DRK-12 Partnership Development Projects

Two people sitting at a table working collaboratively.

This Spotlight features DRK-12 partnership development projects. This project type seeks to build or strengthen connections among school partners and researchers for the purpose of co-designing future DRK-12 research and development. In this Spotlight, PIs describe their processes for building partnerships, share challenges and strategies, and outline partnership next steps. We also share a CADRE resource with advice for establishing authentic and equitable partnerships in STEM education research.
 
In this Spotlight:

Featured Projects

Members of the project team after the kickoff meeting

Building Capacity in a Rural School District to Support Teacher Development in STEM Areas Through Cycles of Continuous Improvement

PI: Rodolfo Rincones
Grades: K-12
STEM Disciplines: STEM

Project Description: Our project focused primarily on building a research-practice partnership (RPP) between the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) and Fabens Independent School District (FISD). In addition to our efforts developing the partnership, we engaged with our project partners in a year-long collaborative inquiry process to specifically identify a problem of practice in STEM teaching and learning, researched best practices to address the identified problem, and developed a targeted improvement plan to strengthen STEM education.

The specific objectives of the grant were the following:

  1. Form an effective, authentic, and equitable RPP between UTEP and FISD that will be sustainable beyond the initial planning year.
  2. Co-develop a targeted improvement plan that addresses a high-need STEM teaching and learning area at the high school level that may stem from previous FISD work and programming in STEM areas—Project Based Learning and making STEM connections across all content areas with a specific emphasis on literacy—and lead to innovative and strategic professional development to increase STEM teaching efficacy.
  3. Co-write and submit a DRK-12 proposal that addresses the high-need STEM teaching area identified as a result of the partnership efforts.

Why was this work a good fit for the partnership development project type?
The work conducted under this grant allowed us to capitalize on a standing research-practice partnership (RPP) we had developed previously between the university and the rural school district. Small, rural school districts usually have scarce resources to fund this kind of work. The grant resources assisted in expanding and consolidating the RPP team to include not only central office administrators but also classroom teachers and school administrators and paying for teacher substitutes, teacher stipends and travel funds for teachers. Being awarded the grant was also external validation of the importance and potential impact of our work as an RPP.

What was your process for building a partnership?
Our partnership quickly developed formal interaction norms, authentic relationships, and open and transparent communication that allowed cohesive and efficient teamwork. The processes that facilitated this were the use of Liberating Structures (LS), which are micro-structures that focus on how people work together and are “methods for a purpose: to improve performance” (McCandless & Lipmanowicz, 2014, Prologue). These structures foster team building and group interaction based on open communication.

What are unique challenges related to your work in this area and what strategies has your project identified for addressing them?
Some of the most salient challenges that we experienced were the different institutional logics of higher education and K-12 public education. Participants at each of these organizations have a different conception of productivity, efficiency, and use of time. In addition, creating space for all voices to be heard and considered was challenging. This was particularly true for K-12 educators as we attempted to flatten the traditional hierarchy of control and decision-making traditionally present in RPP work. We were also confronted with limited joint decision making due to time constraints and traditional K-12 institutionalized norms. However, our more serious issue was finding ways to ensure the sustainability of our RPP team and work. In rural school districts, where there are limited resources in general and even fewer to dedicate to this type of work, once external funding is exhausted, it is very difficult to sustain RPP work. With the numerous internal and external pressures schools are facing, this type of work is often not a priority for K-12 educators.

What’s next for your partnership?
As we close our current grant, we will be discussing as a team how to proceed both as an RPP and with the project we co-developed for an NSF grant that was not awarded this year. We have talked about applying to different funding sources but given that there is no guarantee we will be awarded, we are focusing on determining how to proceed without (or very limited) resources. With viability at the forefront of our minds, our next steps will be to redefine the scope and focus of the work in way that continues to meet the needs of all partners.

Products: We are in the process of producing a report including the activities and results that were obtained under this grant and publishing our findings as well. Three presentations were made under the auspices of this grant which were the following:

  • Peña, I. & Rincones, R. (April, 2025). Un pasito pa’ adelente, Dos para atras”: A Reflection on the Challenges of RPP Work [Roundtable Session]. AERA Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, April 25-27.
  • Rincones, R., Peña, I. & Galaviz, A.A. (June, 2025). Establishing Authentic Collaboration During the Early Stages of an RPP [Poster]. NSF CADRE DRK-12 Meeting, Alexandria VA., June 9-11, 2025.
  • Rincones, R., Peña, I. & Galaviz, A.A. (June, 2025). Refelctions on the early stages of RPP development usig duoethnography. National Network of Education Research-Practice Partnership (NNERPP). June 6th, 2025. (Brown bag, invited presentation)

AIRL Logo

Cultivating Math Resilience: Fostering a Durable School-University Partnership Working to Promote Math Confidence in Post-Pandemic Education

PI: Mathew Uretsky
Grades: Middle
STEM Disciplines: Mathematics

Project Description: Cultivating Math Resilience responds to a sharp post-pandemic decline in middle school math performance and the corollary rise in school avoidance. It is the founding initiative of a growing body of work at Portland State University focused on academic engagement and attendance. The project laid the groundwork for the development of the Academic Resilience Innovation Lab, which now serves as a hub for advancing school-university partnerships and related applied research.

The project began with listening sessions involving district leaders, school administrators, teachers, counselors, and social workers. These conversations helped build trust and opened doors to deeper collaboration. One message was clear: even the strongest intervention would have limited impact if the students who needed it most weren’t attending. Attendance was identified not just as a symptom, but as the foundational issue. Educators repeatedly pointed to math class as a common trigger for anxiety and avoidance, making it a logical starting point for understanding disengagement.

Building on this foundation, the team is launching a fall pilot, the Student Attendance Listening Project. Using structured check-ins, small-group conversations, and a functional behavior framework, the project aims to understand the root causes of school avoidance, especially when linked to academic stress in math. The goal is to identify emotional, social, and academic barriers to attendance.

This listening-first approach brings together educators, mental health professionals, and researchers to co-develop tools that support learning and school connection. The partnership will inform future interventions aimed at improving math confidence and reengagement during the critical middle school years.

Why was this work a good fit for the partnership development project type?
This work was ideally suited to the partnership development project type because it required time and trust to define the problem collaboratively and determine the right starting point. The partnership grant allowed Portland State University and the Tigard-Tualatin School District to build meaningful relationships across roles and institutions before proposing specific interventions.

With this support, we were able to convene cross-role listening sessions with educators, administrators, and support staff to surface concerns, define shared goals, and build buy-in. These sessions revealed a critical insight: no matter what solution we offered, the students who most needed support were unlikely to attend. Attendance, particularly among students experiencing academic stress, was the core challenge.

The grant also gave us the structure and capacity to formalize our collaboration. We created partnership guidelines, established feedback loops, and co-developed tools that will guide our upcoming fall pilot. Without this dedicated funding and structure, we would not have had the time, staffing, or trust foundation to access schools, learn from multiple perspectives, and prepare for an informed and targeted intervention design phase.

What was your process for building a partnership? 
Our partnership-building process began with the shared understanding that addressing attendance and academic disengagement would require sustained collaboration across roles and institutions. We intentionally started with structured listening sessions involving district and school leaders, educators, and support staff to establish trust, clarify shared priorities, and better understand the conditions on the ground. These conversations shaped both the tone and direction of our work and helped us build a foundation before proposing specific interventions.

While the initial response was strong and collaborative, a key insight emerged during implementation: we underestimated the degree of turnover we would experience between grant submission and launch. Several core team members, both in the district and at the university, transitioned out of their roles during this period. This slowed our progress considerably and required us to revisit early relationship building, reestablish communication channels, and bring new team members into the shared vision. What began as a straightforward launch became a second phase of onboarding and relationship repair.

In hindsight, we would have approached our early planning with a clearer contingency for turnover, including succession planning, more formal documentation of decisions and commitments, and staggered onboarding structures. Even with shared enthusiasm, partnerships can be fragile when key people move on. Recognizing this helped us adapt our approach and reinforced the value of documenting and distributing ownership of the work beyond individuals.

What are unique challenges related to your work in this area and what strategies has your project identified for addressing them?
One of the most significant challenges we encountered is the disconnect between intervention design and student participation. From the beginning, educators across the district expressed a shared concern: any support we developed, no matter how well-designed, would be limited in its impact if the students who needed it most weren’t attending school. This surfaced a core tension in our work: the students most affected by academic stress, anxiety, or disengagement were often the least likely to be present for support.

Rather than bypass that concern, we decided to make it central to the project. The initial focus of our partnership shifted from proposing a curricular solution to first understanding the underlying reasons for chronic absenteeism. That meant stepping back from intervention and instead designing a structured inquiry to explore the functions of school avoidance—what, exactly, is getting in the way of students attending school—particularly in relation to math class.

Another challenge has been navigating the complexity of gathering meaningful insight across multiple roles while maintaining a clear structure. Staff, especially district administrators, face limited time and competing priorities, and it has taken careful planning to ensure that tools like check-in logs, meeting debriefs, and follow-up conversations are both actionable and manageable.

To address these challenges, we have prioritized responsiveness and simplicity in tool design, and we have made space for regular reflection across teams. In doing so, we have been able to stay aligned with the problem as it is actually experienced, not just how it appears on paper.

What’s next for your partnership? 
Our next phase builds directly on what we have learned through the partnership so far. With the fall pilot just around the corner, our focus is on gathering meaningful, structured insight from students who are chronically absent. The goal is to use what we learn—through check-ins, group discussions, and behavioral pattern analysis—to design an intervention that addresses the root causes of school avoidance, with particular attention to academic stress and math-related disengagement.

This pilot will inform the development of a targeted, scalable intervention to be implemented and studied in the following academic year. We also plan to apply for additional funding through NSF’s DRK-12 program to support a full research study grounded in the tools, methods, and relationships developed through this project.

In parallel, we are continuing to strengthen internal capacity by refining tools, documenting processes, and supporting school teams in developing shared routines for identifying and responding to early signs of disengagement. This includes the creation of the Academic Resilience Innovation Lab at Portland State University, which grew out of this project and will continue supporting this work and related initiatives aimed at strengthening student presence, participation, and learning in middle school. Our long-term goal is to develop a replicable model for middle school academic resilience, one that integrates academic and behavioral supports, is informed by real-time student experience, and improves both participation and performance.

UD LogoEstablishing a Partnership Among a State Department of Education, Educators, School District Leaders and Researchers to Enhance Early Childhood Educators’ Mathematics Teaching

PI: Lynsey Gibbons
Grades: PreK, Elementary
STEM Disciplines: Mathematics

Project Description: We know that high-quality early learning, especially in mathematics, sets the stage for students' long-term success in school. But to create those rich learning experiences, early childhood educators need meaningful, ongoing support to strengthen their interactions with children around mathematics. This partnership brings together early childhood educators, leaders and directors from schools and centers, district leaders, the Delaware Department of Education, the University of Delaware Partnership for Public Education, Delaware Institute for Excellence in Early Childhood Education, and a faculty researcher specializing in teacher learning and mathematics to form the Research-Practice Partnership for Professional Learning in Early Mathematics (RPP PLEM).

Together, we’re working to understand the professional learning needs of early childhood educators and design support systems that help them grow in confidence and deepen their ability to support young children’s mathematical thinking.

Our partnership prioritizes building trust, listening closely to educators, gathering local insights, and collaboratively shaping a research agenda rooted in the realities of early childhood teaching and learning. Ultimately, we aim to develop a sustainable partnership that addresses real-world challenges in early mathematics instruction and contributes new knowledge to the field through shared learning and knowledge mobilization.

Why was this work a good fit for the partnership development project type?
This work was a strong fit for the partnership development project type because it focuses on building the foundation for a long-term, sustainable RPP on early mathematics professional learning in Delaware. The partnership grant provided the time, structure, and resources needed to do the relationship-building, landscape mapping, and shared learning essential to authentic and equitable partnership work.

With the support of this grant, we were able to bring together an initial group of partners representing a range of early childhood program types and roles—from district-based programs to Head Start and center-based providers. We worked to map the current early mathematics professional learning landscape by identifying key stakeholders and engaging them through site visits, shared gatherings, and a series of in-person and virtual listening sessions. These activities allowed us to surface patterns in local needs, barriers, and aspirations across diverse early learning contexts.

Without the partnership grant, we would not have had the dedicated time and resources to engage in such a deliberate and inclusive process. The grant enabled us to:

  • Build trust across institutional and programmatic boundaries
  • Expand our network to include a more representative range of voices in the field
  • Establish shared goals grounded in the lived experiences of educators
  • Create infrastructure to support co-designed professional learning and a jointly developed research agenda

What was your process for building a partnership?
We started by bringing together internal partners from a university-affiliated early childhood center, along with leaders from early childhood programs in the Appoquinimink, Colonial, and Cape Henlopen School Districts, as well as representatives from local Head Start and center-based programs.

A key part of our process was collaboratively conducting site visits to early childhood classrooms. These visits allowed partners to observe teaching and learning in action and engage directly with educators and young children. By being present in classrooms, we moved beyond abstract discussions and anchored our work in the everyday realities of early learning environments. These shared experiences helped us identify both individual and collective visions for high-quality early mathematics instruction, which informed our thinking about the types of professional learning that could support that vision.

In our early meetings, we listened closely to partners’ perspectives and identified shared goals for early childhood mathematics professional learning. These conversations deepened our understanding of our partners' priorities and established a foundation for co-designing professional learning supports that are both relevant and sustainable.

To enhance our understanding, we reviewed notes from our site visits and partner meetings, identifying recurring themes related to professional learning needs, barriers, and opportunities. We collaboratively analyzed these themes and synthesized our findings into a white paper that captures our shared understanding of the current landscape and provides a basis for ongoing design and inquiry.

We developed a review process for the white paper that intentionally addressed power dynamics and aimed to make feedback accessible and comfortable for all partners. Opportunities for input included an anonymous survey, one-on-one conversations, and individually shared drafts, which allowed partners to annotate directly. This approach respected different communication preferences and ensured that a diverse range of voices and perspectives were represented in the final version.

Our advice to others includes:

  1. Enter with curiosity.
  2. Build relationships and listen closely to partners’ everyday experiences, challenges, and aspirations.
  3. Create low-stakes opportunities for input and reflection.
  4. Be transparent about intentions and responsive to partners’ priorities.
  5. Attend to power dynamics, especially across institutions and roles.

Mutually beneficial partnerships grow from trust, shared purpose, and a sustained commitment to learning together. This foundation has enabled us to begin co-developing a research agenda grounded in the realities and aspirations of those doing the work.

What are unique challenges related to your work in this area and what strategies has your project identified for addressing them?
One of the most significant challenges in our work has been working to bridge pre-K and K–12. These often unintentionally siloed spaces operate under different regulations, funding mechanisms, professional education and learning requirements, and cultures. These differences can make collaboration challenging and potentially limit opportunities for shared learning. Despite these differences, our partnership surfaced a strong, shared vision among early childhood educators, school leaders, and system-level stakeholders: a desire to work together across settings, systems, and silos to better support teachers' learning and children’s mathematical development.

To address this challenge, the RPP PLEM prioritized strategies that intentionally bridged these differences. We designed our engagement activities, such as listening sessions and informal site visits, to foster dialogue among educators and leaders from both pre-K and K–3 contexts. By centering these diverse voices and creating space for shared reflection, we have been able to surface common goals and build trust across roles and settings.

Importantly, our approach has emphasized relationship-building rather than quick solutions. We recognize that developing a sustainable partnership requires time, mutual understanding, and attention to local context. By co-constructing our understanding of their goals and a research agenda with practitioners from across the pre-K to grade 3 continuum, we have begun to lay the groundwork for our shared vision of early childhood mathematics professional learning.

What’s next for your partnership?
We are in conversations across our partners to design professional learning for early childhood educators that will be implemented this coming school year. We are seeking funding to examine our shared research agenda. 

Establishing a Partnership Between a Rural School and an Urban University to Support Algebra 1 Learning for Students with Learning Disabilities

PI: Casey Hord | CoPI: Anna DeJarnette | Project Coordinator: David L. Adams
Grades: Middle, High
STEM Disciplines: Mathematics

Project Description: The members of this project team at the University of Cincinnati actively search for ways that we can find win-win situations with local schools where college students benefit from the work they do in local schools (by gaining experience crucial to their development as professionals and future community leaders) while supporting schools with their needs and capitalizing on the strengths the schools have to offer. In this particular case, we have benefited from the knowledge and experience of teachers, administrators, and local community leaders at our partner school and the surrounding area. With our community partners, we have co-developed plans for future collaboration between the School of Education at the University of Cincinnati and our partner school.

Why was this work a good fit for the partnership development project type? 
The partnership format of this project has been great for this work. The opportunity to take time to carefully co-plan projects with our partner school for a calendar year, without the pressure to quickly collect data, helped us carefully and thoroughly gather input from community partners and our advisory board and begin co-developing future projects. After a year of planning, we are now prepared to co-design projects our partner school and community stakeholders.

What was your process for building a partnership? 
We started our work with a local stakeholder (an administrator at our partner school) who is a long-time friend of one of the project members who grew up in the same community. We built on that friendship toward productive partnerships with other community members and project team members at the University of Cincinnati. We have learned that trust between people, more so than institutions, has been essential for our work. While we may strive to eventually develop partnerships between universities and local schools, we know that much of our work is based on trust that has been carefully built among individuals who, over time, have learned how to work together and trust each other.

We recommend that researchers seek advice from a variety of stakeholders in communities and take the time listen and gather information before making suggestions or planning programs. We started our work with Algebra 1 tutoring by college students because we have had success with tutoring programs in the past, and partner school administration said that math tutoring is a good place for us to start our work together based on the needs of the school and our prior work. But, beyond some piloting of Algebra 1 tutoring at this high school, we have focused on simply asking questions and listening to our partners and our advisory board to get their perspective, and then asking our partners to co-plan future projects with us. We have no interest in trying to prescribe interventions for our community partners from afar; aside from being disrespectful to our partners and incredibly difficult and stressful for us, this approach would be nearly impossible to do well without a local perspective. But, by simply asking and listening, we have had an enjoyable and successful year full of learning and building productive, working relationships with community partners.

What’s next for your partnership? 
We have built a foundation for future work that extends beyond Algebra 1 tutoring in the school. We have begun to look for ways to support our school partner’s students’ learning outside of school in mentoring roles for college students, support for an adult education center and potential experiences for college students, and possible teacher preparation roles for more University of Cincinnati education majors in rural settings as part of coursework or student teaching.

FPSS GraphicFrameworks for Phenomenal Science Success: Enhancing Partnerships for Aina-based NGSS Experiences

PI: Pascale Pinner
Grades: Elementary, Middle
STEM Disciplines: Science

Project Description: Science education integrates the study of and practices from the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). At the fundamental level, the pedagogy involves teaching and learning that emphasizes the use of scientific inquiry and the engineering design process to develop students’ problem-solving, critical thinking, and collaboration skills. Unfortunately, funding and professional development for teachers, which is essential to assure successful implementation of science lessons to increase the potential for student achievement, is lacking.

Therefore, this NSF-funded science-education research project explored the development of a model that deepens the existing partnerships among grassroots, nonprofit community education organizations; K-12 public schools; and local university partners. Together, they worked collaboratively to develop a model where teachers could work with community partners to implement high-quality, place-based, NGSS-aligned science learning opportunities that actively engage students in their classrooms during the school day.

This project has led to the development of a full DRK-12 proposal for high-quality professional development for teachers, using the newly developed Teacher-to-Teacher-Plus-Community Partners (T2T+CP) model, with the goals of increasing science efficacy for teachers and impacting student achievement in science.

Why was this work a good fit for the partnership development project type?
The partnership grant allowed three different groups to come together to discuss, identify problems, and then generate solutions for engaging community partners with teachers in their classrooms during the school day. Without the funding and the development of a collaborative problem-solution space model, this work would not have been done (has never been done) in our local community.

What was your process for building a partnership?
A very careful set of components were developed and implemented one at a time through monthly meetings so that the participants could have time to really think, gather information, and then interact with the other participants in a thoughtful and productive manner. Starting with their personal “Listening Tours” on key questions about community-partner resource use in classrooms led to role groups (teachers, administrators, community partners) developing a Listening Tour Summary. A Gallery Walk to share the Listening Tour summaries allowed all participants to see each of the other groups’ responses and to record their problem/solution pairs and ahas. The next step involved the development of the Problem-Solution Pairs chart by each role group. Identifying the key problems based on the learning tour responses and discussion, as well as identifying problems that they have no control over (cannot solve) led to prioritizing the role group problem-solution pairs. Next the groups took the top three priority problem-solution pairs and developed a theory of action for each pair. This was translated into a revised graphic (findings) for the first objective of the grant.

The second objective was to assess the Teacher-to-Teacher professional development model at its inception and in its current iteration to determine if this model would work for the future development of place-based NGSS-aligned lessons. It was determined that the model should now be called the Teacher-to-Teacher-Plus-Community Partner (T2T+CP) professional development model because there would be strategic selection of NGSS-aligned lessons and community-partner resources with cohorts of the teachers and community partners working together to develop, implement, assess, and revise lessons.

What’s next for your partnership? 
At the last meeting for our partnership grant, we will present a draft of the DRK-12 exploratory proposal (teaching strand) that we will be submitting in November. We will utilize the work that has already been done, the participants who were part of the partnership grant, and other educators in our community as the basis for this next proposal.

Products: Problem-Solution Space Graphic (PDF)

M2DEEP Partner LogosMilwaukee Mathematics Dual Enrollment Equity Pathways

PI: Ann Edwards
Grades: High, Postsecondary
STEM Disciplines: Mathematics

Project Description: The Milwaukee Mathematics Dual Enrollment Equity Pathways (M2DEEP) project was a one-year partnership-development effort funded by the National Science Foundation. The project brought together Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS), Milwaukee Area Technical College (MATC), and WestEd to develop a partnership focused on strengthening and expanding dual enrollment mathematics options for Milwaukee high school students. Dual enrollment (DE) allows students to take college-level courses while still in high school, earning both high school and college credit. Research suggests that participation in DE mathematics can improve students’ participation in mathematics while in high school and support postsecondary enrollment and persistence, particularly for students historically underserved in STEM. Yet implementing DE effectively is complex, requiring coordination across K–12 and higher education systems, as well as among the many roles that support DE students, including teachers, counselors, advisors, and administrators.

The partnership development grant provided an opportunity for MPS and MATC to:

  1. Develop the relationships, structures, and processes needed for an authentic partnership focused on addressing low enrollment and success in math DE at MPS, particularly for students of color and experiencing poverty.
  2. Develop a shared understanding of the root causes of this problem and articulate a shared aim for addressing this problem.
  3. Co-construct a research and development agenda for achieving the aim, including identification of potentially promising program strategies that we planned to design, develop and test in future work.

Why was this work a good fit for the partnership development project type? 
First, the grant enabled sustained collaboration and relationship building across institutions and roles. While MPS and MATC had a long-standing partnership offering math dual enrollment, the partnership development grant provided the time and structure to bring together individuals across these systems—including students, instructors, administrators, and researchers—to rethink and improve the partnership’s existing DE offerings. Without the support of the grant, it would have been difficult to bring such a diverse group together in a sustained way.

Second, the grant provided an opportunity to closely examine the system we were trying to improve. Often, research and development projects aimed at improving student outcomes set ambitious goals without building opportunities to investigate how current systems operate and the root causes that prevent them from serving students more effectively. The partnership development grant provided our project with an opportunity to engage in critical needs sensing work as part of the research and development process, drawing on the perspectives of those within the DE ecosystem who hold knowledge about how it functions in practice and where it falls short.

This early engagement helped the partnership begin identifying a set of unaddressed needs to explore more deeply, including increasing early and consistent outreach to students and families about DE and postsecondary options; reducing logistical barriers related to attendance, time on campus, and access to resources; fostering students’ sense of connection and belonging; providing academic and social supports tailored to high school-aged students participating in college coursework; expanding the pool of credentialed math DE teachers and access to professional learning; and offering math curricula that is contextualized and clearly aligned with students’ goals and interests.

What was your process for building a partnership? 
We began the project with representatives from MPS, MATC, WestEd, and subject matter experts, and recruited two MATC faculty members—one MPS instructor and one former MATC DE student—to join the team. At the start of the project, we established monthly management meetings and meeting routines.

Once the partnership was established, the M2DEEP team worked to develop a shared understanding of the project’s aims and approach, culminating in a collaboratively developed project charter outlining core goals, activities, roles, and operating principles to guide the work. Members conducted site visits at both MATC and MPS, observing classes and meeting with instructors, students, advisors, and administrators to deepen their understanding of current practices and experiences.

The team then co-developed a set of interview and focus-group protocols aimed at exploring these needs in more depth. Unfortunately, project funding was terminated in April 2025, just prior to data collection.

What’s next for your partnership? 
Although the project ended early due to the termination of our grant, the M2DEEP team remains committed to advancing this work. We are actively seeking new funding to build on the foundation established during this year. Next steps include completing needs sensing data collection; refining our understanding of the root causes of limited access to, low enrollment in, and success in math DE courses; identifying curricular solutions, instructional practices, and advising strategies that address the identified root causes; and co-developing an agenda for developing, implementing, and researching a systemic approach to improving math DE in Milwaukee.

Project TeamPartnership Development for Career-Long Teacher Learning in Elementary Mathematics and Science

PI: Marisol Kevelson
Grades: Elementary
STEM Disciplines: Mathematics, Science

Project Description: To address the need for practice-based professional development (PD) opportunities for current K-5 teachers, we convened a team of educators and education researchers to collaboratively co-design a vision and plan for a teacher learning platform based on teachers’ current needs and challenges. Together we developed a detailed plan for providing personalized, digital, on-demand PD for elementary teachers of mathematics and science—meeting teachers where they are and providing flexibility for them to access PD learning experiences from anywhere, at any time.

Our aim was to help address the challenges school districts across the U.S. experience related to providing the PD learning experiences that elementary teachers need to engage in ambitious teaching practices to help their students develop their understanding of mathematics and science concepts and ability to engage in mathematical and scientific sensemaking.

The envisioned teacher learning platform includes two key components: 

  1. Digital teacher performance tasks in which teachers practice facilitating mathematics and science discussions with student avatars. 
  2. Automated, AI-powered feedback reports provided after each practice session to enable teachers to get better at facilitating productive discussions over time.

The platform was envisioned by the team as being highly usable and customizable, including options to turn features off and on, providing options to track learning over time and downloadable data, and offering teachers support, resources, and extensive feedback.

Why was this work a good fit for the partnership development project type?
The partnership grant was critical to allow the co-design team time to build relationships and get to know each other, especially given our different professional roles and training. We were able to use the funding to spend time learning about each other’s expertise, previous and current professional experiences, and the current needs of teachers in both school districts, which set the stage for our team to collaborate productively on co-designing the vision and plan over the course of the one-year project. Another benefit of the grant funding was the buy-in and participation of partners from two very different U.S. school systems (in Tucson, AZ and Flemington, NJ) such that the proposed teacher learning platform and its components will meet needs of teachers in different contexts and with varying student populations and needs. Finally, we also used the funding to invite other stakeholders to review our plan and used their feedback to refine the plan’s components to ensure that it addressed the varied needs of educators across the U.S.

What was your process for building a partnership?
Given the power of in-person experiences for building the relationships that are foundational to successful co-design efforts, the team launched the partnership with a three-day, in-person kick-off meeting. As the team began to work together, team members from the three partner organizations got to know each other through informal and formal activities. One such formal activity, asset mapping, enabled the team members to visually document the range of skills, knowledge, and professional connections they brought to the collaboration, first within and then across the three organizations. Team members also discussed how they hoped to grow their experiences and expertise and what they wanted to learn through their participation in the teams’ co-design of a digital teacher learning platform. We strongly recommend taking the time to learn about the assets that team members bring to the co-design experience and determine collectively how to best leverage the varied expertise to achieve the project’s goals.

The team’s co-design process was guided by collaboratively selected core values including power sharing, respect, and the equitable privileging of all individual voices at the table. The team aimed to ensure that team members could take turns facilitating and leading discussions to share power and ensure all voices are heard. The team chose to regularly reflect on the co-design process to document how well we felt the team was doing at adhering to these values in the work together and how the team might shift the practices to better adhere to these values. The team also sought to understand and document how the approach could be improved to inform future co-design efforts. Ensuring that all team members have opportunities to engage in shared decision making and reflect on how well the co-design process is working (and how to modify so it can work better, as needed) is essential to productive partnerships.

What are unique challenges related to your work in this area and what strategies has your project identified for addressing them?
One challenge was that most team members had not previously been part of a co-design team, while others had limited experience with co-design. To address this challenge, team members spent part of the kick-off meeting learning together about the concept of co-design and practices associated with it, drawing from resources by Leanlab Education and Digital Promise. The team members then discussed and agreed on the core values, norms, and practices to guide their co-design process. After the kick-off meeting and the subsequent first virtual team meeting, these agreements were documented in the team’s community charter.

Working across different time zones posed another challenge for our co-design team. We addressed this challenge as best we could—by finding a meeting time where all could be there, even though the meeting times ended up being less than ideal for some team members. We also made sure to carefully document the outcomes from each meeting and recorded meetings for team members to review afterwards, as needed. In future work, we would incorporate—as funding allows—more opportunities to gather and collaborate in person at key intervals.

What’s next for your partnership? 
Our next step is to develop and study the use of the platform with our district partners, PD providers, and education technology experts. We aim to implement and study it within varied K-5 teaching contexts to determine how it impacts teacher and student learning. We are fortunate to have promising pilot results on platform components, including generative AI teaching simulations and AI-powered, personalized feedback reports, both of which will enable the platform to be scaled and achieve widespread impacts on teachers and students across diverse school districts.

Products: As a co-design team, we collaboratively authored a document detailing the vision and plan for the digital teacher learning platform; the intended audiences for this document include teachers, school district leaders, and educational researchers. We presented and gathered feedback about the vision and plan at the Association of Science Teacher Educators 2025 meeting. We also presented the refined vision and plan, along with our research on our co-design process, at the ISTElive 2025 conference and the NSF DRK-12 PI meeting. At the latter we also shared findings from our co-design research process in a working session we co-led with another grantee and at a poster session. Finally, we developed an infographic to share information about the proposed digital teacher learning platform and our co-design research process and findings.

  • Mikeska, J.N., Kevelson, M., & Black, D. (2025, January 15-18). Co-designing a vision for a personalized, online platform to support in-service teacher learning of teaching competencies. [Exploratory session.] Association for Science Teacher Educators Annual Meeting, Long Beach, CA.
  • Kevelson, M. J. C, Mikeska, J. N., McCulloch, A., & Halder, S. (2025, June 9 - 11). Collaborative learning of key strategies for partnership development and codesign [Conference working session]. NSF DRK-12 PI Meeting, Crystal City, VA.
  • Kevelson, M. J. C, Mikeska, J. N., Black, D, Truncale, C., Losanno, R., Maxwell, T., Bhatia, A., Whalen, K., Grim, N., Peralta-Gomez, X., Gorka, A., & Baehr, B. (2025, June 9 - 11). Empowering teachers: A co-designed approach to innovative instruction. [Research poster presentation]. NSF DRK-12 PI Meeting, Crystal City, VA.  
  • Mikeska, J. N., Kevelson, M. J. C., Truncale, C., Black, D, Losanno, R., Maxwell, T., Bhatia, A., Whalen, K., Grim, N., Peralta-Gomez, X., Gorka, A., & Baehr, B. (2025, June 30 – July 2). Stakeholders’ feedback on a personalized, online platform for STEM teacher learning. [Research presentation.] International Society for Technology in Education. San Antonio, TX.

Strengthening and Developing Partnerships in East Tennessee for Community Engagement in Artificial Intelligence Education

PI: Rachel Wong
Grades: Middle, High
STEM Disciplines: Technology (Computer Science)

Project Description: The aim of this project is to develop and deepen new and existing partnerships with middle and high school computer science (CS) and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) teachers, school leaders, as well as parents, in East Tennessee to advance an understanding of the community's needs in terms of artificial intelligence (AI) and to collectively develop a model of change that addresses these needs. Our project is focused on strengthening and developing research-practice partnerships (RPPs) in three East Tennessee counties—Roane, Scott, and Sevier—with the following goals:
 

  • Strengthen and expand existing RPPs with teachers and school leaders to foster lasting collaboration.
  • Develop new partnerships with parents and students in middle and high schools to ensure their voices inform the direction of our work.
  • Co-construct a shared community vision for AI in education that reflects the unique strengths, needs, and aspirations of the region.

Why was this work a good fit for the partnership development project type?
This partnership development project type seeks to support researchers who need time and support in developing partnerships with existing or potential research partners. Our current project is a good fit for this project type because we are (1) strengthening and expanding three existing RPPs with teachers and school leaders to understand their needs as it relates to AI in K-12 education and to co-construct a vision for AI that will address these needs, and (2) developing new RPPs with middle and high school students and their parents to understand their expectations of teachers and schools, and to leverage their experiences and community practices as part of the development of an AI vision.

This grant allowed us to focus our efforts on connecting with new and existing partners. We were able to use project funds to create opportunities to engage in meaningful conversations with these partners, as well as have partners interact with each other to build upon their understanding of the role of AI in K-12 education.

What was your process for building a partnership?
We leveraged the research team’s existing relationships with East Tennessee teachers and school leaders to build our partnership. We started by putting together an RPP leadership team of individuals who represented the three different counties. From there, we leveraged the connections these RPP leadership team members had in their local communities to build partnerships with other potential partners. We also contacted local school districts within the three counties to recruit potential partners.

What’s next for your partnership? 
We are halfway through our data collection. Our goal is to disseminate our findings from this project to both practitioners and researchers alike. We intend to work with some of our partners to apply for another grant wherein we co-design and develop curriculum to address the needs of the communities.

Products: External Program Evaluation

Additional Projects

We invite you to explore the other active and recently awarded partnership development projects.|
 

Related Resources

Tips for Establishing Authentic and Equitable Partnerships

First page of resourceAuthors: Ceily Moore, Tyrisse Silmon and Terrell R. Morton, University of Illinois Chicago; Davon L. Breedlove, UT Southwestern Medical Center

This new CADRE resource shares insights and actionable guidance from our 2024 Community Partners on how to foster authentic partnerships with schools, districts, and out-of-school learning organizations. Designed for K–12 STEM education researchers, the tips emphasize trust-building, shared leadership, responsiveness to community needs, and long-term commitment. These recommendations offer a roadmap for forming relationships that focus on community voices and values—ensuring that research efforts are collaborative, respectful, and impactful. Read the tips.

Additional DRK-12 Resources in the CADRE Library

Related Spotlights

Year