What is it? School governance and teacher training are sometimes used as mechanisms to improve the attainment of school-age pupils. Partnerships between schools and higher education providers (HEPs) are typically formed through university sponsorship of schools, professional development opportunities for teachers, and placing university staff as governors of schools.

Evidence? There is anecdotal evidence suggesting that school-university partnerships and school sponsorship positively influences student attainment. However, we have very little strong evidence, particularly in the UK context.

Should HEPs adopt it? Since this is a high-cost approach, providers should seek to embed causal evaluation to understand the extent to which school governance and teacher training impact student outcomes – see the TASO evaluation guidance for more information on how to do this.

Interventions that focus on school governance and teacher training include:

  • School-university partnerships: mutually beneficial collaborations between HEPs and local schools (including university sponsorship of schools)
  • Professional development opportunities for teachers
  • Placement of university staff as governors of schools

The advice on this page draws on evidence from studies that investigate the effect of school governance activities on improving attainment and widening access to higher education (HE) for pupils from disadvantaged and underrepresented groups.

Although the evidence is weak at the moment, a small number of studies suggest that school governance and teacher training interventions may raise aspirations, improve attainment, increase teacher ability and retention, and improve school success.

In the UK context, there is limited evidence on the impact of school sponsorship by HEPs on pupil attainment and progression to HE. One existing study looked at the first two student cohorts of the King’s College London Mathematics School (Golding, 2019). The study suggests that King’s sponsorship of a school could have a positive relationship with pupil attainment; however, since entry to the school is selective, it is possible that the school attracts pupils who were already likely to perform well. In a similar study, Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) examined HEPs sponsorship of academy schools and conducted an empirical analysis of the trends in pupils’ attainment and HE progression. The analysis found that there was a significant increase in pupil attainment at Key Stage 4 across all sponsored academies studied (Universities UK, 2017). However, the study did not include a comparison group of schools that didn’t receive the sponsorship, so it’s difficult to know whether the HEP sponsorship is responsible for the increase in pupil attainment.

There is some evidence from the US of the positive impact of school-university partnerships on attainment. First, Officer et al. (2013) analysed a partnership involving a variety of activities, (e.g., tutoring, mentoring campus visits and training courses for school teachers). Although the study does not look at attainment data, it notes that the high school graduation and continuation into post-secondary education rates increased over time after the partnership was established. Ward et al. (2013) found significant positive effects of a similar partnership, involving a combination of additional training provided to school staff, academic enrichment support programmes and parental involvement in the university application process. The study found an association between regular programme participation and better grades, after controlling prior attainment.

The mechanisms that sit between the different interventions and attainment-raising (student motivation and engagement for example) are not rigorously explored in the existing literature, so exactly what would drive change in student outcomes remains unclear. However, the assumption is that interventions focus on enhancing institutional-level factors that contribute to improved attainment for individual students. Further research is required to understand the mechanisms that cause change.

Currently, we do not have enough evidence to make claims about the impact of school governance and teacher training programmes on pupils’ attainment. This is largely due to:

  • A lack of studies that include a comparison group as part of the research design;
  • The challenges of isolating the effects of specific activities within wider multi-intervention programmes;
  • A lack of longitudinal studies that track longer-term behavioural outcomes as well as intermediate outcomes.

Five relevant pieces of research were found, but no study with a causal design.

Studies

Golding, J., (2019). Progression through a mathematics specialist school: a study of trajectories of the first two cohorts through King’s College London Mathematics School. UCL Institute of Education: Progression through a mathematics specialist school (ucl.ac.uk). Linked here.

Officer, S. D., Grim, J., Medina, M. A., Bringle, R. G., & Foreman, A. (2013). Strengthening community schools through university partnerships. Peabody Journal of Education, 88(5), 564-577. Linked here.

Universities UK (2016). Working in Partnership: Enabling Social Mobility in Higher Education. The final report of the Social Mobility Advisory Group: Working in partnership: enabling social mobility in higher education – the final report of the Social Mobility Advisory Group (universitiesuk.ac.uk). Linked here.

Universities UK (2017). Raising attainment through university-school partnerships:Linked here.

Ward, N.L., Strambler, M.J. and Linke, L.H., (2013). Increasing educational attainment among urban minority youth: A model of university, school, and community partnerships. The Journal of Negro Education, 82(3), pp.312-325: Linked here.