RPP efforts, especially in early phases, typically require large time commitments to building, developing, and strengthening relationships with partners before projects can truly launch. For early career academic scholars that are on the tenure track, these types of activities may not be aligned with university-based tenure guidelines, which often require a minimum publication record in peer-reviewed academic journal articles in order to be awarded tenure. These two goals, RPP relationship development and the pursuit of tenure, may thus pose a challenge for early career scholars who wish to engage in RPP work since both aims require a lot of time for activities that may be distinctly different. At NNERPP, we have often fielded questions on navigating this possible tension, with this most recent question contributed by a member leading a newly launched RPP: What are some strategies for early career academic scholars to demonstrate progress on a first year RPP — especially when publishing carries so much weight but launching an RPP is typically not as readily recognized?  

In this “How To” article, we share wisdom from several NNERPP members and friends who have been on this journey to provide concrete examples and helpful strategies in response to this important question. 

Joining us for this conversation are Hilda Borko from Stanford University and part of the Stanford-San Francisco Unified School District Partnership; Sarah Lenhoff from Wayne State University and principal investigator for the Detroit Education Research Partnership; David Naff from Virginia Commonwealth University and associate director of the Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium; Emily Ozer from the University of California, Berkeley; Nicole Patton Terry from Florida State University and founding director of The Village at FCRR; Maggie Reeves from Georgia State University and founding senior director of the Georgia Policy Labs; and Erica Van Steenis from the University of California, Irvine and part of the Orange County Educational Advancement Network.

Q1: WHAT ARE SOME EFFECTIVE STRATEGIES EARLY CAREER TENURE-TRACK SCHOLARS CAN EMPLOY TO DEMONSTRATE PROGRESS ON A FIRST YEAR RPP?

Our respondents have several pieces of advice to share in response to this question, based on their own experiences. As a basic rule, Erica recommends documenting all activities taking place during the first year of the RPP, including the less tangible work involved in finding partners and supporting initial relationship building exercises. This also includes documenting any data collected during that first year. On the topic of data, Sarah similarly recommends prioritizing data sharing by securing a multi-year data-sharing or data access agreement with a school or district in that first year. Sarah also points to the importance of demonstrating support from the practice-side partner and suggests that a letter of support for the partnership from a leader of the partner organization on the practice side can be a useful strategy.

Additionally, several respondents share strategies that may help support initial research activities within the RPP and may even yield publications, which might help with tenure processes. One way to approach this, as Sarah shares, is to get one smaller scale study out there to start with, for example by publishing a small-scale descriptive study on the primary problem the partnership will be working on, “maybe even using publicly available data to start.” Similarly, Emily shares that it has been helpful for her to publish even when there aren’t any research findings to discuss yet by focusing on conceptual papers, which may include measurement development and model development papers that can all be published even when the RPP work itself is still in its infancy. “For example, my first publication when starting [my] new YPAR partnership was about dissemination/capacity building,” Emily says. Similarly, Hilda also recommends focusing on aspects of developing and nurturing partnerships in early publications, including the negotiation of roles and responsibilities between partners, the creation of infrastructures that support RPP work, and the development and co-design of professional learning experiences. Hilda points out that the options for publishing these kinds of papers are increasing as more journals are becoming interested in publishing about RPPs. Erica adds that another strategy to increase the amount of RPP work and writing that can be done in the first year is to link other efforts to RPP work as well, such as connecting course papers and department presentations to the partnership work. When engaging students in your partnership work, Nicole adds that this should go on your CV to build your tenure case. For example, whether you served as a mentor or sponsor or on doctoral degree dissertation committees, all of these demonstrate how you are helping build the next generation of scholars.

On the other hand, Emily also recommends continuing to do other, non-RPP work at the same time. This is helpful for growing early career scholars’ publication portfolios. Specifically, Emily recalls collaborating with bigger projects that had existing datasets while building her partnerships as an assistant professor, “so that I wasn’t dependent on the challenges and timing of the partnered work”. Nicole agrees, saying early career scholars should do “both-and” and “get credit for it all.”  Emily shares another tip here: Keep in mind tenure and promotion guidelines when deciding what other work to pursue. For example, in order to demonstrate independence, she made sure that those bigger projects were not with her grad school mentors. 

Another good way to demonstrate progress is to attend and present at conferences, Erica, Nicole, and Hilda share. In particular, presenting at conferences that publish proceedings can be helpful for building early career scholars’ publication records, as Hilda shares. Nicole says that presenting in both academic and non-academic spaces is beneficial. It can also be helpful to connect with others in the RPP space to share work, Erica adds, including with organizations like NNERPP.

Finally, it is helpful to get started with securing funding – at least on a small scale. Sarah recommends trying to secure a small seed grant for the partnership or for one project the partnership will be working on during the first year, which will go a long way in demonstrating progress. At the same time, Nicole reminds us to keep in mind that funding is absolutely necessary to sustain RPP work but not to begin: “It is not what brings us to the table and it’s not what keeps us there.”

While current university incentive structures do require early career scholars to approach early partnership work in these strategic ways, David reminds us to not lose track of why we are engaging in RPP work in the first place: Always start with the needs of the practitioner in mind, never impose a research agenda on the practice side partner, prioritize relationship and trust building, and “do not take the partnership for granted.”

Q2: MORE GENERALLY, HOW CAN UNIVERSITIES BETTER SUPPORT RPP WORK? WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS?

Not surprisingly, our respondents agree that major changes need to happen in the tenure and promotion guidelines at universities in order to support RPP work, as these are currently “the biggest barrier to supporting RPP work at the university level” (David). David elaborates: “It can be difficult to attract committed faculty members to participate in RPP projects because it is not always clear that their effort will translate into a higher likelihood of achieving tenure when they are up for promotion.” Erica adds that current university tenure and promotion guidelines represent “antiquated ways of thinking about research.” Necessary changes include moving away from the focus on peer-reviewed publications only, as Emily suggests, and recognizing RPP work in tenure and promotion reviews, as Sarah suggests, adding that establishing a formal research partnership should “count” as at least two peer reviewed publications in tenure and promotion reviews. David agrees, saying that universities must place higher value on community engaged scholarship and impact on practice. David adds that universities should reconceptualize the meaning of rigor by acknowledging that work produced in RPPs is arguably just as rigorous as peer reviewed national scholarship “due to the accountability systems and corresponding scrutiny by partnering stakeholder groups from the practice side”. Additionally, RPP work has a more immediate and intentional impact on practice – something universities should value highly. 

In fact, Sarah reminds us that many universities do have a focus on their local communities and regions and thus should recognize RPP work as core to the university’s mission. At the same time, universities must be cognizant of the growth timelines of RPPs: Partnerships are slow to start, but they also “tend to expand opportunities for research exponentially as time goes on.” Importantly, universities also have to be aware of and reckon with their history as it relates to the community where they are located, Nicole points out. If done well, RPP work can lead to the kind of collaborative research that can restore ties with the community and position the community as an equal partner – but first, universities must acknowledge their often harmful histories. 

What needs to happen, Emily says, is culture change. If universities create a culture that acknowledges the benefits of and actually supports RPP work, then the junior faculty members “can have their paths to collaboration smoothed,” benefiting the overall RPP enterprise and university research portfolios. Examples of university supports would be training for faculty on RPP methods and classes and programs for students on RPPs, Erica says. Graduate student milestones could also be organized in a way that accounts for longer timelines of building relationships and research partnerships. Emily adds that other practical support with RPP start-up issues would help tremendously as well, such as those related to MOUs, data-sharing, or funding for graduate students. Maggie agrees that supports that help reduce barriers for early career faculty to engage in RPPs are critical, including freeing up time for faculty to engage in RPP work through leadership support and financial resources. Maggie emphasizes that these types of institutional changes require changed structures and systems, and “therefore aren’t quick fixes”. 

However, there are ways to jumpstart such institutional change: Maggie describes the creation of an Engaged Research Competition (ERC) at Georgia State University through an Institutional Challenge Grant awarded to Georgia Policy Labs by the William T. Grant Foundation, Spencer Foundation, and Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. As part of the award and the ERC, the university is expected to actively reduce barriers for early career faculty to engage in RPPs, for example through freeing up time for faculty and graduate students to engage in RPP work and through providing funds that are explicitly intended to fund early-stage RPP work such as building trust through meetings with stakeholders, relationship building activities, and generating data sharing agreements. Hilda shares how the Stanford Graduate School of Education (GSE) provides funding to faculty and graduate students each year who are involved in two RPPs between Stanford GSE and local school districts: the Stanford-San Francisco Unified School District Partnership and the Stanford-Sequoia K-12 Research Collaborative. Funding is competitive, and proposals are reviewed by a committee that includes both Stanford researchers and district personnel. Through these types of intentional efforts, cultural and institutional changes may very well be possible for universities.

IN CONCLUSION

If you are an early career scholar at a university who is passionate about or currently engaging in the difficult work of launching an RPP – we hope these strategies are helpful to you. To everyone: Please reach out and let us know if there are additional ways NNERPP can support this important pathway to RPPs.

Suggested citation: NNERPP (2022). Early Career Academic Scholars + RPPs: How To Support Early Stage RPP Work. NNERPP Extra, 4(2), 16-18.