Becoming beneficiaries: Redefining partnership outcomes for students as a symmetrical benefit

Traditionally speaking, partnership work conducted by the independent school sector has been subject to a particular direction of travel. I say “subject to” because despite the best intentions of dedicated partnership staff in independent schools, some rather ingrained educational assumptions have dictated that this singular direction of travel exists. This has, up until quite recently, been an accepted truth in the minds of the schools involved in partnerships, the UK government and the public. 

To put it in the crude, yet laconic words of a colleague recently, partnership work has been seen to be “posh kids doing learning to poor kids”. This is an obvious oversimplification, and much work has been done in recent years across the sector to try and remove that impression, however, it is something that requires continued examination. To begin, I think it's important to explore the assumptions that may have caused this rather far-reaching impression to come to be. 

1.   Independent school pupils are inherently better at education

2.   Independent schools are forced to “give something back” to the state sector

3.    Aspirations and educational values are almost universally seen to travel downwards from independent to state

To the critically minded and experienced educator, these propositions fail to stand up to much sustained scrutiny. Why is it then that partnership working between sectors continues to be troubled by them?

A lot of the issues stem from the nature of the partnership work itself. It feels logical to assume that the resource-rich partner would provide more of the physical basis for partnership activity, this can (and often does) include the planning and organisation of the partnership offering (Edkins and Seldon, 2002). This issue is a structural one and is not in itself antithetical to a mutually beneficial partnership. The power to address the idea that one sector is “doing” education to the other lies in planned outcomes for the task itself not who planned it. Coordinators must ask themselves, “What skill is each pupil developing during the event?”

The reasoning here becomes clear with an example. Suppose the science department at an independent school wishes to engage in partnership activity with three local state schools, what might the design process for such an event be? Your mind may wander back to the three propositions listed above and arrive at the conclusion of a science mentoring programme as the ideal type of event. I would like to caveat here that mentoring programmes are extremely commonplace in partnership work, they can be life changing and they can, when done well, provide significant challenge and skills building for all pupils involved. They can also, however, fall foul of the dreaded propositions and I have seen this happen more often than not. The result is not just the perpetuation of those damaging stereotypes but also the creation of an “asymmetrical” skills dynamic.

What does this mean? Well, in simple terms, the students from each sector gain a different range of skills due to the differentiation (or lack of) in the task. When an independent school student comes in to tutor, deliver sessions, mentor or coach, that student is gaining high-value skills. Those skills such as leadership, empathy, technical instruction and initiative are vital to universities and employers and therefore work to enable higher level applications for the independent school student doing the tutoring. Conversely, the tutee gains curriculum-based skills that in the best-case scenario will allow them to compete with their peers. To be clear, both sets of skills are needed, but both sets of skills are needed by all students regardless of where they attend school.

The implication from our myths is that a state school student would be unsuitable to tutor a student in an independent school, and I find this to be a curiously silly idea. State schools are replete with incredibly talented students, working just as hard to get their heads above the competition as their independent school peers, so does it not stand to reason that they, within the same partnership structure, could develop these same skills?

Some careful thought into event planning can open up a number of different ways in which these myths can be challenged, allowing our students to work together collaboratively and symmetrically.

Adapt to succeed

Does your school have an impactful and engaging mentoring programme? If it does, then consider extending the programme by inviting talented students from state partners to come and tutor your younger students. This is a simple way to make an asymmetrical skills dynamic into a symmetrical one while valuing the talent and contributions of your state partners.

Consider areas of natural parity

My own partnership runs a highly popular and successful performance poetry programme. The beauty of this programme is that neither school sector has much experience with performance poetry. The results have been amazing, with winners and runners-up across the sectors and some stellar performances all round. Consider stretch areas where everyone comes in new, mix the schools and see the wonderful benefits.

Consult your partners on their areas of strength

State schools are highly diverse in what they do well; the useful part is they are more than happy to talk about those strengths! Independent school staff and students could go over, see what they do and develop new knowledge and processes.

These are just a few ways in which partnerships may grow into organisations of deep mutual benefit. Give them a try and grow the impact of your partnership for everyone in it.