Editorial: Editorial vision

Citation

Hall, K., Hoppey, D. and Lynch, M. (2023), "Editorial: Editorial vision", School-University Partnerships, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1108/SUP-05-2023-017

As long-time readers, contributors and supporters of School–University Partnerships (SUPs), we are deeply committed to the advancement of school and university-based educators and collaborative partnership initiatives. As newly minted editors, we acknowledge the imperative to continue to center diversity, equity and inclusion in all aspects of publication, including writing, reviewing, editing, disseminating, reading, citing and linking theory-and-practice. Under our editorship, we aim to advance a version of SUPs in which research and scholarship is transformative and makes a positive difference in education.

As such, the aim and scope of the journal have changed slightly. Of note is the focus on committing to antiracism, equity and social justice; linking SUP practices to improved K-12 student outcomes and emphasizing the role of research and policy in advocating for why SUPs matter. The changes in the journal's aim and scope are in line with the second edition of the National Association of Professional Development School's (NAPDS) Nine Essentials, particularly Essential 1, A Comprehensive Mission.

Essential 1: A professional development school (PDS) is a learning community guided by a comprehensive, articulated mission that is broader than the goals of any single partner, and that aims to advance equity, antiracism, and social justice within and among schools, colleges/universities, and their respective community and professional partners (NAPDS, 2021).

Additionally, changes in our aim and scope are reflective of the National Collaborative Research Agenda for Professional Development Schools and Similar School–University Partnerships (Dresden et al., 2023). Four topic areas worthy of investigation and paramount for advancing research in professional development schools (PDSs) and similar SUPs are (1) systems and structures, (2) equity and social justice, (3) the national teacher shortage and (4) policy. These topics of investigation are able to be examined by descriptive methods or studies on outcomes and impacts. To this end, the types of submissions that are welcomed in SUPs are broad in scope, with the intention of capturing a comprehensive view of the issues around PDSs-SUPs. We will continue to center the work on rigorous research and cutting-edge scholarship and continue to cultivate a more diverse audience and authorship. Recognizing the dynamic needs of education, we proudly welcome broader perspectives and methodological approaches.

Our new two options for publishing in SUPs are research papers and practitioner papers. The “case in point” category found in previous issues of SUPs is now the “practitioner paper” to include a wider range of practitioner-oriented and/or practitioner-authored manuscripts.

Cultivating a more diverse audience and authorship brings the opportunity to expand the number and variety of reviewers. One goal is to reimagine more equitable possibilities from a systematic structural approach through an examination of how practitioners are asked to review for SUP, what supports are in place for preparing and submitting manuscripts and the ways in which institutional and structural power dynamics impact P-12 practitioner participation in the journal. We aim to “demystify the publication process” and dismantle intentional and unintentional gatekeeping mechanisms in academic scholarship by building more inclusive pathways to academic discourse, inquiry and research. We are working to achieve this by providing guidance on the review process and putting support systems in place for authors and reviewers. Another way that we have attempted to break down barriers is by forming a diverse editorial team of Associate Editors. Drs Rachelle Curcio, Elizabeth Hale, Jennifer Kilpatrick and Raven Robinson-Wilson are boundary-spanning educators whose research and teaching experiences profoundly impact their work with PDSs and SUPs. Our editorial assistant, Talya Taylor, is a practitioner, a school-based leader and a doctoral student.

We are also excited that SUPs will be open access. This will expand our reach and allow a broader audience immediate access to the important work being done in PDSs-SUPs. Further, that increased access will showcase authors' work and their institutions on a global scale and elevate the journal on an international scale.

While Volume 16, Issue 1 is our inaugural issue as editors, the six manuscripts printed in this issue were reviewed and accepted under the prior editors. To the previous co-editors, Drs Seth Parsons and Mandy Bean and their editorial team, we extend thanks for all the support and guidance as we moved into the roles and transitioned to a new publisher. We appreciate the patience of the authors in this issue and upcoming issues, as well as the publishing team as we transferred manuscripts and correspondence. Moreover, we are excited that we have more reviewers joining our cadre, and we encourage others to consider reviewing by submitting your information here (https://forms.gle/SkYq3cgTNHzq1Z6g8). The diverse perspectives and viewpoints are essential to the elevation of the work.

Each of the articles in this issue approaches the work of studying PDSs and partnerships from a different lens and various methodologies – each intricately intertwined within a larger scope of equity, inclusion and inquiry.

In their article, “What We Wonder: An iterative Exploration of Teachers' Perceptions of Social-Emotional Learning,” authors Rachelle Curcio, Rebecca Smith-Hill and Kate Ascetta demonstrate the power of Essential 3: Professional Learning and Leading. They share how professional learning experiences, designed with improvement science principles, allowed PDS-District teachers to “collectively explore the influence and role” of social-emotional learning (SEL) strategies. By engaging in collective data analysis, the development of inquiry wonderings and goal-setting in the professional learning experiences, the teachers expressed awareness of and eagerness to learn SEL strategies, as well as developed perceptions of the district and their own self-care strategies.

In “Is the Past Prologue: Part II - A Qualitative Analysis of PDS Dissertation Research Focused on Learning,” Eva Garin and Diane Yendol-Hoppey build on their previous article, “Trends from Three Decades of Professional Development School Dissertation Scholarship,” by expanding their analysis of PDS dissertation research. Through an examination of the topics of study and common themes, the authors uncover insights into the degree to which PDS scholars are building on the past to determine future PDS research agendas around inquiry and learning. Their three-part series provides a path forward for PDS communities focused on Essential 5: Research and Results and the series will be instrumental in shaping the future of SUPs.

In “Creating a Culture of Learning: Mentoring in a PDS,” Nicole Schlaack uses Cultural Historical Activity Theory as a descriptive tool to better understand mentor teachers' perceptions of a newly formed network of PDSs. Schlaack found that mentor teachers across six PDS sites reportedly expressed a sense of purpose in educating the next generation, experienced continuous learning alongside teacher candidates and recognized opportunities for professional learning through the PDS network. Shlaack's investigation into mentor teachers' perspectives of the PDS network demonstrates the importance of Essential 5: Research and Results in sustaining and improving PDSs.

Exemplifying Essential 2: Clinical Preparation, in the article “Secondary Preservice Teachers' Critical Reflecting Practices: Examining Perceptions of Confidence Using a Two-Part Reflection,” authors Jess Smith, Ryann N. Shelton, Nate Scholten and Madelon McCall use single case study methodology to examine an innovative practice to support secondary teacher candidate reflection. The authors suggest that teacher candidates approach reflection and move through levels of reflection differently. They underscore important implications: the need for ungraded, iterative reflection throughout clinical experiences and for teacher educators to explicitly model reflection and levels of reflection.

In their article, “Positioned as Pedagogues, Finding their Teaching Personas: Critical, Project-Based Clinical Experiences in PDS/SchoolUniversity Contexts,” Kristien Zenkov, Marion Taousakis, Jenny Gorannson, Emily Staudt, Marriam Ewaida, Madelyn Stephens, Matt Kitchen, Meagan Hostutler and Jasmin Castorena examine 12 preservice middle/high school teachers participation in a “critical, project-based” (CPB) model of clinical practice. They suggest that teacher candidates might best identify pedagogical practices that are in line with their early teaching identities formed in SUPs that position them as professional educators, providing meaningful implications for Essential 2: Clinical Preparation and Essential 4: Reflection and Innovation.

The issue concludes with Michelle Damiani and Brent Elder's “A Call for Critical PDS: Infusing DisCrit into the Nine Essentials” problematizing Essential 1: A Comprehensive Mission through their practice-based example of infusing DisCrit into the larger PDS landscape. They call for everyone engaged in PDS work, not just disability studies scholars, to prioritize inclusive, intersectional approaches that are operationalized to achieve equity in education by dismantling both racism and ableism in education.