A societal sector perspective looks to a broad array of actors and agencies responsible for creating the community contexts that affect youth learning and development. We demonstrate the efficacy of this perspective by describing the Youth Data Archive, which allows community partners to define issues affecting youth that transcend specific institutional responsibilities and to ask and answer questions using combined administrative records in an effort identify opportunities for joint action.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BardachE. (1987). From practitioner wisdom to scholarly knowledge and back again. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 7(1), 188–199.
2.
BardachE. (1998). Getting agencies to work together. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
3.
BardachE. (2001). Developmental dynamics: Interagency collaboration as an emergent phenomenon. Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory, 11(2), 149–165.
4.
BrysonJ. M., CrosbyB. C., & StoneM. M. (2006). The design and implementation of cross-sector collaborations: Propositions from the literature. Public Administration Review, 66, 44–55.
5.
CastrechiniS. (2009). Educational outcomes for court-dependent youth in San Mateo County. Stanford, CA: John W. Gardner Center for Youth and Their Communities.
6.
CastrechiniS. (2011). Examining student outcomes across programs in Redwood City Community Schools. Stanford, CA: John W. Gardner Center for Youth and Their Communities.
7.
CookS. D. N., & BrownJ. S. (1999). Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organization Science, 10(4), 381–400.
8.
CrossR., & SproullL. (2004). More than an answer: Information relationships for actionable knowledge. Organization Science, 15(4), 446–462.
9.
FriedlandR., & AlfordR.R. (1991). Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices and institutional contradictions. In PowellW. W. & DiMaggioP. J. (Eds.), The new instiutitonalism in organizational analysis (pp. 232–263). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
10.
GurantzO. (2012a). Math articulation between the San Francisco Unified School District and the City College of San Francisco. Stanford, CA: John W. Gardner Center for Youth and Their Communities.
11.
GurantzO. (2012b). English articulation between the San Francisco Unified School District and the City College of San Francisco. Stanford, CA: John W. Gardner Center for Youth and Their Communities.
12.
HansenM. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 82–111.
13.
HansenM. T., MorsM. L., & LovasB. (2005). Knowledge sharing in organizations: Multiple networks, multiple phases. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 776–793.
14.
HumanS. E., & ProvanK. G. (2000). Legitimacy building in the evolution of small-firm multilateral networks: A comparative study of success and demise. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 327–365.
15.
HuxhamC., & VangenS. (2005). Managing to collaborate: The theory and practice of collaborative advantage. New York, NY: Routledge.
16.
John W. Gardner Center. (2012). Collaborative approaches to reducing absenteeism among K-12 students. Stanford, CA: John W. Gardner Center for Youth and Their Communities.
17.
LevinD. Z., & CrossR. (2004). The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of trust in effective knowledge transfer. Management Science, 50(11), 1477–1490.
18.
LondonR. A., & CastrechiniC. (2011). A longitudinal examination of the link between physical fitness and academic achievement. Journal of School Health, 81(7), 400–408.
19.
LondonR. A., & GurantzO. (2011). Community-based after school programs and youth physical fitness. Stanford, CA: John W. Gardner Center for Youth and Their Communities.
20.
MulliganM., & NadarajahY. (2008). Working on the sustainability of local communities with a “community-engaged” research methodology. International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 13(2), 81–94.
21.
PenuelW. R., FishmanB. J., ChengB. H., & SabelliN. (2011). Organizing research and development at the intersection of learning, implementation, and design. Educational Researcher, 40(7), 331–337.
22.
RoachC. M., & McLaughlinM. W. (2007). The Redwood City 2020 collaborative: Building capacity for community youth development. Stanford, CA: John W. Gardner Center for Youth and Their Communities.
23.
RommeA. G. L. (2003). Making a difference: Organization as design. Organization Science, 14(5), 558–573.
24.
RossL. F., LoupA., NelsonR. M., BotkinJ. R., KostR., SmithG. R.Jr., & GehlertS. (2010). The challenges of collaboration for academic and community partners in a research partnership: Points to consider. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: An International Journal, 5(1), 19–32.
25.
SanchezM. (2012). Truancy and chronic absence in Redwood City. Stanford, CA: John W. Gardner Center for Youth and Their Communities.
26.
ScottW. R., & MeyerJ. W. (1991). The organization of societal sectors: Perceptions and early evidence. In PowellW.W. & DiMaggioP. J. (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 108–140). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
27.
WeberE. P., & KhademianA. M. (2008). Wicked problems, knowledge challenges, and collaborative capacity builders in network settings. Public Administration Review, 68(2), 334–349.
