Round 4 of the Partnership Model: 2024-25 Implementation Report
Saved in:
| Title: | Round 4 of the Partnership Model: 2024-25 Implementation Report |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Jeremy Singer, Sarah L. Woulfin, Daniel I. Dawer, Lizeth Lizárraga, Katharine O. Strunk, Erica Harbatkin, Wei-Chu Chen, Michigan State University (MSU), Education Policy Innovation Collaborative (EPIC) |
| Source: | Education Policy Innovation Collaborative. 2026. |
| Availability: | Education Policy Innovation Collaborative. 620 Farm Lane, Suite 236, East Lansing, MI 48824. Tel: 517-884-0377; e-mail: epicedpolicy@msu.edu; Web site: https://epicedpolicy.org/ |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 52 |
| Publication Date: | 2026 |
| Document Type: | Reports - Research Tests/Questionnaires |
| Education Level: | Elementary Secondary Education |
| Descriptors: | School Turnaround, Educational Improvement, Teacher Persistence, Faculty Mobility, Teacher Recruitment, Teacher Selection, Educational Quality, Multi Tiered Systems of Support, Fidelity, Educational Environment, Teacher Administrator Relationship, Attendance, School Districts, Principals, Elementary Secondary Education, Public Schools, Charter Schools, Partnerships in Education |
| Geographic Terms: | Michigan |
| Abstract: | This report describes school improvement efforts of Partnership districts and schools during the 2024-25 school year. We bring together quantitative and qualitative data to describe the implementation of improvement strategies, focusing in particular on human capital, curriculum and instruction, and student attendance. We also discuss Partnership district and school leader views of the Partnership Model and their interactions with the Office of Partnership Districts (OPD) and Intermediate School Districts (ISDs).? Key findings include: (1) Hiring difficulties continued to ease relative to the start of their Partnership status, but staffing challenges remain. Principals reported fewer struggles filling vacancies and less reliance on substitute teachers, yet shortages of certified teachers--especially in high-need subject areas and in charter schools--persist. Teachers' intentions to stay and job satisfaction rose modestly, though turnover continues to disrupt instructional continuity; (2) There were incremental improvements in instructional quality, but Partnership schools still lag behind non-Partnership schools. Teachers in Partnership schools believe their literacy and math instruction has improved, along with school climate and leadership quality, though only modestly. District efforts focused on implementing curricula with fidelity, strengthening multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) systems, and expanding tutoring. However, progress was uneven across grade levels and schools, reflecting both capacity gains and persistent challenges; (3) Student attendance remains a pressing concern, despite modest signs of progress. Fewer teachers identified absenteeism as the greatest challenge facing their schools compared to prior years, and attendance systems are now being implemented more consistently. Still, overall levels of chronic absenteeism remain high in Partnership schools, and many strategies focus on communication and incentives rather than addressing deeper barriers such as transportation; and (4) The Partnership Model provided support for districts, but also caused some challenges. Leaders described Partnership Agreements as aligned with their broader goals, and they valued the support from OPD staff, PALs, and ISD consultants. They also benefited from additional resources associated with Partnership status (e.g., 21h funding). At the same time, the issue of repeated identification, along with various reporting requirements, created fatigue and stigma. District and school leaders characterized the Partnership Model as a critical driver of improvement, but one that carries with it additional burdens. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2026 |
| Accession Number: | ED680346 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 CustomLinks: – Url: https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED680346 Name: ERIC Full Text Category: fullText Text: Full Text from ERIC |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: ED680346 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Report PubTypeId: report PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Round 4 of the Partnership Model: 2024-25 Implementation Report – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jeremy+Singer%22">Jeremy Singer</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sarah+L%2E+Woulfin%22">Sarah L. Woulfin</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Daniel+I%2E+Dawer%22">Daniel I. Dawer</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Lizeth+Lizárraga%22">Lizeth Lizárraga</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Katharine+O%2E+Strunk%22">Katharine O. Strunk</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Erica+Harbatkin%22">Erica Harbatkin</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wei-Chu+Chen%22">Wei-Chu Chen</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Michigan+State+University+%28MSU%29%2C+Education+Policy+Innovation+Collaborative+%28EPIC%29%22">Michigan State University (MSU), Education Policy Innovation Collaborative (EPIC)</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Education+Policy+Innovation+Collaborative%22"><i>Education Policy Innovation Collaborative</i></searchLink>. 2026. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Education Policy Innovation Collaborative. 620 Farm Lane, Suite 236, East Lansing, MI 48824. Tel: 517-884-0377; e-mail: epicedpolicy@msu.edu; Web site: https://epicedpolicy.org/ – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: N – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 52 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2026 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Reports - Research<br />Tests/Questionnaires – Name: Audience Label: Education Level Group: Audnce Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Secondary+Education%22">Elementary Secondary Education</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22School+Turnaround%22">School Turnaround</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Improvement%22">Educational Improvement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Persistence%22">Teacher Persistence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Faculty+Mobility%22">Faculty Mobility</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Recruitment%22">Teacher Recruitment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Selection%22">Teacher Selection</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Quality%22">Educational Quality</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Multi+Tiered+Systems+of+Support%22">Multi Tiered Systems of Support</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Fidelity%22">Fidelity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Environment%22">Educational Environment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Administrator+Relationship%22">Teacher Administrator Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Attendance%22">Attendance</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22School+Districts%22">School Districts</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Principals%22">Principals</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Elementary+Secondary+Education%22">Elementary Secondary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Public+Schools%22">Public Schools</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Charter+Schools%22">Charter Schools</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Partnerships+in+Education%22">Partnerships in Education</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Geographic Terms Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Michigan%22">Michigan</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: This report describes school improvement efforts of Partnership districts and schools during the 2024-25 school year. We bring together quantitative and qualitative data to describe the implementation of improvement strategies, focusing in particular on human capital, curriculum and instruction, and student attendance. We also discuss Partnership district and school leader views of the Partnership Model and their interactions with the Office of Partnership Districts (OPD) and Intermediate School Districts (ISDs).? Key findings include: (1) Hiring difficulties continued to ease relative to the start of their Partnership status, but staffing challenges remain. Principals reported fewer struggles filling vacancies and less reliance on substitute teachers, yet shortages of certified teachers--especially in high-need subject areas and in charter schools--persist. Teachers' intentions to stay and job satisfaction rose modestly, though turnover continues to disrupt instructional continuity; (2) There were incremental improvements in instructional quality, but Partnership schools still lag behind non-Partnership schools. Teachers in Partnership schools believe their literacy and math instruction has improved, along with school climate and leadership quality, though only modestly. District efforts focused on implementing curricula with fidelity, strengthening multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) systems, and expanding tutoring. However, progress was uneven across grade levels and schools, reflecting both capacity gains and persistent challenges; (3) Student attendance remains a pressing concern, despite modest signs of progress. Fewer teachers identified absenteeism as the greatest challenge facing their schools compared to prior years, and attendance systems are now being implemented more consistently. Still, overall levels of chronic absenteeism remain high in Partnership schools, and many strategies focus on communication and incentives rather than addressing deeper barriers such as transportation; and (4) The Partnership Model provided support for districts, but also caused some challenges. Leaders described Partnership Agreements as aligned with their broader goals, and they valued the support from OPD staff, PALs, and ISD consultants. They also benefited from additional resources associated with Partnership status (e.g., 21h funding). At the same time, the issue of repeated identification, along with various reporting requirements, created fatigue and stigma. District and school leaders characterized the Partnership Model as a critical driver of improvement, but one that carries with it additional burdens. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2026 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: ED680346 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=ED680346 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 52 Subjects: – SubjectFull: School Turnaround Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational Improvement Type: general – SubjectFull: Teacher Persistence Type: general – SubjectFull: Faculty Mobility Type: general – SubjectFull: Teacher Recruitment Type: general – SubjectFull: Teacher Selection Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational Quality Type: general – SubjectFull: Multi Tiered Systems of Support Type: general – SubjectFull: Fidelity Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational Environment Type: general – SubjectFull: Teacher Administrator Relationship Type: general – SubjectFull: Attendance Type: general – SubjectFull: School Districts Type: general – SubjectFull: Principals Type: general – SubjectFull: Elementary Secondary Education Type: general – SubjectFull: Public Schools Type: general – SubjectFull: Charter Schools Type: general – SubjectFull: Partnerships in Education Type: general – SubjectFull: Michigan Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Round 4 of the Partnership Model: 2024-25 Implementation Report Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Michigan State University (MSU), Education Policy Innovation Collaborative (EPIC) – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Jeremy Singer – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Sarah L. Woulfin – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Daniel I. Dawer – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Lizeth Lizárraga – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Katharine O. Strunk – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Erica Harbatkin – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Wei-Chu Chen IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 2026 Titles: – TitleFull: Education Policy Innovation Collaborative Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
