Summary of a Community Involvement Article

This paper was written by Valli, Stefanski, and Jacobson in 2016.

The report’s authors conducted study to produce a report that is supported by facts. The piece will be summarized in the paper, along with some helpful leadership skills you can learn from it. In addition, the paper will include the section’s study findings. The article’s advantages and disadvantages will also be addressed. The paper will conclude by capturing ramifications for subsequent action in relation to this report.

According to the article, partnerships between neighboring communities and schools contribute towards improving the state of the schools, student learning as well as strengthening the relationship bond between the school and the neighborhoods. The authors also state these partnerships supports the expansion of the traditional educational mission of various learning institutions. According to the purpose, the goal of the school was to provide both social and health services for students and their families’ members. Besides, the mission involved the broader community. Typically, school–community partnerships emerged from a particular need in the community which necessitated the involvement of students and school staff. Therefore, the type of relationship between the two parties differs regarding purposes, structure, processes. This article is the development of the authors’ previous work which they did in 2013. In their earlier research, they came up with a typology to examine closely numerous partnerships between schools and the community (Valli, Stefanski, & Jacobson, 2013). In the previous literature, the authors established four increasingly comprehensive and complex school-community partnership models. Similarly, in this article, the authors reexamined their earlier research. However, this article focuses on the role played by the family in the partnership models. Besides, the report discusses the implications for generative family–school–community partnerships. According to their literature analysis, there is variation in the role performed by parents and families across the four partnership models. Unlike in most of the current literature regarding dichotomy of family involvement versus family engagement, the article establishes eight different methods of envisioning and enacting. Moreover, this article gives a clear image of the roles as a guide to policies and practices to strengthen the position played by family in the school–community partnership.

This article has benefits to leadership performance.

First, the article makes the leader understand the relationship existing between school and community to be able to direct the outreach programs. A clear understanding of school-community partnership forms the basis of good leadership. Also, through the article, an individual can understand various partnership models which exist in school-community partnership. These models play a significant role while leading these groups to undertake a particular partnership project in the society (Nonprofits, n.d).

The Research Findings

The article’s research findings give a broader understanding of possible types and dimensions of partnerships between school and community. Besides, the paper provides implications for relationships between school and family. Also, carefully delineated analysis has been conducted to determine reasons for varying school-family relationships across different models. According to the findings, clarifying responsibilities and power-sharing boundaries plays a significant role in partnership building. Besides, more complex partnership forms need a radical change of both norms and structure of the traditional school. However, the research findings on these four models fail to prescribe the role played by the family in this relationship. Besides, this review establishes the duties of families and parents in school–community partnerships emerged a long time ago. This evolution took place together with raising complexity regarding the purpose and requirements of each model. However, the findings show that continuum only captures examples of currently existing projects without giving prescriptions regarding the incorporation of families. The limited number of cases provided in the four groups proposes the requirement and potential for partnerships to pay more attention to the inclusion of families and parents.

Strengths of the Article

The article has various strengths that make it a good reference. First, the report is based on research findings rather than on mere personal opinion. Besides, the paper has cited other author’s work to support their conclusions. For instance, the authors of this article have sourced information from Dewey’s report stating the ancient society viewed neighboring schools as the community’s primary institution (Dewey, 1902). Also, to Dewey’s article, the article has used only credible sources for more information. That is, the authors have just used support information from books, peer-reviewed journal articles, and educational websites.

Weaknesses of the Article

However, despite having various strengths, this article has some weaknesses. First, the research methodology used during research does not give convincing results. Much of information used in the section was obtained from secondary sources and therefore prone to biases. Second, the researchers did not use the appropriate methods to gather primary data from the research target population. That is, no interview or questionnaire administered to the target population. Besides, the researchers failed to define the sample population for the investigation. Thirdly, the researchers did not conduct a test study to establish the reliability of research instruments.

The Implications for Future Actions Related to this Standard

This article leaves one with various questions regarding the future unanswered. First, the paper has shown the difference between current and traditional partnerships between the community and the schools. However, the next relationships between the two groups are not known since the models are likely to change. Besides, future researchers might not care about the partnerships and its current standards.

Conclusion

This article has captured the partnerships existing between the community and the surrounding schools. The authors have elaborated these relationships using various models. Just, like traditional communities, modern society view schools as its central unit. Besides, the article includes previous literature of the authors’ in which they established four increasingly comprehensive and complex school-community partnership models. That is the authors have reexamined their earlier research in this report. However, in this paper, they concentrate on the role played by both the parents and family in the partnership models. Besides, the article makes a step further to discuss the implications for generative family–school–community partnerships. Nonetheless, the section establishes variations in the role performed by parents and families across the four models of partnership. However, the article has various strengths. First, the authors based the paper on research findings which makes it a credible source for reference. Besides, the report has used information from other researchers on the same topic. In contrary, the article has some weaknesses. Firstly, most information is gathered from secondary sources and therefore likely to be biased. Secondly, the investigators did not define research population sample to use during the investigation.

References

Dewey, J. (1902). The school as a social center. The Elementary School Teacher, 3(2), 73–86.

Nonprofits, S. Partnerships: Frameworks for Working Together.

Stefanski, A; Valli, L & Jacobson, R. (2016). Beyond Involvement and Engagement: The Role of the Family in School-Community Partnerships. School Community Journal, retrieved from

Valli, L., Stefanski, A., & Jacobson, R. (2013, April). School–community partnerships: Typologizing the research. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.