School Partnership Framework

Undergraduate And Graduate Educator Preparation Programs
Keene State College
Endorsed by Educator Preparation Program, May 12, 2026

Keene State College (KSC) Educator Preparation Programs (EPPs) have a long history of collaboration with schools in the Southwest region of New Hampshire, which provides the cornerstone for the ongoing development of educator talent in the state. Our EPPs have worked to refine and expand our connections with school districts so that educator preparation is valued as a “shared responsibility” that is mutually beneficial to all involved in the process of preparing educators (Bohannon, et al., 2024; Burroughs et al., 2020; CAEP, 2020; Darling-Hammond, 2015; NCATE, 2010; Wasielewski, Birch, Bigaj, & Connelly, 2022). We value each unique relationship that we build with P-12 schools and realize that the diversity of school experiences in which our candidates engage is essential for their development. Mutually beneficial school partnerships can have an enormous impact on the development of high-quality and effective teachers as well as positively affect P-12 learners. 

KSC Educator Preparation Partnerships

In accordance with the Council for Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) (2020) definition of partnerships, KSC Educator Preparation programs define partnerships as mutually beneficial agreements between various partners that share the common goal of working together to create inclusive education communities for the purpose of preparing education professionals, enhancing a culture of lifelong professional learning, and responding to the needs of P-12 students.

Students (P-12) and EPP candidates are at the center of our partnership efforts. When KSC and schools work closely together, we have the potential to share expertise and resources and improve teaching and learning for all involved. 

Guiding Principles

Partnerships are unique to each KSC Educator Preparation Program (EPP) and follow a range of forms, participants, and functions. We are one cohesive KSC EPP and have recognized the diversity of various schools and understand the need to be flexible in our partnerships. The most common way partnerships emerge is through supporting clinical experiences for pre-service and in-service educators. The Guiding Principles were developed to allow program variation while maintaining the uniqueness of our EPPs and P-12 schools. The following principles are adapted from the New Hampshire Institutes of Higher Learning (IHE) Network Clinical Practice and Partnership Conceptual Framework (2016).

Principle 1: Partnerships are centered on P-12 student learning and development

At the center of our partnership efforts is the P-12 learner while also building capacity for collaborative learning among KSC students and educators. The primary goal of a partnership is to improve teaching, learning and ultimately improve NH schools (Burroughs et al., 2020; Heafner, McIntyre, & Spooner, 2015; Wasielewski, in press). Within a partnership context we connect theory to practice in clinical placements with the intent of developing correlating projects and experiences that use evidence- based instructional practices (AACTE, 2010, 2018; Allsopp, DeMarie, Alvarez-McHatton, & Doone, 2006; Bohannon, et al., 2024; Darling-Hammond, 2006; Darling-Hammond, 2015; Robinson et al., 2016). Collectively, we recognize the importance of supporting the diverse needs of all learners and strive to provide opportunities for using technology-enhanced learning opportunities at KSC and in partner schools. 

Principle 2: Partnerships foster a culture of professional learning

Partnerships with P-12 schools emphasize teaching as a profession and create communities of practice to strengthen the teaching profession and sustain KSC-school partnerships. A focus on fuller, deeper, and broader experiences for P-12 students, educator preparation candidates, and all those involved in clinical preparation is emphasized (CAEP, 2020). This is achieved through collaborative professional learning and research, graduate programs, teacher mentoring, and building teacher and leader capacity (Bohannon et al., 2024; Hunter-Quartz, et al., 2017; NAPDS, 2008; Robinson et al., 2016; Wasielewski et al., 2022). Educator preparation candidates are supported to be lifelong learners after they graduate from KSC. We aim to enhance our profession through specific practices, including educator rounds, communities of practice, co-teaching, utilizing student performance data, educator assessment/accountability, and immersion in a variety of clinical models.

Principle 3: Partnerships are mutually beneficial and bidirectional

The development of educator preparation candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions occurs in an authentic setting supported by two-way and mutually beneficial relationships between schools and KSC (Bohannon, et al., 2024; CAEP, 2020; NCATE, 2010). Establishing communication between and among partners is a critical component when developing and sustaining partnerships. Additionally, KSC faculty strive to understand and recognize the P-12 school culture and seek opportunities for EPP candidates to integrate into this culture. Partnerships foster the development of interconnected support structures for educators and community stakeholders in education, making them proactive and responsive over time. 

The responsibility for developing educator talent and supporting P-12 student learning is shared among all partners. To the extent possible, this means that all parties involved understand the shared vision and values between IHEs and schools (Bohannon, et al., 2024; Burroughs et al., 2020; CAEP, 2020; Darling-Hammond, 2015; NAPDS, 2008; Snyder, 2005; Wasielewski et al., 2022. For example, partners co-select EPP candidates for participation in clinical experiences, co-constructing experiences, co-evaluating all learners (P-12 learners and educator preparation candidates), and have mutual respect for one another. They collaborate and share decision-making on curriculum development activities, instructional technology, professional learning, and applied research to solidify partnerships (Boyle-Baise & McIntyre, 2008; Robinson & Darling-Hammond, 2005; Darling-Hammond, 2015; Wasielewski & Gahlsdorf-Terrell, 2014). 

Design Elements and Evidence

The design elements are intended to assist individual KSC Educator Preparation Programs in developing or enhancing partnerships with schools. Within each Design Element and corresponding evidence, there is an opportunity to demonstrate adherence to each of the Guiding Principles. For example, an agreement between partners is an opportunity to articulate how P-12 student learning and development is supported by a partnership (Principle 1).

See Appendix for specific recommended evidence to document partnership elements and principles.

• Allsopp, D., DeMarie, D., Alvarez-McHatton, P., & Doone, E. (2006). Bridging the gap between theory and practice: Connecting courses with field experiences. Teacher Education Quarterly, 33(1), 19–35. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ795196.pdf 
• American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. (2010). The clinical preparation of teachers: A policy brief. https://aacte.org/2010/03/strong-clinical-teacher-preparation-a-qmustq-…;
• American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. (2018). A pivot toward clinical practice, its lexicon, and renewing the profession of teaching. https://aacte.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/cpc-full-report-final.pdf&…;
• Bohannon, K., Connelly, V., Bigaj, S., & Wasielewski, L. M. (2024). Development and evolution of clinical partnerships: K–12 school leaders’ perspectives. School–University Partnerships, 17(3). https://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3366&context=facul…;
• Boyle-Baise, M., & McIntyre, D. J. (2008). What kind of experience? Preparing teachers in PDS or community settings. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, D. J. McIntyre, & K. Demers (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (3rd ed., pp. 307–330). Routledge. 
• Burroughs, G., Lewis, A., Battey, D., Curran, M., Hyland, N. E., & Ryan, S. (2020). From mediated fieldwork to co-constructed partnerships: A framework for guiding and reflecting on P–12 school–university partnerships. Journal of Teacher Education, 71(1), 122–134. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487119858992 
• Castle, S., Fox, R., & Souder, K. (2006). Do professional development schools (PDS) make a difference? A comparative study of PDS and non-PDS teacher candidates. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(1), 65–80. 
• Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation. (2020). CAEP consolidated handbook. https://www.marshall.edu/coepd-assessment/files/2020/10/caep-handbook-f…;
• Council of Chief State School Officers. (2012). Our responsibility, our promise: Transforming educator preparation. https://www.nysed.gov/sites/default/files/principal-project-file-40-our…;
• Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Powerful teacher education: Lessons from exemplary programs. Jossey-Bass.
• Darling-Hammond, L. (2015). The flat world and education: How America's commitment to equity will determine our future. Teachers College Press. 
• National Association for Professional Development Schools. (2008). What it means to be a professional development school. NAPDS. 
• National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. (2010). Transforming teacher education through clinical practice: A national strategy to prepare effective teachers. NCATE. 
• Wasielewski, L. M., Birch, M., Bigaj, S., & Connelly, V. (2022). From placements to partnerships: The state of clinical practice and preparation. Peabody Journal of Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2020.1864245