49 Reprinted from Reflections on connecting research and practice in college access and success programs, pp.49-59, by H. T. Rowan-Kenyon, M. Cahalan, & M. Yamashita, Eds., 2018,Washington, DC: Pell Institute. COMMON GROUND AND UPWARD BOUND: LESSONS FROM A CROSS-INSTITUTIONAL COLLABORATION BY EZEKIEL KIMBALL, TYSON ROSE, YEDALIS RUIZ, AND RYAN WELLS Introduction Federal TRIO programs provide vitally necessary educational programming designed to increase access and equity for historically underrepresented and underserved populations. By design, they also employ innovative strategies grounded in best practices and rigorous empirical research. However, TRIO programs also pose a paradox: while they present potentially fruitful sites for research, seemingly very little is known about their impact and what is “known” may be confusing or even incorrect (Cahalan & Goodwin, 2014). The framing for the recent joint undertaking between ASHE and the Pell Institute suggests one reason why: collaborations between higher education researchers and TRIO practitioners are relatively infrequent. In this essay, we highlight two related potential reasons for the infrequency of collaborations in research and practice: 1) the divergent needs and interests of scholars and practitioners; and 2) a difficulty in creating the sort of shared meanings that would allow collaboration to occur. We then describe the development of an ongoing collaboration between personnel in the higher education program and the Upward Bound program at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, highlighting the ongoing conversations and reconceptualizations of research design necessary to make this collaboration work. We describe the collaboration from both perspectives—scholar and practitioner—affording an opportunity to highlight the initial differences in motivation for participation and ultimately the similarities in values for the work. Problems in Scholarship and Practice Messages received from professional conferences, literature on best practices, and graduate training exhort those working in higher education to think of themselves as scholar-practitioners (e.g., Bensimon, 2007; Love, 2012; Reason & Kimball, 2012). This knowledge base reminds interested parties that evidence-based decision-making is facilitated by deep engagement with Abstract Research findings demonstrate the importance of shared understandings, or “cognitive common ground” in collaborations. Yet, college- going is complex, and potential differences in perspective among scholars, practitioners, and students may easily arise. In this paper, we use insights from practice and relevant research to describe how common ground can be nurtured.