Although examples of collaborative education research continue to grow, research conducted by external researchers using school districts as study sites still occurs. This form of research can often recreate and amplify unequal power dynamics. [1] For example, a researcher may have a question or research study in mind and then work to gain access to a school or district to collect data to answer their research question. They gather primary research, access secondary data about students and staff, and in some cases, write deficit-oriented narratives that emphasize the shortcomings of a school or district, often without developing a relationship with the community in which they collected data. Along these lines, teachers and school staff are regularly told to use evidence-based practices and curriculum, but often do not have the resources or capacity to meaningfully engage with researchers in the research and development of these resources, which further perpetuates the one-sided nature of this work. [2] In addition, from our experience, when district leaders seek out external researchers to inform decisions about where and how to commit limited resources, they often fail to also tap into the expertise of their own staff members. Taken together, these examples highlight missed opportunities for collaborative learning, research, and development.

Research-practice partnerships (RPPs) aim to disrupt the unilateral decision-making process in research spaces by encouraging deep and sustainable partnerships between the practice side (for example, school districts) and the research side (for example, universities). For partners working in an RPP approach, they understand that district staff members have a wealth of research and lived experience which, if meaningfully incorporated into the rigorous methodology of research partners, can allow for research findings that can inform positive change in the district. District research leaders –those working in a research department or office at a school district– often play an important role in those RPPs that include districts as practice-side partners, while also being responsible for a plethora of tasks outside of the RPP context within the fast-paced and highly politicized environment of a school district. Being researchers but on the practice side, they are uniquely positioned to link research and practice, facilitating the use of research in district central offices (see more here). They thus also bring unique insights into and knowledge of an RPP’s ability to support the practice side in ways that are helpful and cognizant of the realities and challenges as well as goals and dreams of school districts and the teachers and students they serve.

In this article, we share perspectives on RPP work from two district research leaders, offering lessons and opportunities from our work in Chicago. We are Samhitha Krishnan and Sarah Dickson, members of the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) External Research Team (ERT) who are working to build bridges between external researchers and school spaces, and Erin Henrick, writing from the perspective of the evaluator of the Chicago Alliance for Equity in Computer Science (CAFÉCS) RPP. We draw on examples from the intentional efforts of the External Research Team’s initiatives to further develop the interactions between collaborative research partners and educators working in CPS. These examples demonstrate how district research leaders can support the development of RPPs that engage in equity-focused research rooted in school needs and balanced inquiry. Our thoughts and insights first surfaced during an in-depth interview with Erin as part of an evaluation of the CAFÉCS partnership, which we now expand on here. We recognize that we are only two district research leaders speaking from our distinct context of working within a very large urban school district, and thus can certainly not speak for all district research leaders. We do believe there is value in diving into our own experiences and thoughts more deeply, in the hopes of shining a spotlight on the meaning and value of RPP work from this vantage point. We hope you join us as we dive in!

CONTEXT

Chicago Public Schools is the fourth largest public school district in the country. We serve over 300,000 students in 636 schools. Almost 70% of our students are economically disadvantaged, and almost 90% of our students are students of color. We are a large district, a diverse district, and a segregated district. A tremendous amount of research has been conducted in CPS, often by researchers who do not look like the vast majority of our school community. While there is a growing commitment to acknowledge and address the negative impact of unequal power dynamics and distrust that exists between the researcher and those participating in research studies, much more work needs to be done. [3]

Today, we are lucky to have a strong foundation of research collaboration in Chicago, fueled by a desire to do better by our schools. We are challenged and supported by external researchers who share our desire to be present and responsive to school needs. The External Research Team serves as brokers between the district practitioners and researchers from outside organizations (mostly universities) and works to expand the boundaries of whose voices get to be included in decisions around research design and implementation. We have been working to shift away from the typical scope of interactions between the district research offices and external researchers, where the focus is solely on compliance: navigating the research review process and data use contracts required for project approval, and once approved, “the subsequent interaction between the district and the researchers usually is minimal,” resulting in researcher-school district relationships which are not particularly beneficial to either party. [4]

The External Research Team strives to integrate strategic thinking and actionable outcomes about district research priorities into our compliance-oriented roles. Our team sits within the Department of School Quality Measurement and Research, which allows us to connect with both data quality experts and policymakers focused on redesigning the school accountability policy. [5] School districts are often organized in hierarchical silos where decision-making powers are limited. In contrast, our team has been working to connect with subject matter experts across a range of central office staff to expand the number of practitioners engaging in research. A key part of this engagement has stemmed from developing a job position specifically designed for partnerships and engagement. As the research partnerships manager, Samhitha is able to dedicate targeted capacity toward the expansion of the research ecosystem within CPS by building out a network that consists of district- and network-staff, parents, and school leaders.

The rich research partnerships that CPS shares with both local and national institutions place us in a critical space of both engagement and questioning. While embracing the potential for research to meaningfully inform decision-making, we also recognize that the education research enterprise is fundamentally flawed in the ways that meaningful research knowledge is not always integrated into educational practice [6] and needs to be reconceptualized if we are to truly build equitable spaces that prioritize the needs of districts and the students they serve.

THE ROLE OF RESEARCH AT CHICAGO PUBLIC SCHOOLS

We thus began this work by examining and documenting our perspectives as district research leaders related to the role of research at the district, which has implications for how RPP partners work with us. We conceptualized our work as being equity-centered and vision-aligned research, which means connecting and learning from a radically inclusive range of experts to provide school communities with meaningful and accessible knowledge that empowers the district and its stakeholders to collectively build equitable learning environments for every student in every school. Within this conceptualization we describe the goal of research (equitable learning environments for all), how it should be carried out (collectively), and by whom (by a broad range of partners – the goal is not only to be inclusive but radically so). We believe good research is rooted in partnerships and communities and should ensure success for all, include diverse viewpoints, and respect and value lived experience. In addition, we make sure our work is aligned with district priorities by for example integrating aspects of the CPS Equity Framework into the systems and processes that drive our work. [7]

As previously mentioned, we place great importance on research and the impact it can have, wanting research to be applicable to the district, while knowing that the research done in our district also has potential for understanding our larger, sociopolitical climate. With that impact comes responsibility, because we believe research is always political: It is not an amorphous entity but has practical consequences on policy and, even more importantly, on the actual lived experiences of our students.

We believe that research is neither neutral nor to be taken lightly or as the magical solution. We often hear district and school leaders ask  “what does the research say?” with the goal of deciding the course of action based on that research. We would like to offer a caution here because what is often underneath that question is the belief that research is a magic wand, which is simply not true. Our perspective is that research doesn’t provide “the right answer.” We do not view data and methodologies as neutral or objective, and instead acknowledge the role of researcher positionality and interpretation. From this perspective, research provides the space to share learning and stories about complex issues in education. With this understanding also comes the responsibility to deeply consider what stories we need to explore; what stories we need to uncover; what stories we need to change. We believe this is important for all participants in an RPP to think about.

WORKING WITH RPP RESEARCH PARTNERS

From our experiences working with RPP research partners, we would like to highlight several strategies for working together and making it a valuable collaborative experience for all. 

First, regular meetings play a big part in getting this work done, though the participants as well as the content of these meetings have evolved for us over time. Our meetings are composed of representatives from eight RPP institutions, which we refer to collectively as our Collaborative Research Partners. While the representatives vary in their roles, from organization leadership/principal investigators, data archivists, and operations-based research facilitators, we work to invite an expansive group of individuals who are in turn well-connected within their own institutions. These gatherings, which began as monthly data-driven convenings, shifted into strategic discussions due to the pandemic and research being necessarily halted. The discussions evolved to questions such as, “Where are we going; what are we thinking about; what are we doing; and what are we aiming towards?” These questions in turn then lead to discussions about a theory of change and a theory of action about what a given RPP research project could do in the district, and to partners’ roles in supporting those theories of change and action. Conversations about secondary / administrative data are still an integral part of these meetings, but the focus is on large questions about access and sharing, as well as the development of shared metrics around the varied and complex data sets that exist within the district. 

The shift in the nature of these meetings was driven by two key RPP facilitation moves: 1) the External Research Team hosts biweekly office hours, where researchers can sign up for a short, 15-30 minute slot to tackle specific questions about data that may have otherwise taken up time during larger collective meetings and 2) the collaborative meetings are now managed by the Research Partners Manager and the embedded Data Liaison on our team which allows us to set a scope and sequence for partner engagement that prioritizes both data needs and strategic future planning. During these meetings, we set a clear objective and strive to gather meaningful feedback from our partners about External Research efforts. This feedback is then shared back with partners through improvements to our systems and methods of collaboration, such as a tracker we use to keep up with new and existing statements of work and the creation of best practice tools, such as a rubric for equity-centered research (forthcoming) and a set of considerations that we ask partners to review as they prepare to share any CPS-related findings in conferences or presentations.

We always strive for these meetings to be a space for those with differing viewpoints to contribute –this is essential to understanding what equity-centered research looks like– and to be a space for transparency as participants discuss issues such as funding or timelines. We create spaces for social engagement within the structure of Collaborative Research Partner meetings: Our quarterly research socials (NOT an oxymoron!) bring together district staff and external research partners to help build a sense of connectivity beyond the work. We openly share ongoing updates about changes in district leadership and forthcoming initiatives as appropriate, to allow each of our partners to get a clear sense of what types of research might be most beneficial for future projects. Additionally, each meeting ends with exit tickets for individual reflection for circumstances where a representative may need more time to reflect or does not feel like sharing out to the collective but can still give the External Research Team valuable feedback.

At our office, we emphasize the need to expand the definition of who gets to be a research partner. We want to move away from thinking of teachers and principals and students and families as research subjects and instead think of them as equally qualified research partners. What that requires, however, is engagement with all these different groups to understand what their needs and priorities are, what their level of knowledge is, and what skills they have or need or want. In other words, they need outreach, which takes time and resources in terms of both staff and money. It is a slow process, but one that is incredibly important for building the foundational relationships with our expansive research ecosystem.

In 2022, when Samhitha started her role as Research Partners Manager, we began a research use survey series to get a sense of how different groups affiliated with our office use and think about research in their work. In the first iteration of this survey, directed at CPS district Central Office staff, we found out that a majority of our nearly 250 respondents were interested in hearing directly from researchers. Thus, we began the “Conversations with Researchers” series, bi-monthly lunch-and-learn sessions where various research partners join CPS staff to present research findings on topics that are interesting and relevant to a wide range of individuals. Our largest sessions have had up to 100 attendees, yet still offered a low-stakes way to ask questions and get engaged with the work of external researchers. After each session, Samhitha gathers feedback that has spoken to the benefit of this low-lift engagement effort: district staff asked to be connected directly with researchers for further engagement, joined our Research Review Board committee, and even brought their own research questions to share with us! In summer of 2023, we shared a parallel survey with school leaders and found that many principals and assistant principals were engaged in research of their own and needed support from our team in navigating the research review process. We shared the findings from this survey with the CPS Department of Principal Quality, allowing the staff that work most closely with our school leaders to make decisions about how research findings are shared and presented. Currently, we are analyzing findings from a teacher research use survey (co-designed with and fielded by Dr. Eve L. Ewing) and working closely with the CPS Office of Family and Community Engagement (FACE) to create data literacy programming for a group of parent leaders who expressed interest in continuing to work with us. From each of these surveys, our goal is to implement actionable steps to not just hear from our broader school community but to support members of these groups in accessing research by addressing learning needs.

THE ROLE OF THE RPP

In order to examine our district research leader perspective on what makes productive and sustainable RPPs, we offer a brief example of our work with the Chicago Alliance for Equity in Computer Science (CAFÉCS), one of the RPPs we are participating in and working with at the External Research Office. In this example, we hope to highlight key facets of district-focused RPP work. 

To us, CAFÉCS is an example of an RPP that fits a rigorous definition of good partnership, for several reasons. First, the RPP research is co-designed closely with district staff to meet the existing needs and inform strategy. The RPP engages in a problem solving cycle oriented around an issue facing the Department of Computer Science [8]. The research plan is adjusted based on what the district is needing and wondering about, rather than on some strict predetermined plan. For example, when staff in the Department of Computer Science realized that there was a racial gap in terms of who was taking computer science courses and who wasn’t, CAFÉCS immediately focused on supporting the district in addressing this problem, asking questions about the kinds of professional learning, resources, and other supports for teachers that might make sense and engaging in pilot projects to address this need. The CAFÉCS team prioritizes the district’s needs first, so the grants that they receive feel invisible to the district research department. That is actually remarkable and very different from what districts usually see when they partner with external researchers.

Secondly, the above-mentioned research on professional learning for teachers showcases another feature we’d like to note about the partnership: The way the partnership thinks about connections across the different parts of the educational system. Instead of only focusing on student outcomes, CAFÉCS looks much further upstream at what generates those student outcomes, considering classroom and school practices that inform the student experience. The RPP’s operational thinking goes beyond the surface of a school’s need to offer computer science and improve student outcomes; it extends to building teachers’ capacities to effectively teach computer science to all students. CAFÉCS is not just thinking about programs for students, but also about the needs of the teachers and the schools, as well as the resources required to meet those needs.

Lastly, CAFÉCS is committed to bringing teachers into the design team and the conversations and also includes other members of the the community, including students, into their research space. For example, each year, CAFÉCS holds an in-person symposium that celebrates and includes the voices of students, teachers, district staff, university partners, and researchers in the joint effort to ensure that all students in CPS participate in rigorous and engaging computing experiences. [9] At the symposium, graduate research fellows present findings from summer research projects informed by district questions, alongside CPS students and their teachers telling their stories. As attendees of this event, the External Research Team saw the ways in which CAFÉCS meaningfully brought together all of these communities, aligning with our vision for research that invests in the next generation of researchers and their capacity to engage in collaborative research, and mentoring graduate students into creating the type of research that is directly applicable to the district needs. This approach helps build much-needed capacity in a sustainable and engaged way.

CHALLENGES OF DOING RPP WORK IN A DISTRICT RESEARCH OFFICE

We close by turning to the challenges we are still facing in doing this kind of RPP work in a district research office. Our biggest struggle in our role is the space between strategy and vision and implementation – how do we get to where we want to go when the relational and operational aspect of this work takes significant time and the district team is small? Put simply, right now we don’t have the resources we need to fully implement our vision of equity-centered and visionaligned research. With limited resources and capacity, it has been hard to demonstrate the value-add of the strategic work that our team is doing and the value-add of the partnership work that we are doing with our partners. To get more resources, we need to be able to show how partnership translates into value for the district, but without sufficient resources, it becomes harder to do so.

One step toward this effort is a recent collaborative grant with our partners at NORC to help us document key tools in democratizing research use at Chicago Public Schools to allow both district staff and researchers to better integrate their work. RPPs can and should play a key role in helping district research teams disseminate not only research findings, but information about district processes, to a wider audience. We encourage other district research offices to document and share useful practices that support fundamental shifts in ways of working towards equity-centered and vision-aligned research. The NNERPP community can be a source of support and a resource for district research offices to learn from other teams engaged in these efforts. 

CONCLUSION

To us, if done right, RPPs offer a promising way forward in doing equity-centered research rooted in school needs. We think district research leaders play an important role in supporting these efforts, but this requires new ways of doing business. We have shared our journey here to change the ways in which the external research office engages and supports research-side and practice-side RPP teams. We have found that this work takes time and comes with many challenges, including the need for all partners to have a balanced view of what research is and is not, and the need for all partners to embrace ways of working together that are not extractive but truly rooted in partnership and acknowledgment of everyone’s expertise. When these basic conditions are fulfilled, our own experience shows us that partnering with external researchers in an RPP can be truly beneficial for districts and the communities they serve.

Samhitha Krishnan is Research Partners Manager at Chicago Public Schools; Sarah Dickson is Director of External Research at Chicago Public Schools; and Erin Henrick is President of Partner to Improve and Co-Director of the Nashville Partnership for Educational Equity Research (PEER).

REFERENCES

[1] Chicago Beyond. (2018). Why Am I Always Being Researched? Chicago Beyond. Accessed at https://chicagobeyond.org/researchequity/

[2] Rosman, T., & Merk, S. (2021). Teacher’s Reasons for Trust and Distrust in Scientific Evidence: Reflecting a “Smart But Evil” Stereotype? AERA Open, 7. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584211028599

[3] Chicago Beyond. (2018). Why Am I Always Being Researched? Seven Inequities Framework. Chicago Beyond. Accessed at https://chicagobeyond.org/researchequity/

[4] Henrick, E., Munoz, M. A., & Cobb, P. (2016). A Better Research-practice partnership . Kappan Online. https://kappanonline.org/henrick-munoz-cobb-better-research-practice-partnership-collaboration/ 

[5] Chicago Public Schools. (2024). District Policy for Continuous Improvement and Data Transparency. https://www.cps.edu/sites/cps-policy-rules/policies/300/302/district-policy-for-continuous-improvement-and-data-transparency/ 

[6] National Research Council. (2003). Strategic Education Research Partnership.

Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/10670.

[7] Chicago Public Schools. (2020). CPS Equity Framework: Creating and sustaining equity at the individual, school, and district level. https://www.cps.edu/globalassets/cps-pages/sites/equity/cps-equity-framework.pdf

[8] Henrick, E., Schmidt, D., McGee, S., Rasmussen, A. M., Dettori, L., Greenberg, R. I., … Yanek, D. (2024). Assessing the Impact of an RPP on a Large Urban School District: The Case of CAFÉCS. Peabody Journal of Education, 99(3), 380-394. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2024.2357040

[9] Dettori, L., McGee, S., Brylow, D., Scianni, R., Henry, L., Desire, P., Moore, T., Lynch, G., Na, C., Dumbleton, K., Kirakosian, A., Kelleigh, W., & Beck, K. (2023, August). Measuring Computer Science Success in Chicago Public Schools and Milwaukee Public Schools [Webinar]. Chicago, IL: The Learning Partnership. https://doi.org/10.51420/report.2023.9

Suggested citation: Krishnan, S., Dickson, S. & Henrick, E. (2024). Equity-Centered and Vision-Aligned Research: Strategies of a District Research Office to Build Better Research Collaborations. NNERPP Extra, 6(3), 8-16. https://doi.org/10.25613/C9SZ-HZ43