Trust in education is never static. We are either building it or repairing it—there’s no standing still, especially when it comes to bridging the gap between research and practice.
Trust is the cornerstone of the knowledge-brokering process, particularly when linking research and practice in education. It transforms information into actionable strategies, bridges gaps between interest-holders, and fosters an inclusive environment where meaningful change can take root. Beyond the relationships it nurtures, trust is what sustains partnerships and builds systems resilient enough to evolve. The ways trust is cultivated—through transparency, collaboration, and shared purpose—offer valuable lessons for driving systemic change in education.
Transparency, paired with clear communication, is foundational in building trust. When schools and districts focus on creating shared language and collective decision-making processes, they open pathways to collaboration and understanding. These practices don’t just build inclusion—they also ensure that solutions reflect the voices and needs of the community, creating a shared sense of purpose and possibility.
As trust grows, research can more effectively translate into practice. Educators, who operate in dynamic and often challenging contexts, are far more likely to engage with new strategies when they trust the source and feel its relevance to their students’ needs. As a Fellow with the CREATEd Fellowship, I am part of a diverse team that bridges research and practice through co-design. Our group includes knowledge brokers, a math instructional coach, researchers who authored our anchor piece, and a graphic design expert. Together, we are creating tools—an infographic and a social media carousel—to frame the design principles behind the purpose of Math Language Routines and their power to unlock multilingual learners’ language resources. Trust has been essential: it allows us to share expertise authentically and ensures our work resonates with educators and fosters deeper learning for students. Showing up consistently, listening deeply, and adapting to the needs of the team has underscored how trust transforms co-design into impactful solutions.
Equity-focused educational advocacy also hinges on trust. When engaging with educators, communities, policymakers, and/or researchers, trust ensures that research-backed recommendations move beyond rhetoric into meaningful action. Advocacy work requires asking the right questions, exploring challenges deeply, and amplifying under-resourced voices. By acting as a broker of ideas and evidence, I’ve witnessed how trust, cultivated through consistent partnership and shared understanding, creates the conditions for sustainable systemic change.
Professional development offers a unique avenue for knowledge brokering to thrive. When trust is present, professional learning sessions become brave spaces where educators can engage deeply, challenge assumptions, and reflect on their practices. In my experiences designing and leading professional development, I’ve seen how trust can foster a culture of continuous improvement, inviting educators to learn from one another and confidently try new strategies. These spaces often become incubators for translating complex research into practical classroom applications.
Stephen Covey’s assertion that ‘trust is the glue of life’ reminds us that trust transcends specific initiatives. For knowledge brokering, this glue binds research with the lived realities of educators, ensuring new strategies and insights are both accessible and actionable.
Trust, however, is not an abstract ideal. It must be intentionally cultivated through transparency, shared ownership, and authentic engagement. Knowledge brokering thrives on these practices, creating dynamic systems where communities and educators feel valued, empowered, and united in their pursuit of better opportunities for students. As you reflect on your role in education—whether as a teacher, leader, or advocate—consider how you can prioritize trust. How might greater transparency, collaboration, or inclusion elevate your impact? By intentionally cultivating trust, you lay the groundwork for resilient systems and thriving environments for all learners.
Jen Loescher is a Math Coach and Trainer with the Southern Nevada Regional Professional Development Program and a CREATEd Knowledge Broker Fellow. With over two decades of experience in education, she has served as an instructional coach, data coordinator, and classroom teacher. A dedicated advocate for impactful instructional coaching, Jen is also an alumnus of several prestigious fellowships, including the Public Education Foundation’s Teacher Leadership Academy and Nevada Teach Plus Fellowship. Contact Jen on LinkedIn.
As I write this blog, I am sitting in my office on the 16th floor of a high-rise building in downtown Atlanta. It is a beautiful space, quiet and organized, with colleagues working down the hall and a comfortable shared area for staff meetings and conversations at the far end. There is little physical sign of the large numbers of people my work is ostensibly intended to actually support – students attending schools, their families*, local community members…in fact, through my transition over the last fifteen years from a high school teacher working with students every day to a graduate student and now a researcher, I feel like I’ve seen those folks less and less.
I work for the Southern Education Foundation, the nation’s oldest education justice organization, and we frequently meet with and speak with young people, their families, and community activists, among many other community voices. It is key to our work, and we work hard to do it well. However, from our office up here it is still worth noting that there is much more work to be done to better incorporate community voices into all aspects of the work we do – right from the very beginning and continuing throughout each step. When we design our projects, we always think carefully about how to build in student, family, and community voice…but those designs are still generally created by us, my colleagues and I, here in our office or working remotely from our homes.
What’s more, “the community” is of course not a monolith, and although we work hard to build communication channels, we know that often the voices that are most valuable in helping us to understand what is needed in our education equity work may be the hardest for us to access – those whose phone is turned off, who aren’t seeing the postings or in the locations to spot the notices, who don’t know the activists we connect with when we look for a range of community input (and, for that matter, often are not familiar with us at all).
Developing authentic strategies for including a much broader range of community input in the earliest stages of our work is hugely important, and a huge challenge. And working to solve that challenge shouldn’t just be the responsibility of the folks in the community whose input we are seeking: coming up with a better way to do it which does not add undue burden to others and reflects and incorporates the reality of those who inform our work is our responsibility as brokers.
Some of you – particularly those who do direct community engagement work – may at this point be feeling a little frustrated: “Another researcher, complaining about how hard it is to connect with the community. The community should be leading this work, not just ‘informing’ it!” I agree! The challenge is that it is simply a matter of fact that this is often not the case. Many of us, myself certainly included, occupy a privileged position in the education ecosystem and have access to tools and resources that not everyone can easily access, that not everyone is even aware of. We can work as hard as possible to democratize those tools and resources, but we cannot simply transfer our grants and projects to “the community.” Further, our partners in the philanthropy sector have shared their own difficulty in effectively routing funds to community organizations to support authentic local initiatives. They need to do better. We all need to do better. But simply knowing that does not mean that we know how – the question of how to most effectively build in inclusive community voices in all aspects of the work we do (and your work may be very different from mine) is a legitimate one that requires real study and investigation.
The Education Knowledge Broker Network is about developing shared knowledge among many knowledge brokers in many different roles to answer the hard questions in our work, and few, if any, are harder than this: given the current reality of education improvement work, which is far too rarely led by actual representative community groups and individuals, how do we bring in key community voices right from the beginning? How do we transfer ownership of community-focused work to the community? To ask a famously simple but famously difficult question repeated by everyone from organizers to activists to researchers to educational leaders, how do we ensure that our work is with the community, not for it?
There is of course no one right answer to this question. Best practice depends on local context and structures, on the particular work and the wants and needs of those with whom it is done, on the breadth and scale of focus, on the specifics of the mechanisms and policies and structures in play.
But this is not a question it is acceptable not to answer. This is not a question we can reserve for later while we work from our own positionality without acceptable regard for the problematic nature of so much of the thinking we may be doing, even if inadvertently, for others. We do not know what people want and need until they tell us, and if our work begins only based on our own knowledge and in our own heads we run the risk of getting it wrong right from the start.
The Education Knowledge Broker Network is here to work to answer the hard questions – we have not marshalled resources for a group like this just to answer the easy ones. This is a topic that is ripe for discussion, and one for which we must create better approaches, better practices, and better knowledge. We all work and broker in different ways, but ensuring that key community members inform and shape our work centrally and right from the beginning is a necessity no matter our specific role. Work that is for others is really for no one.
Join us in this endeavor, and please share your expertise, your thoughts, and your challenges as we work to build answers together! We invite you to consider and address these questions along with us, and to join our future conversations and events, to discuss this hugely important topic.
*Obviously it largely goes without saying that some of my coworkers are parents – including some with local school-aged children – so it would be inaccurate to suggest there are no family members in my office, but I’m sure you, the reader, get my drift here.
Max Altman is the Director of Research and Policy at the Southern Education Foundation, where he oversees SEF’s research agenda and its research-informed policy positions and advocacy initiatives, including the recently released report, Miles To Go: The State of Education for Black Students in America. He previously served as the technical assistance lead for the Pacific Regional Educational Laboratory at McREL International in Honolulu, where he designed and facilitated ongoing support projects to meet the needs of educators in Pacific jurisdictions. Max has also served as a teacher and curriculum writer. Connect with Max on LinkedIn.
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:
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.
Introduce yourself at your next meeting as a knowledge broker (yes, really, give it a try)!
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.
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.
As a doctoral student, I have explored educational dynamics, particularly through the lens of the ‘hidden curriculum’—the unplanned, intangible interpersonal lessons that often impart more lasting knowledge than the structured curriculum (Giroux, 1978). My journey as a novice knowledge broker in the Science of Learning has been profoundly shaped by these informal learning experiences. The lived experience of translating theory into practice, sharing knowledge across diverse contexts, and facilitating new connections has enriched my understanding, mirroring the dynamics of both the hidden and formal curricula. This document attempts to encapsulate the nuanced insights gained from these firsthand experiences. While not exhaustive, it captures the recurring themes and pivotal learning moments that have surfaced along the way.
Know Thy Self
Understanding the content — in my case Science of Learning — as well as my strengths and weaknesses as they relate to communicating this content has been instrumental in establishing myself as an accurate and reliable source of information. This has meant admitting to myself when I need to look back at the research to reevaluate my conclusions. Conversely, it has also meant maintaining confidence if opposed, when appropriate. Acknowledging and differentiating between the previous two scenarios is a challenge in and of itself! Finding the balance between standing down and standing my ground is one I continue to work on. Keeping up with the research and acknowledging the iterative nature of this work has been a humbling experience, balanced mostly by instances of successfully clarifying otherwise ambiguous evidence for educators. There is still much for me to learn about the information I am advocating for dissemination, as is there much for me to learn about the best methods and avenues to employ towards that goal.
Adventures in Networking
It is not just Science of Learning evidence that I have been working to spread. Professional matchmaking is also a major component of acting as a knowledge broker. For the purposes of my studies and work, this has meant helping organizations connect with education administrators or state level decision-makers in hopes of a partnership that may lead to prioritization of SoL. It has also been supporting organizations in finding and hiring complementary, qualified professionals, aiding the translation of educational material for the U.S. market, or simply crafting a virtual introduction for people who work adjacently and may benefit from a collaboration. Thanks largely in part to social media, I have been successful at discovering and connecting with many other Science of Learning thought leaders. In fact, I can attribute much of my supplemental learning to resources and professionals I discovered on social media. My mantra remains, ‘don’t be afraid to reach out.’ It has served me well. I continue to be pleasantly surprised by the intellectual generosity that exists.
Navigating Crossroads
Some of my most productive relationships or conversations have resulted from dialogue with those who oppose Science of Learning. Becoming knowledgeable about conflicting perspectives has helped me to 1) understand what may need further investigation or refinement within Science of Learning, and 2) uncover instances of miscommunication. Sometimes the conflict is not about value or correctness, rather it stems from the way in which a topic has been named or framed. While it feels good to remain in the comfort of the echo chamber, the opportunity for transformative brokering seems to be associated with willingness to step outside of it.
Mind you, due diligence with nay-sayers does not always end well. My idealism has been recalibrated to more realistic expectations. There will not always be common ground, and sometimes maintaining respectful discourse is all you can hope for. I’ve certainly had conversations go awry. It is easy to take personally when others are not receptive to what I am so passionate about — or even to remaining amicable through the tension. While I imagine that my ability to mitigate these situations will improve with experience, I have accepted that not everyone wants to hear me, agree with me, or be connected with someone new.
The Why
As with most relationships, effective and transparent communication is key. Have I oversold the potential for a lucrative relationship when introducing potential collaborators? Maybe. I have learned to keep tabs on my enthusiasm when brokering introductions — no empty promises or false hopes. Disclaimer: this connection may not lead to exposure or sales. Maintaining reasonable expectations has also helped me keep my intentions in check. Do I just want these two people to know each other because I simply appreciate their work, or should I be more intentional with others’ time? Developing ‘an eye,’ so to speak, for what may turn into a fruitful relationship is an evolving skill that requires knowing each person’s work and their needs. I have learned to be direct about the reason and potential benefit for brokering a new connection.
Similarly, when communicating evidence, whatever the format, being transparent about what is known and what is unknown has helped build credibility. Here is what evidence suggests and how that may help your practice. We are not sure about its benefits for X, Y, or Z. I keep tabs on any hints of overpromising or misrepresentation. It is harder than it sounds. Just as I have appreciated this characteristic in others whom I admire, I am striving to mimic that honesty in my own communication.
The What, Who & How
The message AND the messenger matter. I know this more as a teacher, but it is something that I remain mindful of when acting as the messenger. As a knowledge broker, my role is not to position myself above my fellow educators or to impart wisdom from on high, but to share insights and evidence from the Science of Learning that have enriched my own practice on the ground. I think my colleagues and their administrators deserve to also have access to this information — not because they are incapable of performing their respective responsibilities, but because becoming knowledgeable about SoL can strengthen their ability to make decisions with their own unique students and contexts. Relatability, compassion for and understanding of needs, and building trust takes precedence over gravitas.
My Hidden Curriculum
So, understanding Science of Learning knowledge, its possibilities, and limitations for education has only been one dimension of my work as a knowledge broker. Gaining an audience, building interest and relationships, and making information meaningful is an entirely different set of skills which has become my own hidden curriculum. It is the skills I never knew I needed and the lessons I did not anticipate. There is more of both to come, no doubt. My success as a broker relies on my ability to integrate the formal knowledge of Science of Learning brokerage with the practical and relational lessons gained from ‘on-the-job training.’
Giroux, H. A. (1978). Developing Educational Programs: Overcoming the Hidden Curriculum. The Clearing House, 52(4), 148–151. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30185121
About the Author
Dr. Sarah Oberle is a teacher in the Red Clay Consolidated School District and has recently completed her doctorate, studying educational leadership and cognitive sciences at the University of Delaware. As a seasoned primary teacher, she has held leadership roles such as team leader and is actively involved in several key educational initiatives. Sarah serves on the professional standards committee for the Delaware Department of Education, is a steering committee member of the Education Knowledge Broker Network, and is an advisory board member for the Learner Variability Project at Digital Promise.
Her doctoral research is dedicated to translating and disseminating Science of Learning evidence to enhance teaching practices. Sarah is committed to bridging the gap between educational research and practical application, aiming to make evidence-based strategies accessible to educators.
In addition to her academic and professional roles, Sarah is the Chair of the researchED United States: Delaware conference. She resides in Chester County, Pennsylvania, with her husband and two daughters.
*I would love to hear from others who have similar or conflicting sentiments about this work or their own! Feel free to reach out. Email or message on TwitterX: S_Oberle
Equity is at the center of the work of knowledge brokering.
For the Education Knowledge Broker Network, equity – as it should be in all education work – is not “a consideration” or “a topic” or an add-on of any sort – it is the lens through which we must view and assess what we do. Far too often, we measure educational outcomes in ways that in and of themselves are not especially meaningful – test scores only matter if we think those tests are assessing things that matter, and even more concrete outcomes like postsecondary success arguably only matter if that success leads to life outcomes that matter for the individuals and/or society.
So what matters? If people are all different, with different skills and interests, different experiences, different cultural and geographic contexts, and different values (among many other differences), how can we possibly do system-level or even classroom-level work that is intended to serve and support students and communities? The answer is not for us to decide what should matter, but instead for us as knowledge brokers to work to construct a system in which all students have the possibility – the opportunity – to make that decision for themselves.
In a real sense, opportunity is what matters. Opportunity does not mean that all students value the same things. Given a full range of opportunities, students may make very different choices. What brings happiness, fulfillment, or a sense of success to one individual may have absolutely nothing in common with that of another. We cannot tell individuals what they should value. We couldn’t possibly know. What we can do is strive to contribute to the creation of a system in which everyone has the ability to make those choices for themselves.
Regardless of your take on specific educational issues, it is inarguable that right now that is not the case.
Equity is a very difficult word to define, but opportunity is easier to recognize. For knowledge brokers, the challenge lies in how to apply the complex concepts of equity to real situations in order to increase opportunity – and “success,” whatever that may mean – for more students. And we won’t sugar-coat it: that is very hard to do. With apologies to John F. Kennedy, we do not do these things because they are easy. We do them because they are hard.
It is difficult to teach equity work. It is difficult to broker equity work. However, we do have resources: many people, every day, are working to do this better, to put these ideals into practice as best they can. They, and we, will make mistakes. They, and we, will struggle and fret and think and sensemake and puzzle through the challenges of this work. Equity work is naturally messy, and there may be no better way to improve our own than to have the rare opportunity to hear others who are thinking about and puzzling through these issues share their experiences, thoughts, and challenges with us. That kind of access is a rare opportunity indeed, but incredibly impactful when we can find it.
Today we at the Network want to share exactly that. As a start to an equity conversation that will underlie the work of this network, five CREATEd Fellows – current education professionals participating in a year-long knowledge brokering fellowship with the opportunity to study, read, discuss, and collaboratively work to understand what knowledge brokering looks like and how it operates – have been willing to share their stories and insights into the place of equity in the work that they do. Two of these brokers – Isabel and Kim – will also participate in our upcoming Centering Equity in Knowledge Brokering panel on Tuesday, August 13 at 4pm ET, where they will continue to share their experiences and where attendees will have the opportunity to ask questions, share their own challenges and ideas, and continue the conversation around equity.
We thank Diane, Tanisha, Isabel, and Kim for their willingness to share their work with us, and we are very excited to present their stories and insights.
Diane Hsieh
Research Scientist, Search Institute
Who I am and what I do: Hi! My name is Diane, and I am a Research Scientist at Search Institute, which is an applied research non-profit organization that focuses on positive youth development. Prior to Search Institute, I got my PhD from the University of California-Irvine, School of Education, where I studied adolescents’ STEM motivation and out-of-school time participation.
How I am a knowledge broker: I’d say 70% of my work involves “typical research” tasks such as data collection, data analysis, academic writing, etc. The other 30% of my work is about translating research to support practice, which includes writing practitioner-facing reports, developing resources/activities, hosting partnership meetings, etc. I think knowledge brokering happens when I go back and forth between that 70% and 30%. .
In my work, equity looks like: I think equity is part of my work in many ways. From the very start, equity looks like asking asset/strength-based research questions as opposed to deficit-based or questions that came from a savior mindset. Then, equity looks like having the right people on your team, including people whose voices are often marginalized in the context of your research question; for example, through participatory approaches (example lessons learned from a project with LGBTQ+ youth, and a project with Black and Latina/o youth on math engagement). I’ve also been thinking about equity in the research process; for example, research often takes a long time, how can we engage participants in a more humanizing way? Finally, I think equity is a big thing in terms of research dissemination. I’ve enjoyed writing practitioner-facing reports or blog posts for its more immediate and wide impact.
How I have used what I have learned as a fellow to address issues of equity: The fellowship’s module on communication stood out to me. It encouraged me to consider more diverse formats for communicating research. There were also concrete resources for making research outputs more accessible (e.g., data visualization best practices, tips for conveying key messages), which I really appreciate as they are very relevant for my work. During our small group discussion, other fellows shared ideas for gathering practitioner feedback/input after an output is disseminated– I appreciate those ideas and am exploring ways to do so in my current projects.
One equity success and one equity challenge in my work: Success: As mentioned, I am grateful to be on a few participatory action research projects and learning to work closely with practitioners and youths. I think the biggest success is when those practitioners and youth co-researchers let us know that they genuinely enjoyed the collaboration.
Challenge: For me, I think equitably allocating the budget is a challenge. Also, I wonder what are some equitable ways (beyond financial stipend) to compensate practitioners and youths for their involvement?
One more thing to know about equity in my work: There are probably a lot of equity challenges that I don’t even know to look out for. For example, I realize that as an able-bodied person, I am often insensitive to some equity challenges related to accessibility. One thing that I find very helpful and valuable is to engage in positionality reflection every once in a while, especially at the start of a project.
Tanisha Brandon-Felder
Director of PreK and Elementary Success, Highline School District
Who I am and what I do: Hello, I have been in education for over 25 years. As a classroom teacher (Elementary and Middle School), a Director of Equity, and most currently as a Director of PreK and Elementary Instruction,. I have always seen my work as advocacy for equity. I am a mother, daughter, wife and avid reader.
How I am a knowledge broker: Knowledge brokering means being in communication with students and families about what meets the needs for their child’s academic goals and helping create partnerships with educators and students towards effective learning opportunities.
In my work, equity looks like: Examining the conditions in our Iinstruction and learning contexts and ensuring we are creating bridges and not boundaries.
How I have used what I have learned as a fellow to address issues of equity: I have! Really understanding the impact of messaging channels and ways to speak to various stakeholder groups has been powerful. My fellowship gave great input on an info graphic I designed that is now being used as the foundation of the equitable literacy work we are doing in our district.
One equity success and one equity challenge in my work: One equity success has been peeling back the layers of the technical lens that have been traditionally used to address literacy and opening up adaptive possibilities as we lean on research from scholarships of color.
One equity challenge has been the mindsets that need to shift to make this equity implementation possible. One more thing to know about equity in my work: I understand the ultimate barometer for equity lies in the experiences of our students. When students feel affirmed, valued and excited to learn, we are winning. One more thing to know about equity in my work….it is not a choice. It is a moral and ethical obligation that educators do right by students who have been pushed to the margins of my system. The students are my non-negotiable WHY.
Isabel Lopez
Postdoctoral Fellow at Ensenada Center for Scientific Research and Higher Education (CICESE)
Who I am and what I do: Hi everyone! My name is Isabel Lopez. I hold a PhD in Educational Psychology from the University of Minnesota. Originally from Mexico, I am fluent in both English and Spanish, having spent half my life in both the U.S. and Mexico. As a former Fulbright Scholar, I am deeply committed to international research. I am currently a postdoctoral fellow at CICESE, focusing on evaluating and developing AI-based educational technologies in Mexican schools.
How I am a knowledge broker: The best way to describe myself is as a translational researcher in education. This means creating research that is directly applicable to policy and practice while building relationships with the communities my research impacts. It also involves literally translating research into different languages, adapting it across various educational policy settings, and making it accessible to parents, children, teachers, nonprofits, etc.
In my work, equity looks like: Working across different policy settings in various cities, states, and countries has made me realize that disparities are a constant presence. While they manifest differently depending on the context, they are always there. In any project I engage with, I begin by examining the context, exploring past history, current culture, and data to identify which students are being overlooked. I then do my best to address these disparities. This might involve leading data-focused reflections on potential students being overlooked, working to acquire resources for underprivileged schools, or simply listening and reflecting. Regardless of our position as research brokers, there is always an opportunity to incorporate equity work and reflection.
How I have used what I have learned as a fellow to address issues of equity: One of the most valuable skills I have developed in this fellowship is successful facilitation. Leading conversations on equity in a way that highlights everyone’s perspectives and opinions, while also keeping the group focused on actionable steps, is fundamental to effectively addressing these issues.
One equity success and one equity challenge in my work: One of the biggest challenges I face, which is likely common in most equity work, is advocating for tangible actions to advance an equity-centered agenda.
Success often comes in small but significant steps: a policy-maker who finally understands, a resource reaching the person who needs it most, or a well-designed, equity-focused research product. I’ve experienced all of these moments in my career.One more thing to know about equity in my work: My understanding of equity challenges and issues is constantly evolving. I will never be an equity expert, nor do I aspire to always get it right. To paraphrase Shrek, equity, much like Shrek, is like an onion with layers upon layers. Even if you think you’ve reached the center, there is always something more underneath.
Kim Rank
Director of Special Projects and School Improvement, Chester County (PA) Intermediate Unit
Who I am and what I do: I am currently overseeing all school improvement for Chester County including TSI, A-TSI, and CSI designations; as well as; Director of Special Projects, which I am currently overseeing a Structured Literacy grant. I supervise and support internal curriculum supervisors and work directly with six CSI designated schools as their school improvement facilitator. Prior to working in the area of school improvement, I was a Supervisor of Special Education for 10 years. Having this background has provided me with the understanding and knowledge of how to meet the individual needs of students among diverse groups while positively impacting the system as a whole using the Pennsylvania Continuous Cycle of Improvement as a framework to assist schools and districts.
I completed my Doctorate of Educational Leadership and Letter of Eligibility from Drexel University in June of 2017. I am married with three grown children and a granddaughter who is 10 months old. I enjoy traveling, doing CrossFit, and spending time outdoors.
How I am a knowledge broker: In my role as a school improvement facilitator, it is critical that I assist schools and districts bridge the gap between research and practice, build capacity, support data-driven decision making, sustain improvement efforts, and ensure appropriate and effective evidence-based strategies are chosen and implemented as prescribed.
In my work, equity looks like: In my work with school improvement, equity is at the forefront of everything we do. Through the school improvement process, schools can be designated for their all-student group (CSI) or for one or more student groups (A-TSI or TSI) as needing improvement in meeting growth or achievement thresholds. As a school improvement facilitator, I work with schools to identify resources and research that will address disparities in their student outcomes and promote inclusion. This includes completing a root cause analysis to identify the cause and selecting evidence-based strategies that will support diverse learning needs, promote culturally relevant pedagogy, and facilitate professional development that supports all backgrounds and ensures all students have access and opportunities to be successful in their educational environment.
How I have used what I have learned as a fellow to address issues of equity: I have integrated what was learned through the Fellowship to advance educational equity in my school improvement work by taking a comprehensive and collaborative approach and utilizing the Pennsylvania Cycle of Improvement Framework. As I work with schools, we start by gathering and using data to identify strengths and areas of needs, which includes looking at all student and individual student group data and setting measurable goals and targets. We then choose evidence-based strategies that are aligned to their school demographics and are recognized as a tier 1 or 2 rating according to ESSA. Action plans are developed and include the implementation to meet individual student needs (e.g., personalized learning plans, flexible groups) and facilitate professional development and create professional learning communities to share best practices. As a school improvement facilitator it is my role to advocate, promote and support practices that are inclusive and equitable while engaging the school community to refine strategies through gathering feedback and revising plans as needed to ensure all students have access to an effective learning environment.
One equity success and one equity challenge in my work: One equity success I saw this past year with working with a middle school designated as a Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) school was through the implementation of Restorative Practices (RP), which has led to significant reductions in disciplinary referrals, improved academic performance, enhanced school climate, and strengthened relationships among students and staff. For example, during the 2023-24 school year, the 6th Grade Center decreased from 2,000 discipline referrals to 673 for the year and increased on the state assessment in both ELA and Math.
One equity challenge I had this past year was ensuring all plans within a school system were aligned. Last spring in working with a school developing their CSI plan, the team did not take into consideration the corrective action plan they were on for special education or their overall induction and professional development plans. By mid-fall it was obvious groups were not working collaboratively but in isolation. Meeting with the school improvement team, we discussed the need to expand our team and include stakeholders from special education and other areas to ensure we were addressing all student groups, and our plans were cohesive in nature. We did incorporate this into our planning process moving forward. One more thing to know about equity in my work: The Pennsylvania Cycle of Improvement framework. Within the “Set the direction” phase school teams need to agree upon a shared vision for learning which includes all students and define the purpose of the improvement process. During the “Assessing needs” phase, data, both quantitative and qualitative, is gathered and analyzed to identify trends and reveal patterns of inequity. Student performance data, such as discipline, attendance, and academic; is broken out by race, gender, socioeconomic status, and other demographics. Surveys and focus group data is gathered from teachers, parents and students to gain insight into their experiences and perceptions. All this information is used during the “Create the plan” phase to develop goals and action plans that meet the needs of all learners and address inequities. This is reflective in their action steps and professional development plans and monitored within the “Implement the plan” phase. As schools are implementing their plans, we are always moving in and out of the “Monitor the plan” and “Adjust the plan” phases to ensure what is in place is working for all students and if not, make revisions as a result of the data.
Please join us in thanking these brokers for sharing their experiences with us! Please join us on Tuesday, August 13 to discuss the place of equity in knowledge brokering!
In 20 years of working to understand the link between research and practice, perhaps the most important conclusion I’ve come to has been the critical importance of knowledge brokers in the educational ecosystem. On the whole, relationships among researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and other community members are mediated. That means that those relationships work through individuals and organizations that work across boundaries to facilitate the exchange of ideas and the flow of resources. These individuals and organizations are knowledge brokers – and the idea of knowledge brokers is well established in other sectors such as health, and in other nations, such as the U.K.
In education, knowledge brokers serve in a range of roles and exist across all levels of the education system, but to date it has been challenging to fully recognize, strengthen, and leverage those individuals and organizations. This is for many reasons, including the lack of common titles for jobs that include these roles (few folks have “knowledge broker” in their job description); the fact that the language of “knowledge brokers” is relatively new in the education sector; and the diffuseness, complexity, and scale of the educational ecosystem which makes it hard to understand and coordinate efforts.
Nonetheless, knowledge brokers play crucial roles in building capacity to work across research, policy, practice, and other communities; facilitating the exchange of different kinds of knowledge; building trusting, sustained relationships that enable change; developing knowledge products that meet the needs of diverse audiences and communities, and promoting equitable policies and practices. Because of these critical roles, it is essential to create spaces and opportunities for knowledge brokers to develop their own capacities, networks, and professional identities – all of which have been missing to date. By launching the Education Knowledge Broker Network, members of the steering committee hope to address this need and foster a community that elevates, professionalizes, and strengthens the work of knowledge brokers and contributes to a more effective, equitable, and democratic education system.
We are excited to kick off our series of programs and offerings through this blog, as well as upcoming webinars and interactive knowledge cafes. Our first set of programs focuses on demystifying knowledge brokers, which is designed to clarify language (what is a knowledge broker), create an expansive understanding of who knowledge brokers are and what they do, and foster shared professional identities as knowledge brokers. We’ll follow this series with programs centered on equity in action, and then language matters. Our Equity in Action series will focus on promoting equity and inclusion and addressing power dynamics in knowledge brokering, knowledge brokers’ roles in advancing equity and justice, as well as how knowledge brokers can support the democratization of evidence. Our Language Matters series will explore issues related to communicating across research, policy, practice, and community boundaries; diverse perspectives and terminology around research, knowledge, policy, and practice; cultivating inclusive and culturally-responsive communication practice; and promoting effective collaboration through shared understanding and respect.
We hope you join these and many future conversations, explore our website and knowledge broker resources, sign up for our newsletter, and we welcome your ideas and contributions to this critically important emerging community!
