http://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/services/Feed ${session.getAttribute("locale")} 5 http://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/manager/Repository/uon:12023 University-school connections (partnerships) have had an historical place in Australia, England and the United States of America since Dewey in 1904; however, there is increasing acknowledgement of the value of connections that vary from the traditional versions of professional experiences (practicum and internship). In this paper, I draw on two sources of data, a literature review and focus group interviews both of which were collected for a larger research project titled University-School Connections (USCs): Complex Connections. Plentiful evidence, over time, of the research effort spent on USCs is available, with the bulk of studies indicating the high value of USCs to stakeholders, (individually and collectively: pre-service teacher education students, teachers, schools, and by extension school students, academics, higher education institutions and systems operating within the profession and beyond). Alongside of this evidence of 'value' sits, at times, an urgent call for adaptations to the style and an increase in the frequency of university-school connections. The focus is on four areas in this paper. Firstly, the terminology used by researchers to describe USCs is explored and it is argued that the use of the word partnership isn't the most appropriate choice. Partnerships, according to research, happen via collaboration, are mutually beneficial, with partners having some autonomy, thus resulting in the creation of a common culture. These ingredients however do not necessarily constitute a recipe for a successful or enduring partnership. Wenger claims that collaboration and the forming of a common culture can involve challenges such as 'conflict and cordiality, competitiveness and co-operation'. Sachs tackles the difficult problem of defining partnerships based on either collaboration or co-operation. I argue that the use of the term partnership for co-operative/ collaborative and /or third culture arrangements between schools and universities is a misnomer and in some way contributes to the cause of disharmony, dissatisfaction and lack of endurance of some partnerships. Secondly, there is a brief historical perspective of the journey of USCs and thirdly an outline of more recent developments in USCs touching on both a national and international perspective where there has been a systematic push for universities, students, graduates, government and community to make meaningful connections is presented. Indeed many Australian university strategic plans encourage the development of collaborative partnerships and internationally a push for increased connections between schools and their communities is evident in the research literature. Lastly, to give student voice to USCs data from focus group interviews of pre-service teachers involved in a university-school connection, the LiNKS Program is drawn on. This paper is a contribution to the theme of student voice at the ECE conference. 2012-11-16T04:47:33.548Z ]]> http://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/manager/Repository/uon:9066 This paper draws on data from a preliminary study of the literature for a larger research project, the focus of which was university-school connections (USCs) involving preservice teacher education and Australian primary schools. There is no scarcity of data or research effort on USCs with the majority of studies indicating the value of USCs to stakeholders (pre-service students, teachers, schools, academics and systems operating within the profession). There is a tendency for the education profession to sustain the conversations surrounding USCs many of which are concerned with the same issues studied over time since Dewey in 1904. This sustainability of interest is coupled with, at times, an urgent call for increased connections to be made between the university system and schools. The focus of this paper is three-fold. Firstly, it explores the terminology used by researchers when describing USCs and argues that use of the word partnership is not the most appropriate choice, secondly, it gives an historical perspective of the progression of USCs and thirdly, it moves forward to more recent developments in USCs. It concludes with a number of research questions that the author is currently working on that have emerged during the review of the literature and argues that closer attention to the endurance of USCs and how this is articulated is required. 2012-01-30T05:12:34.969Z ]]>