Valentine, K. S. (2018, December 19). Review of Improving education together: A guide to labor, management, community collaboration by G. Marietta, C. D’Entremont & E. Murphy Kaur. Education Review, 25. http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/er.v25.2409 December 19, 2018 ISSN 1094-5296 Marietta, G., D'Entremont, C. & Murphy Kaur, E. (2017). Improving education together: A guide to labor, management, and community collaboration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. Pp. 174 ISBN: 978-1682530627 Reviewed by Kesha S. Valentine Old Dominion University United States Improving education together: A guide to labor, management, and community collaboration (LMC) is a guidebook for improving the communication processes needed to get better educational outcomes for students. It was written to provide processes and tools for school districts seeking to approach academic achievement from a holistic perspective and in ways that include all stakeholders. This book is relevant, as budgetary resources are consistently strained and expectations for academic improvement are steadily increasing (Turner & Spain, 2016). School boards, county leaders, and local businesses can use this book to develop a working plan that will enrich students’ achievement through inclusive community processes. Because the results of increased academic achievement will enhance the community as a whole, approaching it together makes sense. The authors of this foundational book address the process of coming together to create a common definition of collaboration, set of goals, guidelines for participation, and approach to the process. They also provide suggestions for handling collaborations that go off course, for instance, changes in Education Review /Reseñas Educativas 2 leadership, funding, or team members. Finally, real life examples of districts that have tried and succeeded or experienced challenges are shared from the participants’ standpoints. Don’t let the small size of this book fool you. Improving Education Together is full of big ideas about approaching educational improvement from a collaborative perspective. Along with this concept comes detailed strategies and practical, useful forms for the user. The book is dense, in a good way. As I read it, I frequently stopped to make notes, analyze my school district’s scenario, and continually add to the list of names receiving my recommendation to read this book, which comes with heavy weight as a librarian, especially since we are often tasked with locating resources on myriad topics. This book highlights the necessity of LMC collaboration as communities work toward a common goal of supporting academic achievement for all students. Recognizing that collaboration has differing meanings, depending on the context and users, the text clearly defines collaboration as, “a process by which stakeholders who see parts of a problem differently can explore these differences and construct solutions that are better than what they could have come up with on their own” (p. 2). Following this definition, the authors presented methods and suggested tools for the hard work of collaborating across groups of stakeholders that come into the process with different agendas, skills, and points of view. An example of a new, realistic concern comes from school districts that have decided to implement an individualized learning program with 1:1 devices. Though everyone has student academic achievement as the primary goal, the approach to reaching that goal is different from each stakeholder’s perspective. The school division may see technology as a way to provide equity, while parents have concerns about their children’s technology usage. Both share the same goal, student success, with differing and potentially conflicting viewpoints. The authors provide multiple entry points for the LMC teams to access the collaborative process, with examples of best- case scenarios and potential pitfalls. As a best- case scenario, Baltimore City schools were able to improve student outcomes using the five factors of successful collaboration: interdependence, joint solutions, ownership in decisions, accountability for outcomes, and dynamism (refers to the dynamic nature of problem solving) – with participation from approximately 66 schools. On the other hand, Leominster Public Schools enjoyed a successful inaugural year, but began to experience challenges during their second year with a critical leadership change. Coupled with a change in the team’s working culture, this resulted in a reduction in collaborative efforts. Today’s culture of constant school reform causes many frustrations among stakeholders (Heyd & Sawyer, 1997). The heart of improving achievement is change, which is one of the most difficult processes that people have to go through (Dolph, 2017). In my experience, the mere act of carefully selecting groups and establishing norms does not necessarily mean that people are able to come to the table with a clean slate and work towards change. The authors recommend “learning fast to implement thoroughly” as a strategy, rather than the common practice of “implementing fast and learning slow.” The Implementation Science model, to which their philosophy refers, consists of four stages: plan, do, study, act. After personally participating in several frequent culture and reform shifts, I suspect this strategy is one that will resound with some readers. The included data on needs assessment not only helps school districts determine their readiness to begin a project of this nature, but it may also serve as a catalyst for initiating collaboration as their mechanism for improving student outcomes. However, as districts look for additional data to inform Review of Improving Education Together by K. Valentine 3 their practice and future decision-making, it would be helpful to include a process on how to measure the project goals. As a result, districts will be able to create metrics for measurement in tandem with their goal development, which will allow them to evaluate the success of their newly implemented strategies from the beginning. The team forming, building, and working processes are outlined in great detail. According to the authors, the team’s makeup will be determined “as a function of the process” and all team members “will have a say in the process.” Because everyone on the team is not well versed in instructional best practices, potential problems may arise with regard to the feasibility of implementation. It would helpful if this book presented a methodical way to deal with the feasibility of classroom implementation. Specific, non- emotional dialogue practice examples would be helpful for exchanges that are emotional, e.g., ideas that sound great to non- practitioners, but present unrealistic classroom expectations. With all of the great information shared about including all of the stakeholders in the process, I have to ask, where are the kids? The authors address the adult stakeholders, but the primary benefactors of this improvement, the students, are not included. The next iteration of this book should include a section on the benefits and potential challenges of including students. The student voice is needed to assist in maintaining a sense of reality and balance since they understand what works for themselves and their friends. Including students as a stakeholder group requires additional preparation, as many of them have likely never had the opportunity to participate in discussions with stakes this high. They will gain experience in the civic process, communication, collaboration and leadership. A solid recommendation might include providing leadership and communication training to selected students. Since the community plays such an important role in this process, it would be nice to see a few more specific details designed to facilitate their integration. For instance, a plan for introducing the community to the collaboration along with a selection process for community members should be considered. In order to develop and maintain community enthusiasm for the process, a clearly worded process should be included. Finally, this book needs to include a process on how to educate all stakeholders on educational jargon, in an unbiased manner, keeping the audience in mind. This section should be specific without being condescending to maintain open lines of communication. This text would make a great introductory study for leaders of school districts or organizations looking to bridge, not only the academic achievement gap, but also the expectation gaps that exists between each of the stakeholders. The primary audiences for this book are school administrators, school board members, and active community leaders. However, the collaboration skills and tools presented in this text can be directly used by anyone working collaboratively as a team. Anyone who picks up this book will be empowered with step-by-step details describing the rationale and method for moving through the collaborative process. The idea of defining collaboration, establishing goals, and creating norms for group participation, at the inception of the group, are among best practices for successful team collaboration (Parker, 2008). However, in many cases, groups dive right in to the work and only stop when there is a breakdown in the process. Sadly, there is no opportunity to return to the blank slate that exists at the onset of the groups’ project. Reading this book, and actually using it as a guide will help even K-12 students (guided by their teachers) experience more fruitful collaborative processes. Education Review /Reseñas Educativas 4 In my 12 years of experience as an educator and even more years as a student, the mere suggestion of collaboration elicits a cacophony of groans. However, this useful text is a substantial tool for improving the collaborative experience by preparing all stakeholders to work through the process together to improve the educational outcomes of their community. The authors presented five elements of successful collaboration that will provide school districts with a blueprint for creating an atmosphere that provides students with a more productive learning experience – the ultimate goal for all stakeholders. References Dolph, D. (2017). Challenges and opportunities for school improvement: Recommendations for urban school principals. Education and Urban Society, 49(4), 363-387. Heyd, S., & Sawyer, M. (1997). Educational reform: A drama in three acts. The English Journal, 86(5), 43-49. https://doi.org/10.2307/820444 Parker, G. (2008). Team players and teamwork [electronic resource] new strategies for developing successful collaboration (2nd ed.). Hoboken: Wiley. Turner, E., & Spain, A. (2016). The multiple meanings of (In)Equity. Urban Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085916674060 About the Reviewer Kesha S. Valentine is a Ph.D. student in the Old Dominion University’s Occupational and Technical Studies program (Darden College of Education). She is an Education Specialist for Secondary Libraries and has experience in various roles on change teams in public schools. Her research interests include career literacy and the intersection of literacy and equity. Review of Improving Education Together by K. Valentine 5 Education Review/Reseñas Educativas/Resenhas Educativas is supported by the edXchange initiative’s Scholarly Communications Group at the Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College, Arizona State University. Copyright is retained by the first or sole author, who grants right of first publication to the Education Review. Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Education Review, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. More details of this Creative Commons license are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/. All other uses must be approved by the author(s) or Education Review. Education Review is published by the Scholarly Communications Group of the Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College, Arizona State University. Disclaimer: The views or opinions presented in book reviews are solely those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of Education Review. Connect with Education Review on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/pages/Education- Review/178358222192644) and on Twitter @EducReview https://www.facebook.com/pages/Education-Review/178358222192644 https://www.facebook.com/pages/Education-Review/178358222192644