Growing University–School Partnerships

  • Mellita JonesEmail author
  • Gail Chittleborough


The ways in which the Science Teacher Education Partnerships with Schools (STEPS) project identified and represented a guide for growing university–school partnerships are presented in this chapter. Based on evidence from the STEPS research into the independent school-based science teacher education programs of five Australian universities, components for initiating and sustaining successful partnerships were identified and described. These components are: (1) partner identification of aims and rationale for entering the partnership; (2) institutional requirements and constraints that govern partnership activities; (3) the nature and extent of the relationship between partners; (4) the nature and quality of the learning; and (5) a commitment to action to achieve the desired outcomes. The relevance of these components across three phases of partnership work, initiation, implementation, and evaluation, is also described alongside concomitant Action Planning Tools that can assist partners’ discussion and negotiation of the phases and components. Collectively, the components and phases form the Growing University–School Partnerships (GUSP) element of the STEPS Interpretive Framework. The GUSP encompasses essential planning aspects and helps to ensure that all partners’ needs and roles are considered and that the partnership achieves the desired benefits for all. Initiating, maintaining, and growing partnerships can be challenging; however, the process and tools summarised in GUSP and presented in this chapter provide a guide for others wishing to establish a new partnership or to review and/or develop an existing partnership.


Partnerships Growing partnerships School-based Teacher education Interpretive Framework 


  1. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Powerful teacher education: Lessons from exemplary programs. San Francisco, CA: Wiley.Google Scholar
  3. Goodrum, D., Hackling, M., & Rennie, L. (2001). The status and quality of teaching and learning of science in Australian schools: A research report. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.Google Scholar
  4. Hobbs, L., Campbell, C., Chittleborough, G., Herbert, S., Jones, M., Redman, C., Kenny, J., & Gilbert, A. (2015). Science teacher education partnerships with schools (STEPS): Interpretive framework. Retrieved from
  5. Jones, M., Hobbs, L., Kenny, J., Campbell, C., Chittleborough, G., Herbert, S., et al. (2016). Successful university-school partnerships: An interpretive framework to inform partnership practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 108–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Korthagen, F. (2011). Making teacher education relevant for practice: The pedagogy of realistic teacher education. Orbis Scholae, 5(2), 31–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Korthagen, F. (2016). Pedagogy of teacher education. In J. Loughran & M. Hamilton (Eds.), International handbook on teacher education (Vol. 1, pp. 311–346). Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kruger, T., Davies, A., Eckersley, B., Newell, F., & Cherednichenko, B. (2009). Effective and sustainable university-school partnerships. Beyond determined efforts of inspired individuals. Canberra: Teaching Australia [Electronic version]. Retrieved from
  9. Loughran, J., & Hamilton, M. (2016). Developing an understanding of teacher education. In J. Loughran & M. Hamilton (Eds.), International handbook on teacher education (Vol. 1, pp. 3–22). Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Rossner, P., & Commins, D. (2012). Defining ‘enduring partnerships:’ Can a well-worn path be an effective, sustainable and mutually beneficial relationship? Queensland College of Teachers, Retrieved from
  11. Schön, D. A. (1995). Knowing-in-action: The new scholarship requires a new epistemology. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 27(6), 27–34. Scholar
  12. Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory Group (TEMAG). (2014). Action now: Classroom ready teachers. Retrieved from
  13. Zeichner, K. (2010). Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college- and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–2), 89–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Zeichner, K., Payne, K., & Brayko, K. (2016). Democratizing teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(2), 122–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Australian Catholic UniversityBallaratAustralia
  2. 2.Deakin UniversityBurwoodAustralia

Personalised recommendations