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.
In today’s dynamic educational landscape, knowledge brokers are indispensable in bridging the gaps between research, policy, and practice. While few may label themselves as knowledge brokers, many professionals engage in this vital work across various roles and organizations. These individuals cultivate and maintain relationships that facilitate the exchange of knowledge among key stakeholders, ensuring that knowledge is not only accessible but also actionable. They work within diverse settings, including curriculum development organizations, state education agencies, schools, and research institutions.
Despite knowledge brokers’ critical role in the education system, many have expressed concerns about the lack of formal training. Often, brokers navigate their responsibilities as boundary spanners and knowledge mobilizers without the benefit of structured guidance. To address this gap, there is a pressing need for the development and delivery of targeted training programs tailored to the unique challenges faced by knowledge brokers.
The Foundations of Knowledge Brokering program, offered by the Center for Research Use in Education (CRUE) at the University of Delaware, aims to fill this gap by providing the skills and community necessary for effective knowledge brokering. Over six months, participants engage with modules covering knowledge brokers’ roles and activities, applying an equity lens to their work, understanding the educational ecosystem, supporting evidence-informed change, and developing design, communication, and facilitation skills.
A Brief History of the Program
In 2021, CRUE hosted a pivotal five-day gathering for knowledge brokers in education. The Research Broker Network Meeting provided a platform for participants to share their experiences and challenges, leading to critical discussions about the need for formal training in the field. Many attendees expressed that they often learn informally or “on the job,” which can hinder their effectiveness and deter potential knowledge brokers from entering the role.
Responding to these insights and recommendations, CRUE applied for and received a grant to develop a structured training program. In each of the last two years, CREATEd offered a year-long fellowship program. Starting in 2025, we are excited to begin offering programming more broadly through the Foundations of Knowledge Brokering.
The Foundations of Knowledge Brokering,based on the curriculum of the fellowship,was created to equip participants with 25 essential competencies based on a review of academic literature. This program aims to provide theoretical foundations and practical tools that can be immediately applied professionally.
Why You Should Participate: Insights from Past Participants
A fundamental aspect of CRUE’s mission goes beyond developing the training program; it encompasses a strong commitment to evaluating its impact. Ongoing evaluation allows us to adapt the program to the evolving needs of knowledge brokers while also assessing its effectiveness in benefiting participants. Over the past two years, insights from the evaluation efforts have revealed valuable information about how the curriculum supports participants in their professional growth and enhances their capabilities as knowledge brokers. We hope these insights help you consider how the program can support your own professional journey and inform your decision to participate.
You should participate if you are committed to developing your knowledge and skills to connect research and practice. Many past fellowship participants expressed a strong desire for professional development and skill building, noting that the program offered valuable opportunities to refine their abilities in ways that aligned with their day-to-day responsibilities and career aspirations. Evaluation data from previous participants reveal that many acquired essential skills to articulate their roles more effectively, integrate equity into their work, and apply research in ways that bridge the gap between theory and practice. Participants reported deepening their understanding of the educational ecosystem and its diverse stakeholders while enhancing their communication and collaboration abilities.
“[The program] came at the right time of my career when I was trying to find a lot of language for what I’m doing and want to do going forward.”
“In my work, I often find myself brought into partnerships where groups of people from different backgrounds work together…I thought that the knowledge broker framing and the focus on supporting knowledge brokers [could] be useful for that aspect of my work that I continually find myself in.”
You should participate if you aim to leverage what you learn for real-world impact. Past fellowship participants have identified the program as crucial to their professional growth, often citing immediate applications of their newfound knowledge within their institutional contexts. Many found the program invaluable for deepening their understanding of stakeholder dynamics, launching successful initiatives, and enhancing their communication skills. They emphasized their ability to apply specific tools and resources from the program immediately, leading to tangible improvements in their practice. Additionally, numerous participants have shared insights and resources with colleagues, fostering a greater collective understanding and enriching team practices.
“I felt like the content was really relevant. I loved looking at things from different lenses, both, you know, policy, practice, and research, but also looking at things through the lenses of the different topics of modules. I loved getting resources and articles and things to share, and I was always turn-keying them back to folks on our team to make sure we were making the best out of this opportunity.”
You should participate if you want to expand your professional network and engage with like-minded peers. Past fellowship participants have emphasized that connecting with individuals from diverse areas of the education sector was essential for their growth; this exchange of ideas deepened their understanding of the material and offered fresh perspectives on their work. The cohort experience fostered a collegial and friendly atmosphere, where participants frequently shared insights and resources. Through collaborative discussions and small group activities, they not only enhanced their problem-solving skills but also gained practical strategies to effectively tackle real-world challenges, benefiting from their colleagues’ collective knowledge and experiences.
I really have valued the diversity of the cohort. The people involved span[ned] all different levels of experience and expertise and came from all different types of organizations and backgrounds. I think learning in a cohort, when you get a chance to hear other people’s reflections, that’s really what pushes you. One of the strengths of this program is not just the curated readings and the tools that have been picked—and they’re really exemplars from the field—it’s also the benefit of being part of a learning community and learning from one another.
This is a robust group of really smart folks who are thoughtful and engaged. And to hear, you know that every module, there’d be, a couple [of readings] that stood out to me, then other ones stood out to others… ’ So yes, that 100% enhanced [my learning].
Convinced? Here’s How to Take the Next Step
If you’re ready to take the next step in your professional journey, we invite you to register for the Foundations of Knowledge Brokering. This is your opportunity to engage with a vibrant community of education professionals committed to making research actionable in their contexts.
Registration Process: To register, visit the Foundations of Knowledge Brokering webpage, where you will find detailed information about the registration process, deadlines, and program specifics. We encourage you to submit your registration early, as spots may fill quickly due to high demand. If you have questions about the program, contact Carolyn Hammerschmidt at crue-info@udel.edu
Financial Support: The Education Knowledge Broker Network is pleased to partner with CRUE to offer a limited number of scholarships to Network participants to fully support the program participation fee of $495. These scholarships will be offered on a rolling basis between October 1 and November 15, 2024. If you want to apply for a scholarship, complete the form here.
Bio: Samantha Shewchuk, Ph.D., is a Research Associate and a senior researcher within the Center for Research Use in Education (CRUE) at the University of Delaware. Samantha is responsible for leading the research and evaluation efforts for the Foundations of Knowledge Brokering.
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.
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!
Federal agencies’ push towards the intentional use of evidence in policy development is cause for federal agencies to evaluate the accessibility of existing evidence. Rebecca A. Maynard discusses the four pillars of support provided by federal agencies in the road to advance the federal evidence-based policy agenda.
Rebecca Maynard is Professor of Education and Social Policy at the University of Pennsylvania and a member of this Center’s team.
Citation: Maynard, R. (July 2018). The Role of Federal Agencies in Creating and Administering Evidence-Based Policies. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science,678,(1), 134-144.
