In literature about P–20 partnerships, Professional Development Schools (PDSs) are a focal point. PDSs play a role in initiatives pertaining to clinically based teacher education and equity in P–12 education. Claims about PDSs’ impacts are widespread. PDS research, however, has been hampered by a conspicuous absence of common frameworks for contextualizing or evaluating evidence regarding PDSs’ effectiveness. In response, the authors of this review synthesized a descriptive framework through a document analysis of PDS descriptions from 223 journal articles published from 2008 to 2022. The framework established three domains of PDS characteristics: startup components, organizational components, and partnership core components. Within-domain analysis suggested that while localized approaches are a hallmark of PDSs, PDSs’ patterned aspects are transferable and can be systematically described. Concluding with implications for PDSs and other partnerships, this article’s key contribution is an intellectual foundation for more systematic future research surrounding PDSs and similar P–20 partnerships.
Abdal-HaqqI. (1998). Professional Development Schools: What do we know? What do we need to know? How do we find out? Who do we tell? [Paper presentation] National Professional Development School Conference, Baltimore, MD. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED425142.pdf
2.
Abdal-HaqqI. (1999). The Professional Development School movement: Is there a clear destination? Purpose, responsibility, and accountability in PDS work. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED435593.pdf
3.
Academy for Educational Development. (1985). Teacher development in schools: A report to the Ford Foundation. Author.
4.
AlexanderP. A. (2020). Methodological guidance paper: The art and science of quality systematic reviews. Review of Educational Research, 90(1), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319854352
BreaultD. A. (2013). The challenges of scaling-up and sustaining professional development school partnerships. Teaching and Teacher Education, 36, 92–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.07.007
9.
BreaultR. A. (2010). Distilling wisdom from practice: Finding meaning in PDS stories. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 399–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.04.013
10.
BrindleyR.LessenE.FieldB. E. (2008). Toward a common understanding: Identifying the essentials of a professional development school. Childhood Education, 85(2), 71–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.2009.10523066
11.
BurnsR. W. (2012). Conceptualizing supervision in the professional development school context: A case analysis [Doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University]. https://etda.libraries.psu.edu/catalog/14536
12.
BurnsR. W.BakerW. (2016). The boundary spanner in professional development schools: In search of common nomenclature. School-University Partnerships, 9(2), 28–39. https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/esf_facpub/199
13.
ButvilleD.HanrahanS.WolkenhauerR. (2021). Prepared to take responsibility: Practitioner inquiry for social justice in a Professional Development School partnership. School–University Partnerships, 14(3), 167–190.
14.
Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy. (1986). A nation prepared: Teachers for the 21st century. Author.
15.
CoburnC. E.PenuelW. R. (2016). Research–practice partnerships in education: Outcomes, dynamics, and open questions. Educational Researcher, 45(1), 48–54. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X16631750
16.
Cochran-SmithM.LytleS. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. Teachers College Press.
17.
DavisB.SumaraD. (2016). Complexity and education: Inquiries into learning, teaching, and research. Routledge.
FarrellC. C.PenuelW. R.AllenA.AndersonE. R.BohannonA. X.CoburnC. E.BrownS. L. (2022). Learning at the boundaries of research and practice: A framework for understanding research–practice partnerships. Educational Researcher, 51(3), 197–208. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X211069073
20.
FerraraJ.JacobsonR. (Eds.). (2019). Community schools: People and places transforming education and communities. Rowman & Littlefield.
21.
GarinE.BurnsR. W. (Eds.). (2020). Clinically based teacher education in action: Cases from professional development schools. Information Age Publishing.
22.
GarinE.Yendol-HoppeyD. (2023). Is the past prologue? Part 1: A qualitative analysis of PDS dissertation research focused on learning. School–University Partnerships, 16(1), 18–39. https://www.emerald.com/insight/1935-7125.htm
23.
Georgia State University. (n.d.). College of education & human development [Conference session]. AERA-Georgia State University Education Research Conference. https://education.gsu.edu/aera-pds/
24.
GoodladJ. I. (1990). Teachers for our nation’s schools. Jossey-Bass.
25.
GuhaR.HylerM. E.Darling-HammondL. (2016). The teacher residency: An innovative model for preparing teachers. Learning Policy Institute. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED606443
26.
HarkavyI.HartleyM.HodgesR. A.WeeksJ. (2013). The promise of University-Assisted Community Schools to transform American schooling: A report from the field, 1985-2012. Peabody Journal of Education, 88(5), 525–540. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2013.834789
27.
HeersM.Van KlaverenC.GrootW.Maassen van den BrinkH. (2016). Community schools: What we know and what we need to know. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1016–1051. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315627365
Holmes Group. (1990). Tomorrow’s schools: Principles for the design of professional development schools. Author.
30.
LevineM. (1998). Designing standards that work for professional development schools. In LevineM. (Ed.), Designing standards that work for professional development schools (pp. 1–10). National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED426052.pdf
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M.SaldañaJ. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). Sage.
33.
National Association for Professional Development Schools (NADPS). (2008). What it means to be a professional development school. www.napds.org
34.
National Association for Professional Development Schools (NADPS). (2021). What it means to be a professional development school: The nine essentials (2nd ed.). [Policy statement]. https://napds.org/nine-essentials/
NeapolitanJ. E.TunksJ. L. (2009). Exploring the “development” in professional development school research. Action in Teacher Education, 31(3), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2009.10463523
RutterA. L. (2005). A PDS in name only. In GuadarramaI. N.RamseyJ. M.NathJ. L. (Eds.), Professional development schools: Advances in community thought and research (pp. 299–314). Information Age Press.
42.
RuttenL. (2021). A case study of inquiry as stance among teacher candidates conducting practitioner inquiry in a professional development school [Doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University]. https://etda.libraries.psu.edu/files/final_submissions/24070
43.
SmithE. E. (2021). P–20 partnerships: A critical examination of the past and the future. Rowman & Littlefield.
44.
SnowD.FlynnS.WhisenandK.MohrE. (2016). Evidence-sensitive synthesis of professional development school outcomes. School–University Partnerships, 9(3), 11–34.
45.
TeitelL. (1998). Professional development schools: A literature review. In LevineM. (Ed.), Designing standards that work for professional development schools (pp. 33–80). National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED426052.pdf
46.
TeitelL. (2000). Assessment: Assessing the impacts of professional development schools. American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED443805.pdf
47.
VetterA.FairclothB. S.HewittK. K.GonzalezL. M.HeY.RockM. L. (2022). Equity and social justice in research practice partnerships in the United States. Review of Educational Research, 92(5), 829–866. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211070048
48.
WatersR. (2017). We must face it: PDSs have failed to innovate. School-University Partnerships, 10(1), 19–25. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1147231
49.
WilsonS. M.AnagnostopoulosD. (2021). Methodological guidance paper: The craft of conducting a qualitative review. Review of Educational Research, 91(5), 651–670. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211012755
50.
WisemanD. L.KnightS. L. (Eds.). (2003). Linking school-university collaboration and K-12 student outcomes. American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED482818.pdf
51.
ZeichnerK. (2006). Studying teacher education programs: Enriching and enlarging the inquiry. In ConradC. F.SerlinR. C. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook for research in education: Engaging ideas and enriching inquiry (pp. 79–94). Sage.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
