Using Coproduction to Strengthen Family-School Partnerships

A military-connected student who joins a class midway through the year often arrives with a file listing courses, grades, and formal services. The file rarely captures which classroom routines helped at the previous school, whether a course title reflects the material already covered, or what the student is worried about on the first day. The family can fill in some gaps, the student can fill in others, and the receiving school understands its own curriculum and supports. A workable plan brings those perspectives together.

Strong family-school partnerships connect participation to real decisions. Schools can strengthen that connection by clarifying what they are deciding, inviting the knowledge needed for that decision, and showing families and students how their input shaped the response.

Partnership as decision infrastructure

Public-administration research offers a useful lens for this work. Nabatchi, Sancino, and Sicilia (2017) call it coproduction when government professionals and members of the public voluntarily work together to produce a benefit. In a public school, educators contribute professional and institutional knowledge, while students and families contribute knowledge grounded in experience.

Viewed through this lens, family-school partnerships become part of a school’s decision infrastructure. Communication opens the door, while a defined process carries what the school learns into planning, action, and review. Coproduction helps educators determine who should be involved, when their involvement can add value, and what families, students, and school personnel can work together to produce.

These questions matter because education research shows that different forms of family involvement are associated with different results. Kim (2022) combined 23 reviews covering 1,177 studies conducted over 50 years and found that academic socialization, which includes parents communicating the value of education and their expectations and aspirations for the future, had the strongest association with achievement among the forms examined. For schools, one practical application is to learn what families hope for their child’s education and how they understand the path toward those goals.

Schools can put that knowledge to use by asking focused questions, connecting the answers to academic decisions, and showing families how their input informed next steps. The School Resources Academic Achievement and Family Engagement professional learning series provides evidence-informed guidance for building these partnerships. Within the series, the Frequent Parent Communication module can help educators maintain an ongoing exchange with families, while Documenting Conversations with Parents offers guidance for preserving family input for planning and follow-up.

Follow family and student knowledge through a military transition

Recent military-family research shows what each stakeholder can add to a transition plan. Nicholson and colleagues (2025) interviewed 39 elementary- and middle-school teachers and counselors in one public school district near a large military installation. The interviews focused on participants’ roles in supporting military families during transitions, their experiences working with these families, and their views of relevant professional development and training. Educators described learning about families, helping students form connections, using formal and informal supports, communicating consistently with parents, seeking timely records, and checking in during parental deployment.

Spencer and colleagues (2026) interviewed 40 highly mobile active-duty military families with elementary- and middle-school students. The researchers asked families about their experiences moving between schools, students’ academic, social, and emotional well-being and sense of school connection, and the school supports they considered helpful. Parents described registration requirements, delayed records, academic placement, and differences among curricula. Students focused more on leaving friends and forming new relationships. Families appreciated school tours, opportunities to meet teachers, and peers who helped new students find their way or invited them to sit together at lunch. Most also valued military-specific supports.

Together, the studies illustrate how educators, parents, and students notice different parts of the same transition. School personnel understand available services, parents can explain previous instruction and supports, and students can identify where the transition feels most difficult. Bringing those perspectives together gives the school a stronger basis for planning its response.

The Transfer of Educational Records for Military-Connected Students module explains relevant Interstate Compact guidelines for records and enrollment. How Can School Liaisons Help School Personnel? describes ways school liaisons can assist with coordination.

Carry family knowledge through the decision cycle

Gathering information is only the beginning of the family-school partnership. A decision process carries what the school learns into action and follow-up. Nabatchi and colleagues identify four phases of the public-service cycle in which coproduction can occur: commissioning, design, delivery, and assessment. Schools can adapt these phases as a practical sequence that carries family and student knowledge from the first conversation through follow-up.

1. Identify shared priorities. During co-commissioning, participants determine what is needed, who should benefit, and what they hope to accomplish. The school, family, and student might agree that appropriate coursework and an initial sense of connection are the two most urgent outcomes. Naming those outcomes keeps the partnership focused on decisions that matter.
2. Design the response together. During co-design, educators explain requirements and available supports, the family describes prior instruction and effective strategies, and the student explains what would help during the first days. Together, they might select a records review, brief placement check, designated school contact, peer mentor, and follow-up date. The plan should show how each participant’s knowledge influenced the selected actions.
3. Put the plan into action. Co-delivery turns the plan into coordinated roles. The school may obtain records, review placement, and arrange the peer connection. The family may share available documents and new information, while the student raises questions as the first week unfolds. Clear roles support coordination, while the school retains responsibility for required services and professional decisions and family participation remains voluntary.
4. Review and improve the response. Co-assessment returns participants to the outcomes they identified. They can consider whether the coursework is appropriately challenging, whether the student knows whom to approach for help, whether peer connections are developing, and whether the family knows whom to contact. Their answers guide adjustments and may begin another cycle of priority-setting, design, action, and review.

A short written record can connect the four phases by capturing the priorities, selected actions, responsible staff members, and follow-up date. The Documenting Conversations with Parents module provides guidance for recording these exchanges effectively and securely. When a parent is away, the Communication During Parental Absence module can help schools determine who should receive updates and how family members can remain informed.

Conclusion

When a military-connected student arrives, the registration file will rarely tell the whole story. Schools can build a reliable way to learn what the file leaves out and use that knowledge responsibly. Three questions can guide the work: What decision are we trying to improve? Whose knowledge would strengthen it? How will participants know what changed? When schools can answer all three, family-school partnerships become part of how they make better-informed decisions for students.