Editor’s Note: Although we typically include an examination and synthesis of related NNERPP-member produced research in the “Research Insights” series of NNERPP Extra, we invite you to join us as we take a brief detour from our regularly scheduled programming this round to learn about a proposed innovation to an early step in the research process (i.e., co-defining a research agenda that is practice-driven and equity-centered) from our colleagues at Digital Promise. They first share their approach to developing a protocol that supports the creation of practice-driven, equity-centered R&D agendas, then offer reflections from this process, and finally, share back discussion points that took place during their recent presentation of this protocol at the 2020 NNERPP Annual Forum.

One of the promises of research-practice partnerships (RPPs) is to produce research that is more relevant to practice or policy. This purpose is critical because, historically, education research has too often been based on gaps in published research or the niche interests of researchers, rather than the priority challenges faced by schools, districts, and states. As a result, the education studies coming out of traditional research designs are often not applicable to local education agencies’ most pressing needs. And while we know that students at the margins—including Black and Latinx students, students experiencing poverty or trauma, students with learning differences, and English learners—often have very different experiences in schools than their white, middle class, and native English-speaking peers, the needs of students who could benefit most from new innovations have too rarely driven education research and development (R&D). 

To spur future education research that addresses the specific equity goals of schools and districts, Digital Promise set out to define and test Equity in the Driver’s Seat, a collaborative process that engages a variety of education leaders in developing practice-driven, equity-centered R&D agendas. To create such a process, we convened a range of education stakeholders to listen to and prioritize the equity-related challenges that on-the-ground staff face, while considering prominent gaps in existing research and solutions.

Testing Out the Process

For this testing phase of “Equity in the Driver’s Seat,” we selected two “challenge” topics around which to pilot this approach (adolescent literacy and computational thinking); we then identified teams from four League of Innovative Schools districts (Fox Chapel Area School District, Indian Prairie School District, Iowa City Community School District, and Talladega County Schools) to partner with us and provide the critical voice of real-time practice. 

By inviting teachers to participate at the convening alongside researchers, funders, district administrators and other formal leaders with decision making authority, we strove to break down assumptions about what kinds of expertise count and to elevate the perspectives of individuals who work closely with students. We started the day by building trust and openness; participants each shared their commitment to equity. Next, we broke into strands by topic, with each group encompassing a diverse mix of participants who began their discussions by digging into district teams’ specific equity challenges. Only after dissecting the challenges did we invite teams to consider how knowledge from the research literature could help answer the district teams’ context-based questions. Participants in each strand worked to coalesce their understanding about gaps in knowledge, and began collaboratively defining an agenda for future research questions and development priorities. The closing session provided an opportunity for participants to come back together to reflect on their experience.

After the convening we synthesized session and reflection notes into draft agendas, integrating a range of ideas to highlight the nuance and diverse perspectives that characterized the discussions. We iterated on these drafts based on input from district teams and other convening attendees, which resulted in sample R&D agendas for each challenge topic, as well as learnings about what sets this process apart from a traditional research agenda approach. Below we highlight some learnings about centering equity in R&D (read the full report to explore the practice-driven R&D learnings).

Indicators for Equity-Centered R&D Agendas

Based on reflections from participants, facilitators, and our own analysis of discussion notes from throughout the day, we identified preliminary indicators of R&D agendas that center equity. These include:

• Evidence that marginalized groups’ voices and participation are there from the start, based on the process for setting the agenda
• The specific challenges included in the agenda are those faced by marginalized populations and are identified by members of the community themselves, again based on the agenda-setting process
• Equity is not a separate consideration but integral to the problems addressed in the agenda based on how questions are framed 
• The agenda uses equity-informed language – for example, leading with persons and potential rather than descriptors with negative attributions (e.g., students experiencing poverty rather than poor students)

These indicators reflect the goals we set out for the project and to some extent, are aspirational because, in reflecting on our 1-day convening, we realized how difficult it was to keep equity central to the conversation. In analyzing the discussions–in terms of content and flow–we observed that it was easier to focus on practice without consistently situating equity considerations within the practice focus.

Facilitator Reflections

We – participants in the Equity in the Driver’s Seat convening – found it challenging to keep equity at the center of discussion for several reasons. Below we offer some reflections for why this might have been the case, as well as some suggestions for how we could have improved this process.

• Participants approached the agenda-setting discussions with different frames for equity; including an orientation about meeting individual differences and needs in the classroom and system-level examination of differences between groups of students, as well as more upfront work to build a common definition of equity, would have been helpful
• Most participants and facilitators brought content expertise in adolescent literacy or computational thinking; more folks with expertise in equity work would have enriched the discussion 
• As facilitators, we focused on session logistics and making sure a range of voices were heard; however, more explicit facilitation prompts, in-the-moment scaffolding, and pushing on equity would keep the discussion focused on equity rather than moving back to “equality,” especially in light of local political contexts that emphasize “all students”

These reflections lead us to problematize this idea of an equity-centered R&D agenda. How does being equity-centered change the questions included in an R&D agenda, if at all, and how might corresponding research and development practices need to change? This question resonated with participants in our 2020 NNERPP Annual Forum session, Where is Equity?: Setting Practitioner-Driven, Equity-Centered R&D Agendas.

Strategies and Reflections from the Field

In the session, participating RPP representatives shared several strategies that their partnerships use to keep equity at the center of their work. Multiple partnerships stressed the importance of common equity language; members from both the research and practice sides described working to be transparent about potential biases, to avoid making harmful assumptions based on these biases. One participant described being alert for buzzwords or phrases (like “all students”) that signal when partnership discussion is veering off from equity; this team points out and scrutinizes these slips to get back on track. Another participant shared a simple, actionable tip: explicitly include equity discussions in RPP meeting agendas. The strategy of adding equity as a recurring agenda item resonated with others whose RPPs strive to focus their work on ensuring students and educators can get what they need.

While joint development of research questions with practitioners is a familiar RPP strategy, collaborative interpretation of data is another equity-oriented approach that some partnerships are beginning to integrate into their processes. They recognize that the lived experience of practitioners and community members can deeply inform how data is interpreted. For example, one partnership is working to bring in Native American community members into their research conversations; they are considering ways to provide support on reading data, which is new for some community members. Others are working on the accessible presentation of data, using dashboards with data disaggregated by student sub-groups, and scaffolding discussions with equity rubrics.

We additionally invited participants to share ideas about tools and resources that would be useful to their efforts in centering equity during the research agenda setting process. Their ideas included:

• Accessible equity framing and definitions
• Tools for collaborative interpretation of data
• Training on culturally-appropriate research methods

And finally, we ended the session with some lingering questions that participants were interested in pondering further:

• How can partnerships support districts to engage with troubling equity-related research findings?
• Beyond diversity, equity, and inclusion, how can partnerships center anti-racism in their work?
• What definitions of “data” and “evidence” are RPPs using? Who decides what “counts”?

Next Steps

The Equity in the Driver’s Seat convening yielded useful protocols for centering practice in generating R&D questions and underscored the effort and intentionality required to maintain a focus on equity throughout the conversation. Through ongoing work, including Inclusive Innovation projects, we will continue to learn about how to spotlight equity in identifying research questions, creating development criteria, defining outcomes that matter to historically marginalized communities, and understanding implementation factors that shape inclusion.

We hope to keep learning about equity-centered research partnerships with and from the NNERPP community. Please be in touch with us (babe@digitalpromise.org and vyoung@digitalpromise.org) to share questions or ideas, or if you’d like to collaborate on related work.

Babe Liberman is the Project Director of Research Communications and Viki Young is Senior Research Director at Digital Promise.

Suggested citation: Liberman, B., & Young, V. (2020). Where is Equity? Reflecting on a New Approach for Setting Equity-Centered R&D Agendas. NNERPP Extra, 2(3), 2-5.