Creating Links between the School and the Community Beyond its Walls: What Teachers and Principals Do to Develop and Lead School-Community Partnerships
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is based on a qualitative case study examining the impact of social context on school-community partnerships. Sixty-four students and school personnel at one K-12 magnet school in southern California participated in 21 open-ended, 45-minute interviews. Observations were conducted, and documents were collected. Structural, cultural and agentive issues impacted partnership establishment. Teachers and the principal valued a school culture was conducive to community involvement. They collectively developed the school’s mission and vision with a focus on global citizenship, and initiated partnerships consistent with the vision. The stages of the partnership development process are discussed, and it is argued that they are broadly applicable to the establishment of collaborative activities. Funding and networks contributed to the professional development, resources and technology needed to support partnering. Findings extend research by identifying the educators’ leadership roles in partnering, and the structures and cultures that facilitate it.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.028 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it