Effective cooperation among schools, families, and district‑level stakeholders is an indispensable condition for maximizing student success and fostering inclusive community development. Traditional partnership models often remain fragmented, episodic, and resistant to systemic innovation, leaving gaps in student support and educational equity. This article proposes an integrative mechanism grounded in an innovative pedagogical approach that synthesizes ecological‐systemic theory, design‑thinking principles, and data‑driven decision‑making. A mixed‑methods study conducted in three public schools in Tashkent Region examined how iterative co‑creation cycles, digital collaboration platforms, and community design labs reshape relational dynamics and educational outcomes. Quantitative measures included student achievement growth, attendance, and parent engagement indices over two academic years; qualitative data were obtained through focus groups and participatory observation. Results suggest that the proposed mechanism significantly increases multi‑actor coordination efficiency, strengthens trust, and yields measurable gains in learner motivation and well‑being. The discussion analyses enabling factors—leadership openness, distributed agency, and digital literacy—as well as constraints such as resource disparity and regulatory rigidity. The study concludes with recommendations for policy and practice aimed at institutionalizing the mechanism through adaptive governance and continuous capacity‑building initiatives.  

School–family partnership, community engagement, innovative pedagogy

Epstein J. L. School, family, and community partnerships: preparing educators and improving schools. 2nd ed. Boulder: Westview Press, 2011. 547 p.

Bronfenbrenner U. The ecology of human development: experiments by nature and design. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1979. 330 p.

Fullan M. The new meaning of educational change. 5th ed. New York: Teachers College Press, 2020. 400 p.

Hargreaves A., O’Connor M. Collaborative professionalism: when teaching together means learning for all // Corwin Journal of Learning. 2018. Vol. 12, № 3. Pp. 15–29.

Johnson D. W., Johnson R. T. The impact of cooperative learning on achievement in education // Educational Researcher. 2009. Vol. 38, № 5. Pp. 365–379.

Kadirova G. S., Rakhimova Z. M. Digital platforms in Uzbek school governance: opportunities and constraints // Journal of Modern Education. 2023. Vol. 7, № 2. Pp. 51–64.

Kim J. H., Reeves T. Design‑based research: putting a stake in the ground // British Journal of Educational Technology. 2007. Vol. 38, № 6. Pp. 959–962.

Loukaitou‑Sideris A., Kwon J. Mahalla communities and educational support networks in Central Asia // Central Asian Survey. 2022. Vol. 41, № 4. Pp. 563–582.

Patton M. Q. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. 4th ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2015. 806 p.

Reimers F. M., Schleicher A. Preparing teachers and schools for the future of education // OECD Education Working Papers. 2021. № 260. 44 p.

Salikhova D. T. Innovative governance in Uzbek basic education: policy review. Tashkent: Institute for Research in Education, 2022. 112 p.

Yin R. K. Case study research and applications: design and methods. 7th ed. Los Angeles: Sage, 2018. 485 p.