shared Goals: Embedded Process Over External Program Where Did We Start? What Steps Happened along the Way? Where Are We Now? Shared Methodology: The Design Improvement for Equity (DI4E) Model Where Did We Start? What Steps Happened Along the Way? Where Are We Now? Shared Learning: Shared Research Agenda in a Research–Practice Partnership Where Did We Start? What Steps Happened Along the Way? Where Are We Now? Summary of Impact Conclusions and Lessons Learned Lesson 1: Be Clear About your “Why”—Your North Star Guides the Way Lesson 2: Create a Shared Theory of Improvement for your Partnership Work and Use It as a Map to Reach your Destination Lesson 3: Interdependence Was Essential to the Partnership and to Increasing Equity in the System Lesson 4: Be Disciplined about a Shared Learning Agenda or Research Plan Lesson 5: Despite Shared Values, Norms, and Goals, There Are Still Organizational Values and Conditions That Will Limit Systems Change Questions for Discussion References 10 Organizational Changes’ Impacts on University-District Partnership Development: University of South Carolina and K-12 School District in South Carolina (Kathleen M.W. Cunningham, Peter Moyi, and Barnett Berry)ContextUniversity of South Carolina College of Education Myrtle Creek School District The Partnership Between CoE/EDLP and MCSD Developing and Sustaining a District-University Partnership Two Partnership Frameworks: iLEAD’s Developmental Progressions and the Stage Model Developmental Progressions (Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 2020) Stage Model (Trubowitz, 1986) Partnership Journey Improvement Work Begins Establishment of a Core Improvement Team Organizational Progress: Partnership Organizational Progress: USC (i.e., CoE and EDLP) Challenges Challenge 1: Multiple, Evolving Goals Challenge 2: Logistics (Distance, Funding, Time–Competing Priorities) Challenge 3: Personnel and Leadership Transitions Challenge 4: COVID-19 Pandemic Conclusions and Lessons Learned Consideration 1: Clearly Defined Goals and Expectations Consideration 2: Core Partnership Team with Consistent Membership, Leadership, and Active Commitment Consideration 3: Lean on a Continuous Improvement Mindset to Reflect and Learn Questions for Discussion References 11Preparing Principals for Urban Schools: The Challenge of Equitable Outcomes at Scale: University of Illinois Chicago and Chicago Public Schools(Steve Tozer, Peter Martinez, Cynthia K. Barron, Shelby Cosner, Zipporah Hightower, Janice Jackson, David Mayrowetz, Sam Whalen, and Paul Zavitkovsky)Partnership Context: Chicago School Reform and UIC’s “Urban Mission” Chicago School Reform and State Legislation The Principal Preparation Program Design and Re-design: 11 Key Components Impact of Program Design and Re-design “We Want to Be as Good as People Think We Are” Using the Developmental Progressions to Tell the CPS/UIC Partnership Story From MOU to Vendor Contract A Missing Objective? Preparation of CPS Principal Supervisors (Network Chiefs) and Central Office Personnel A Next Edge of Growth Developing Capacity as a District Partner: the UIC EdD Program Elaborations and Qualifications on the IHE Narrative Vision, Systems, and Above All, People Our First Targeted Program Hire Building the Team Leadership Coaches as Boundary Spanners Creating “Boundary Objects” Next Edges of Growth Need for New Resources How Did the District Sustain Its Share of the Partnership for 20 Years across Nine CEOs? Conclusions and Lessons Learned 1. Equity 2. Partnership 3. Leadership Development: Vision, Systems, and People 4. Continuous Improvement Questions for Discussion References Conclusion:Evolving Tethers that Bind School District to University (Louis M. Gomez and Manuelito Biag)Tightly Tethered Mutuality Attending to the How of Partnerships The Role of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching Building a Strong Field: Infrastructure that Recasts Partnerships Creating Social Infrastructure for Collective Action Looking Forward: The Sustainability of Mutually Beneficial Partnerships for Leadership and Continuous Improvement References Reference Index About the Contributors

This volume brings together a dream author team—a mix of scholars and scholarly professionals with complementary research and practice-based expertise who have figured out how to work productively together in research-practice partnerships. Their contributions provide inspiration and concrete guidance for educational leaders in schools, districts, and institutions of higher education. The rich cases of higher education–school district partnership reveal innovative structures and collaborative practices that enable joint work to build capacity for continuous improvement in service of creating more effective and equitable systems. For all these reasons and more, this book is on the cutting edge of the continuous improvement movement in education and is a must-read for educators seeking to transform U.S. education and create equitable learning opportunities for students.