Synthesis of Existing Knowledge and Practice in the Field of Educational Partnerships.

A brief history of business/education partnership development (BEPD), using the development of the Boston Compact in 1975 as an illustrative case study, highlights several points: partnerships embrace diverse territory and goals; a partnership is a process, not an event; a partnership is a relationship between institutions and people within those institutions; and the goals and form of a partnership change and evolve. Benefits of partnerships are considered in terms of gains for business, education, higher education, parents and students, and the community. Three typologies of BEPD are presented: (1) levels of involvement (incorporating three stages--support, cooperation, and collaboration); (2) partnership structure (simple, moderately complex, and complex); and (3) levels of impact (containing six categories--partners in special services, partners in the classroom, partners in teacher training and development, partners in management, partners in systemic educational improvement, and partners in policy). The first two typologies illustrate the relationship between partners and the structure of these relations, respectively. The third model focuses on goals and emphasizes the partnership's impact on the educational system, and is therefore considered the most useful of the three typologies. The six levels of impact categorized in the third typology serve as the framework for presenting numerous specific examples of partnerships corresponding to each level; this is followed by a section in which the following more generic elements of successful educational partnerships are outlined: top level leadership; grounding in community needs; effective public relations; clear roles and responsibilities; racial/ethnic involvement; strategic planning; effective management and staffing structure; shared decision-making/interagency ownership; shared credit/recognition; appropriate well-timed resources; technical assistance; formal agreements; action and frequent success; patience, vigilance, and increased involvement; and local ownership. A brief discussion of outcome measures and evaluations of the six types of partnerships conclude the paper. Endnotes and references are included, and a list of contacts for major partnerships discussed in this paper is appended. (RLC)