Knowledge Brokering: What’s in a Name?

Since we launched the Education Knowledge Broker Network in March of this year, we’ve offered numerous events for educators from every sector to learn more about knowledge brokering. Participants have tuned in from across the globe and represent just about every role you can imagine in the education field. Even with this diversity, there is a common refrain we hear over and over in our conversations about brokering: “This is what I do, but I never called it that! I didn’t even realize there was a name for it.”  

In fact, many of us who have been involved in building the network have uttered some variation of the above. We introduce ourselves as teachers, educators, coaches, researchers, and so on, but it is still uncommon to name ourselves as practicing knowledge brokers. It is encouraging to see so many individuals recognize themselves and their work as they learn more about knowledge brokering, but widespread adoption of the term remains a challenge for the field.

One barrier we face is that there are not yet agreed upon terms or definitions that consistently describe brokering in educational contexts. Lucy Rycroft-Smith recently argued that the state of literature related to educational knowledge brokering is “confused, inconsistent and us[es] a variety of terms for apparently similar concepts.” Two separate systematic reviews, led by Jennifer Watling Neal and Eleanor MacKillop respectively, drew similar conclusions, highlighting both inconsistent definitions and frequent failure to explicitly define key terms.

Shared language is an important component of field building, and it is clear that knowledge brokering, particularly for educational contexts, remains an area ripe for refinement. Yet there is also a practical need for language to facilitate ongoing dialogue across the diverse brokering community, even as we work to improve our understanding of brokering. To that end, our team at the Education Knowledge Broker Network has adopted ‘working definitions’ that guide our conversations and efforts but remain subject to revision as the work evolves. Some key terms include:

  • Knowledge Brokers: Individuals or intermediary organizations who facilitate the exchange of knowledge among key constituent groups and individuals including researchers, practitioners, policymakers, parents, students, and community representatives. 
  • Knowledge Mobilization: Activities that promote multi-directional exchange of knowledge through interactions and sharing activities among researchers, brokers, and users to support research use in policy and practice, and inform ongoing research efforts.
  • Research Brokerage: A dynamic and complex set of actors, activities, and motivations within which research-based knowledge is exchanged, transformed, and otherwise communicated.
  • Evidence: Findings derived from systematic, empirical research, and from data and information generated through lived experience, program evaluation, practice-based evidence, and Indigenous Knowledge (adapted from Democratizing Evidence and the Transforming Evidence Network)

Inherent in these terms and definitions is a commitment to seeing brokering as a tool for more equitable educational practices, policies, and outcomes, particularly for those communities who have been historically and systematically disenfranchised. We conceptualize brokers as more than disseminators of research to practitioners or policymakers; they are also advocates for research that is informed by and improved through lived experience and context expertise. Like Elizabeth Farley-Ripple and colleagues, we see brokering as a bi-directional approach targeting a bi-directional problem. Brokers play a critically important role in connecting traditionally disconnected elements of our education and knowledge production systems.

Our goal at the Education Knowledge Brokers Network is to provide space for practicing knowledge brokers to engage with one another and continue exploring the nuances of language, theory, and implementation in brokering. The hundreds of you who joined us for a webinar, knowledge café, network happy hour, or other programming event have shown there is growing excitement for how knowledge brokers can contribute to a more just and effective education system. How can you help move the field of knowledge brokering forward? Here’s a few suggestions:

  1. Even if you are still familiarizing yourself with some of the terms listed here, start using them in your daily practice. Recognize where and when you are brokering knowledge and explicitly label it as such for your colleagues and partners.
  2. Introduce yourself at your next meeting as a knowledge broker (yes, really, give it a try)!
  3. Register for upcoming events with our network, including interactive series like our Knowledge Cafes and Broker Happy Hours! Be sure to sign up for our mailing list to stay up-to-date.
  4. Help spread the word about the Education Knowledge Broker Network by following us on LinkedIn at Education Knowledge Broker Network, on Threads @EdKnowledgeBrokers, and on X @EdKnowledBroker.

Across our network, in the literature, and in our various working environments, we will continue to negotiate meaning for key terms as we still have much to learn about brokering’s impact on our students and systems. But we can collectively make the work more visible by naming it and incorporating it as a regular part of our vernacular. I’d love to hear what happened when you introduced yourself as a knowledge broker- send me a message on LinkedIn!

About the Author

Katherine Philp, Ed.D., M.P.H., is a member of the Education Knowledge Broker Network Steering Committee. She has diverse, cross-sector experience in education, public health, and nonprofit leadership. Dr. Philp is a practicing knowledge broker, working closely with local youth organizations and grassroots coalitions in the Orando, FL region to both apply and generate research evidence. Her scholarly work focuses on after-school programs and community-based learning.