Developing and Sustaining K-12/Higher Ed Collaborations

byFred Waldstein

Irving R. Burling Chair in Leadership&

Professor of Political ScienceWartburg College

“Why should you be spending your time listening to this guy?”

• Longstanding interest in the topic of collaboration from a theoretical perspective.

• Experience consulting with the Corporation for National & Community Service on this topic.

• Personal engagement in multiple collaborations throughout professional career. Focus today is on Community Builders: Fostering Intergenerational Civic Engagement.

Why this project? • It focuses on a K-12/higher education

collaboration• It is in its 10th year• It has been recognized as a model program

– Milken Family Foundation Festival for Youth Award (2003)– Carnegie Foundation classification for “Community Engagement.” (2006) – President’s Higher Education Honor Roll for Community Service “with

distinction.” (2007-2009)– Washington Center Higher Education Civic Engagement Award (2009)– MacJannet Prize for Global Citizenship (2010)

Impacts• College students: 720 since 2001• 6th grade students: 1,300 since 2001 • Adult volunteers: 60 since 2001• Local community service project instances: 180 since

2004 • School supply kits (250), teacher resource kits (40)

and personal hygiene kits (500) prepared and taken to Nicaragua since 2006

• Service projects undertaken in Nicaragua: 4 since 2009

• Wartburg College students work with 6th grade students from the W-SR school district and St. Paul’s Lutheran School. Critical to the success of the project is the participation of adult volunteers who bring their perspectives on the value of community and our responsibility to it. These constituencies form “neighborhoods”. – 2 Wartburg students from a Leadership class– 1-2 adult volunteers– 6-8 6th grade students

• The neighborhoods meet 8-10 times during the year to discuss the importance of community, and engage in service projects.

• These “Community Builders” are individuals who learn from one another and help create a respect for community as necessary to the health and well-being of a democratic society.

“What do we mean by collaboration?”

Collaboration is a mutually beneficial and well-defined relationship entered into by two or more organizations to achieve a common goal. -The Amherst H. Wilder Foundation

• Communication—Activity that has as its purpose the sharing of information and nonmaterial resources.

• Coordination—Activity between two or more agencies or organizations that has as its purpose the prevention of duplication of efforts and assurance of provision of service.

• Cooperation—Activity between two agencies or sectors that aims at some integration of operations, while not sacrificing the autonomy of either party.

• Collaboration—A mutually beneficial and well-defined relationship which involves people from different agencies or sectors of the community joining together to achieve a common goal.

• Relationship (trust and respect)• Communication/interaction• Mission and goals• Planning • Administration• Authority and accountability • Leadership • Evaluation • Resources

Mattessich and Monsey (1992), Collaboration: What Makes It Work

Relationship

Interaction

Mission Goals

Planning

Admin.

Authority Accountability

Leadership

Evaluation

Resources

Communication                  

Coordination                  

Cooperation                  

Collaboration                  

• There are several important points to note about these factors: – The distinctions among these levels of

interaction are not mutually exclusive– The importance of factors may vary from one

factor to the next at any given point in time, – and the importance of factors may change over

time as the relationships among organizations evolve.

• The general framework is not intended as an evaluation tool ala collaboration is the superior set of relationships and all organizations should aspire to that end.

• Which category is most appropriate at any given point in time can only be decided by the partnering organizations.

Specific factors pertaining to a K-12/Higher Education Collaboration:

Community Builders

• Relationship: • Wartburg College works with both schools

(W-SR and St. Paul School) in a variety of capacities through a Schools Partnership Coordinator. This includes activities ranging from bringing students to campus for programs and college student engaged in student teaching.

• Communication:

The importance of establishing good communications is obvious; but at least as important is maintaining good communications. This has to be done intentionally through regularly scheduled meetings even if there is no agenda.

• Mission and goals:

Even with good relations and good communications, collaboration is not sustainable without the alignment of project mission and goals. These need to be clearly articulated.

• Planning:

All participants have to have a direct role in the planning because this builds ownership. One of the errors made in the planning of CB was that we dealt only with the principals and not the teachers. This severely hampered the CB project at its outset.

• Administration:

Clear administrative channels which integrate communications among all collaborating partners is critical.

• Authority, Accountability & Leadership:

Authority, accountability, and leadership are inextricably linked in this particular project. It is clear within each partnership and across partnerships who the accountable parties are, and they are members of the leadership team. Authority and accountability have to be consistently maintained.

• Evaluation:

Ongoing evaluation is part of the communication process. College students, teachers, and project administrators meet between town meetings to review what occurred, what was effective, and what needs attention.

• Resources:

This includes human as well as financial. All collaborating partners need to be clear about what the commitments are, and for how long.

• Autonomy• Compromise• Sharing resources• Accountability

Advantages of Collaboration• Broadening organizational perspectives and

attitudes about how to address problems; • Sharing changes in information technology

and transference; • Pressure from funders; • Cost sharing; • Making services more accessible and effective

to client groups.

Thank You

Questions & Comments