Utilizing Participatory Action Research to Foster Effective Family/School Collaboration at an Urban PreK-8 Catholic School

A scoping review: The utility of participatory research approaches in psychology

“…About 20% of the studies we reviewed offered ideas about participatory approaches to implementation. These included: The creation of “user groups” to advise ongoing program changes (e.g., Harrison & Brandling., ); participant‐involved outreach strategies (e.g., Klemm et al, ); the inclusion of participants in program design and development (e.g., Bogart & Uyeda, ; Dworski‐Riggs & Langhout, ; Ward & Bailey, ; Weeks et al, ), program delivery (e.g., Baptiste et al, ; English et al, ; Noel, Rost, & Gromer, ), or program evaluation and communication (e.g., Checkoway & Richards‐Schuster, ; Shriberg et al, ; Trauth‐Nare & Buck, ); and engaging service providers in program implementation (e.g., Kegeles et al, ; L'Etang & Theron, ; Morisky et al, ; Rhodes et al, ). For example, in their discussion of the youth‐focused Lifting New Voices project, Checkoway and Richards‐Schuster () explained that “each [participating] organization…formulated a plan, formed a steering committee, hired a youth organizer, and established a structure for implementation” (p. 28).…”

Promoting Educators’ Use of Culturally Responsive Practices: A Systematic Review of Inservice Interventions

“…Qualitative analysis. The remaining eight studies qualitatively examined the impact of inservice interventions through ethnographic fieldwork, case study analyses, grounded theory methods of analyzing open-ended survey responses, and document review (Eberly, Joshi, Konzal, & Galen, 2010;Fickel, 2005;Hammerness & Matsko, 2013;Jones et al, 2006;McAllister & Irvine, 2002;McCormick, Eick, &Womack, 2013;Shriberg et al, 2012) or employed mixed methods (using quantitative descriptive data to support case study findings; Ryan et al, 2007). These studies yielded meaningful and useful knowledge regarding inservice approaches to promote CRP in schools, which we discuss in greater depth in the Aim 3 results.…”

“…External auditors/peer debriefing. Four articles reported use of external auditors or a peer debriefing process, such as having a colleague or "outsider" provide critical feedback on interpretations and analyses (Fickel, 2005;McAllister & Irvine, 2002;McCormick et al, 2013;Shriberg et al, 2012).…”

Untitled

“…Collaboration endeavors in the public sphere have been shown to have the potential to yield positive effects (e.g., Daka-Mulwanda, Thornburg, Filbert & Klein, 1995;Nolan, Cartmel, & Macfarlane, 2012;O'Brien et al, 2009;Purcal, Muir, Patulny, Thomson, & Flaxman, 2011;Sanders, 2001). Collaborative partnerships between Catholic schools and universities have been developed to strengthen pedagogical practices for ethnically and linguistically diverse children, as well as those with learning differences (Borrero, 2010;Henk, Maney, Baxter, & Montejano, 2013;Montejano, 2010;Scanlan & Zehrbach, 2010;Shriberg et al, 2012;Whipp & Scanlan, 2009). However, no known study has examined the coordination and integration of early childhood services between Catholic schools and Catholic Charities, nor their funding and staffing needs.…”