Universities, Community, and Democracy in Action

In August 2025 we contributed a chapter to The Cambridge Handbook of School-University Partnerships. The full chapter is available here. Please enjoy this conversation with the chapter authors.

Karen: At the most basic level, it’s about rethinking school–university partnerships. Universities have a long history of working with schools, but those relationships are often shaped by the university’s priorities. We argue that University-Assisted Community Schools, or UACS, offer a different orientation—one where the school and the community are centered, and the university plays a genuinely supportive role.

Jeffrey: And I’d add that it’s not just about being nicer or more collaborative—it’s about power. Who sets the agenda? Who benefits? Who gets to define what success looks like? UACS are an attempt to shift those dynamics in a more equitable direction.

Rebekah: Yes, and the chapter is also saying that this isn’t hypothetical. There are schools and universities already doing this work. We wanted to surface what we can learn from those examples and why they matter right now.

Rebekah: Community schools are getting a lot of national attention, which is exciting. However, there is also a risk of oversimplifying them. Nuance can get lost when models try to scale quickly. We wanted to slow down, reflect, and ask: What actually makes these partnerships equitable and democratic? Not just effective, but just.

Karen: And there’s also a higher education moment here. Universities are being asked to demonstrate public value, to be anchor institutions. UACS offer a concrete way to do that—if universities are willing to rethink how they show up.

Jeffrey: That even well-intentioned partnerships can reproduce inequality. Universities have institutional power—grant funding, research prestige, control over timelines—and schools often have to adapt to that. When expectations aren’t aligned, schools can end up feeling like sites for training or research rather than equal partners.

Rebekah: And sometimes it’s structural rather than personal. Different calendars, different accountability systems, different definitions of “impact.” It’s important that there is intentional design, because those differences can undermine the partnership.This is why we emphasize that equity doesn’t just magically happen. It is built into the partnership through governance, shared decision-making, and constant reflection.

Karen: They kept surfacing across contexts as the things that made partnerships more equitable. When community is centered, the work stays grounded. When deliberative democracy is practiced, power is shared. And when public scholarship is valued, knowledge flows both ways.

Jeffrey: I also think of them as guardrails. They help partnerships avoid drifting back into old habits where the university quietly takes the lead again.

Jeffrey: It means starting with the community’s needs and assets, not the university’s proposal. That can look like needs and assets assessments, integrated student supports, or expanded learning opportunities—but it’s also a mindset. Families and students are experts in their own lives.

Rebekah: I’d add that centering the community also means being responsive. Needs change. Political contexts change. Strong partnerships evolve alongside the community.

Rebekah: It looks like people taking time to listen, reflect, disagree productively, and make decisions together. In UACS, that can mean governance teams that include teachers, families, students, community members, and university partners. It’s slower than top-down decision-making, but it’s also more sustainable .

Jeffrey: And sometimes messy.

Rebekah: Very messy. But productive messy.

Karen: And importantly, schools practicing deliberative democracy are teaching students what democracy actually looks like—not just as a concept, but as a lived experience.

Karen: Because it challenges narrow ideas about who produces knowledge. In UACS, research is done with schools and communities, not on them. The goal is to inform practice, influence policy, and contribute to the public good—not just publish articles.

Rebekah: And public scholarship values multiple forms of knowledge—stories, data, lived experience. That’s especially important in communities that have historically been marginalized by research.

Rebekah: Because it shows how these ideas come together in a real place with real constraints. The school serves a multilingual, immigrant community and works closely with UCLA but the partnership doesn’t overshadow the school’s mission.

Jeffrey: It also shows how universities can contribute meaningfully—through teacher education, research-practice partnerships, and services like the legal clinic—without dominating.

Jeffrey: That partnership work requires investment, humility, and patience. Universities need to value this work institutionally—through staffing, recognition, and reward structures.

Karen: And they need to resist the urge to control outcomes. Being an anchor institution means showing up in service of community-defined goals.

Rebekah: It also means being willing to learn together.

Karen: That community schools are not just a strategy—they’re a way of organizing education around democracy, equity, and collective responsibility.

Jeffrey: And that partnerships matter. How schools and universities work together shapes what’s possible.

Rebekah: Ultimately, we hope readers see community schools as places where democracy is practiced daily with students, families, educators, and communities at the center.

Suggested Citation: Quartz, K. H., Yo, J., & Kang, R. (2025). University-assisted community schools: Partnerships that advance community, democracy, and scholarship. In The Cambridge Handbook of School-University Partnerships (pp. 483–500).