Home » NNERPP Extra Articles » LOOKING BACK, LOOKING FORWARD: RPP LEADERS REFLECT ON A DECADE OF CHANGE

LOOKING BACK, LOOKING FORWARD: RPP LEADERS REFLECT ON A DECADE OF CHANGE

2026
Research Insights
Field Building RPP impact
Wooden figurine stands on stacked blocks, watching pastel spheres float in a line like planets, casting shadows on the floor.

Since NNERPP was founded in 2016, we have had the honor to closely follow and help shape the growth and development of the RPP field. What is more, we have been lucky to accompany and support the members of the NNERPP community in their learning journeys. That’s a whole decade of learning together! As we celebrate 10 years of NNERPP in this issue of NNERPP Extra, we want to pause, reflect, and take stock of what we’ve learned.

In this article, we explore the perspectives of those who have been in the RPP space for a long time (and connected to NNERPP for a long time!) on how the RPP field has shifted during the past decade as well as where it might be headed. We invited eleven “RPP OGs” and long-time NNERPP friends to respond to five reflection prompts about the development of RPPs and/or the RPP field. These RPP leaders’ reflections are based on 10+ years of experience in RPP work through both fruitful and tumultuous times for collaborative education research. We hope you join us in exploring what they have learned!

A QUICK INTRODUCTION OF OUR RPP OGs

The following RPP leaders, all of whom were either working in an RPP or doing work that supports RPPs when NNERPP was founded in 2016 and continue to be engaged in the same or other RPP or RPP-adjacent work today, contributed their reflections to this article:

We invited our RPP leaders to respond to the following reflection prompts:

  • (I) What are some ways in which your RPP and/or the RPP field has shifted over the last 10+ years?
  • (II) What do you know now that you wish you knew when you started / when the field was just emerging? Or what are 1-2 lessons that you would go back and tell the earlier version of yourself?
  • (III) What are 1-2 enduring questions that keep coming up for you despite this model being around for 10 + years?
  • (IV) What do you imagine the questions around RPPs will be in another 10 years from now?
  • (V) Is there anything else you would like to share?

In their thoughtful responses, several themes emerge for each reflection prompt, painting a picture of how the RPP field has changed over the last decade as perceived by RPP leaders from across the country, the enduring questions that remain, and the possible developments we might expect to see over the next decade. 

REFLECTION PROMPT I: WHAT ARE SOME WAYS IN WHICH YOUR RPP AND/OR THE RPP FIELD HAS SHIFTED OVER THE LAST 10+ YEARS?

There has been an increase in the variety of what “counts” as an RPP.

Several of the RPP leaders note that there is now much more diversity in how RPPs are composed and which organizations are involved than there was a decade and more ago, including an increase in the involvement of community organizations, as Kylie points out. Joy reflects that 10+ years ago, the focus was on "replicating" the UChicago Consortium model, and there was more conversation about and concern with what exactly is required to “count” as an RPP; now, there is a “much broader understanding (and allowance) of what RPP work can be.” Taking a slightly different angle, Laura observes that now, more people call their work an RPP, calling out that the use of the label has increased, which might not be quite the same as an increase in the number of actual RPPs.

One specific development in terms of how RPP work is structured that came with the proliferation of the RPP model that David calls out is that some school districts now have multiple, formal research partnerships. This comes with its own benefits and challenges, such as giving districts more options and greater capacity for generating meaningful research but also placing a greater administrative burden on them and challenging external research partners to clarify and articulate their contributions and priorities as they might compare to those of the other external partners. 

In addition to the growth and breadth of RPPs that our RPP leaders observe, they also describe how the field has become more interconnected, better supported, and more mature. Kylie points to "more examples of RPPs collaborating with other RPPs in their regions," which she describes as "very exciting," while Steven and Erin note the expansion of funding programs that support RPPs. As the field has matured, partnerships themselves have also become more varied. As Beth puts it, "[we] have OGs, newbies, and everything in between," reflecting a broader range of partnership stages of development.

Contributors also describe an expansion in both the scope of RPP work and the ways it is carried out. Rather than seeing new partnerships coalesce around a common set of problems, Beth observes an "ever-expanding" range of problems of practice and research questions being addressed. Similarly, David highlights the growing use of participatory and qualitative research approaches that engage community members in collecting, analyzing, and communicating evidence. He sees this as evidence of the field's increasing commitment to learning from people's lived experiences and of equity and the democratization of evidence emerging as major motivations for RPP work. Echoing this, Cheri points to the rise of equity-centered partnerships, including efforts to identify the "explicit mechanisms" that help embed equity in partnership work.

Finally, contributors observe that the field's evolution extends to changes in how RPPs themselves are understood. Jim states that "[our] vision of the RPP landscape has vastly expanded!," moving from defining RPPs primarily “by their structural characteristics” to understanding them through “their functional elements and theories of action”. This, in turn,  opened up new ways of thinking about RPPs such as a greater understanding of and appreciation for the role of communities in RPPs and for local problem solving as a central organizing principle of partnership work.

There has been growth in the knowledge of and enthusiasm about RPPs, including an understanding of why and how they are important.

Along with our thinking about and understanding of RPPs evolving over the last 10 years came a growth in the knowledge about how and why to RPP. The RPP leaders describe a substantial expansion in the knowledge base, driven by or along with a growing recognition of the value of RPPs and collaborative research approaches more generally. 

Laura points to a larger body of literature and more documented "practical knowledge" about RPPs, including their impact, while Cheri highlights the development of a "much richer shared vocabulary for what RPPs are, how they vary, and what makes them work," along with the production of more practical tools and frameworks. Similarly, Steven and Erin describe a growth in publications, resources, tools, and awareness, including internationally. In a similar vein of thought, Ruth observes that RPPs are ”no longer on the margins of academic research.” Cheri also mentions that the growth of infrastructure supporting RPP work, such as NNERPP, has helped the RPP field mature. 

Our contributors also observe that the values underlying RPPs have gained broader acceptance. Kylie describes a clearer understanding of the benefits of working in authentic partnerships, and Steven and Erin point to increasing acceptance of participatory approaches more generally. This growing legitimacy has been accompanied by greater enthusiasm for RPP work itself. Laura and Ruth observe that more people now actually want to work in an RPP, while Ruth also notes that many institutions and RPP participants are still working out how to incorporate RPPs into existing academic structures. Chris also sees a growing community of advocates of RPP work and/or RPP principles, in particular on the policy and funding front, citing the incorporation of the idea of a “Learning Agenda” as “the driver of what state research and technical assistance priorities should be” as part of the Regional Education Laboratory (REL) and Comprehensive Center program.

Finally, contributors suggest that the influence of RPPs now extends beyond formally defined partnerships. Chris observes that RPP principles increasingly appear in evaluations and shorter-term research projects that may not meet the definition of an RPP because they lack long-term, reciprocal collaboration. Even so, this "RPP-like engagement" reflects broader recognition of the value of partnership-based research, can lead to follow-up work later on, and can also expand the base of potential funding for RPP work beyond supporting a specific entity, as funding for research still tends to be project-specific. 

REFLECTION PROMPT II: WHAT DO YOU KNOW NOW THAT YOU WISH YOU KNEW WHEN YOU STARTED / WHEN THE FIELD WAS JUST EMERGING? OR WHAT ARE 1-2 LESSONS THAT YOU WOULD GO BACK AND TELL THE EARLIER VERSION OF YOURSELF?

RPPs are a long-term strategy requiring steady work, patience, collaborative structures, and adaptability – which is hard work but also a big draw. 

In their responses, the RPP leaders frequently talk about having had to learn about the nature of RPP work and what that would mean for them in their daily work and the required mindset and expectations. They reflect on how long it takes to develop and build partnerships, how tricky it can be to assign and clarify roles, and that trust is a key component which is easily built. RPPs are, in Laura’s words, “about institutional change, building infrastructure, and changing the status quo, including tackling racist institutional structures,” –all while also being in the political frey– and Beth similarly states that “it’s going to take time … to build something strong and meaningful.” Being patient, listening to others, keeping at it even when things don’t work initially, and being adaptable to the inevitable ups and downs are just some of the things Laura and Beth mention as being part of RPP work. Steven and Erin reflect on how important it is to think through who should be involved in any given RPP and to clarify roles and responsibilities. Our contributors also point to the central role of trust in effective, meaningful RPPs, while emphasizing the long-term nature of building said trust. Kylie describes trust as being necessary for the “vulnerability [that] is essential for meaningful work in partnership,” and Steven and Erin call out how fragile trust can be, particularly amid turnover in any of the partnering organizations. On the flipside of these lessons around the hard work of partnering are lessons around the draw of this work. Chris shares that one of the things he’d tell his earlier version would be “to have more faith in the younger generations” and their receptiveness to RPP work and willingness to let go of traditional notions of research and researcher roles. He also points out again that a looser interpretation of what qualifies as an RPP is helpful for the field and is a lesson that could have been learned sooner. 

Our RPP leaders also share lessons learned about understanding the complexity of navigating the many organizational structures present in RPPs and building effective RPP routines amidst this complexity. Collaborative structures and routines need to align across all the organizations and people that are involved and their respective priorities, as Steven and Erin reflect. The many entities that can be involved in RPPs each bring their own bureaucracies, in addition to differing timelines and expectations, as Joy adds. This also has implications for what kinds of projects RPPs should take on – typically not those that need to get done quickly or those that are fraught with political complications, even though those might be “high leverage” or “high impact” topics that get a lot of attention. Instead, Joy advises RPPs to take on “just under the radar” topics that they have sufficient time to explore. This necessitates having a good sense for which topics will have “future implications” and are fruitful for an RPP to explore together.

Finally, given the nature of RPP work, Joy concludes: “Not everyone is well suited for RPP work. And not all work needs to be RPP work.”

Certain skills are foundational for RPP work.

Building onto what it may take to be well suited for RPP work, our RPP leaders also foreground some skills they deem foundational to RPP work as they reflect on what they wish they had known or what they would tell an earlier version of themselves. These include learning how to raise funds, learning how to build relationships with community members and individuals working in diverse organizations, learning how to lead RPP teams, and learning about the organizational realities on the research, practice and community side. Despite being the most important skills in RPP work, these are typically not taught in grad school, as Ruth points out. Ruth lists developing relationships in the community and maintaining these relationships, raising money for RPP work, and leading an RPP team –particularly one that is growing rapidly– as three foundational skills. Cheri similarly talks about the importance of learning how to secure funding, especially for the partnership infrastructure itself, rather than just the research, saying that a lesson she learned was just how much work this takes, including making this kind of ask to funders "explicitly and repeatedly.” Kylie calls out how important it is to engage well with your partner(s) by learning about and listening to them and their unique context and expertise. As someone who began RPP work from the practice-side, Kylie wishes she had understood more about how things work on the research-side, including funding of time for partnership efforts, incentives in academia, and the challenges research-side partners face in university settings that are not necessarily supportive of collaborative work, reflecting: “If I had better understood this, I think I could have been a stronger advocate and supporter of my partners.”

Contributors point to skills related to supporting evidence use as well, as this is a foundational RPP principle. For example, Laura wishes she had known sooner that to democratize research evidence and help advance the use of research in practice, it is helpful to make all research findings and products public and to engage multiple target audiences in the research from the start. Cheri reflects on learning just how much "intentionality" it takes to build specific routines and relationships that support evidence use, in addition to securing the right resources and staff.

Understanding what truly makes RPP work impactful and meaningful is important.

A couple of our RPP leaders share lessons they would tell their earlier selves about understanding the true meaning and impact of RPP work, reflecting on how the significance of partnership work and the personal and professional rewards of engaging in this work became clearer over time. Looking back, Jim recognizes that he underestimated the central role of equity in RPP work during the early conversations about launching NNERPP 10+ years ago, wishing he had spent more time studying the active elements of democratizing evidence, knowledge mobilization and brokering, and continuous improvement. Beth’s reflection about the meaning of RPP work focuses on professional rewards: “If you build with the right people and invest in those relationships, it will be 100% worth it and one of the more fulfilling things you will do working in a research role in a school district.”

REFLECTION PROMPT III: WHAT ARE 1-2 ENDURING QUESTIONS THAT KEEP COMING UP FOR YOU DESPITE THIS MODEL BEING AROUND FOR 10 + YEARS?

Questions around how to ensure the sustainability and institutionalization of RPPs.

Across their reflections, many of our RPP leaders identify sustainability and institutionalization of RPPs as two of the field’s most persistent challenges. A central concern is the question of how partnerships can secure the resources needed to become self-sustaining, particularly when both research and practice partners often operate with limited funding capacity, as Beth points out. Leaders highlight the need for more reliable funding streams, including potential roles for state and federal investment, with Laura thinking about state funding in particular, in light of both unreliable federal funding and the significant role of state and local policy in education, and Jim also thinking about the federal role in supporting RPPs, posing the question of whether or not it is desirable for the federal government to be more engaged. Steven and Erin are thinking about how RPPs can sustain their work more generally, including but not limited to funding, as well as how RPPs might decide not to sustain and sunset the partnership. Uncertain funding and funding environments can also make it hard for RPPs to stay true to their partnership principles, as Cheri points out. 

When it comes to the institutionalization of RPPs, our contributors raise questions about how RPPs can become more embedded within their home organizations and how they can gain recognition within academic structures that often prioritize traditional forms of scholarship. Laura observes: “It amazes me that every university does not have someone leading their collaborative research efforts given the ROI our RPP has seen as far as research produced that advances theory as well as practice.” The question, she says, is how we can make RPPs a “a need to have rather than a nice to have.” Similarly, Ruth, also speaking from a university standpoint, points out that the academy still doesn't seem to value RPPs as much as traditional academic work, which makes it challenging for faculty to participate in RPPs. David also emphasizes how challenging it still is for university-based researchers to engage in RPP work, due to RPPs and applied research in general not being valued as much as traditional research at universities. Similarly, Joy refers to the enduring problematic incentive structures in higher ed, asking: “What does it mean for RPPs to be mutually beneficial if the overarching goal is to improve student outcomes and this remains misaligned with higher education incentive structures?”

Questions around further clarifying the what, who, and how of RPP work.

Several of our RPP leaders observe that we still don’t have all the answers when it comes to the what, who, and how of RPP work: Acknowledging that how we answer these questions shifts over time and context, David still points to the ever-present challenge of balancing who contributes to RPPs in what ways, including a need to understand the meaning and value of expertise: “Who has what expertise? How can we ensure that all expertise is valued? What role do we each play in the production, distribution, and use of evidence?” Chris names remaining challenges around authentically engaging agency leadership and other practice-side participants at scale. Cheri adds that the question of how to support the use of the research that RPPs produce is enduring. Steven and Erin also point to the challenge of RPPs having to adapt to their local context and its changing needs and demands while starting true to their core mission.

Questions around how to further support professional learning for those working in RPPs or wishing to do so.

While learning opportunities and support exist for those engaging in RPP work, including NNERPP-led efforts and a growing number of university courses on RPPs, some of our contributors emphasize the need for more training, given that building successful RPPs requires very specific skills. Kylie points to the need for support for “the cultivation of specific skills, attributes, and mindsets that foster a successful RPP,” particularly for practice-side partners, who have “NO dedicated supports for professional learning [but find themselves in] a ‘learn on the job’, ‘other duties as assigned’ situation.” Joy is also thinking about the practice side, saying that an enduring question is how RPPs can support practice-side people in getting access to research literature.

Questions around how to demonstrate the impact of RPPs.

Demonstrating the impact of RPPs also remains a challenge that keeps coming up for our RPP leaders who describe both the need for being able to measure and quantify impact and the challenges of doing so given the nature of RPP work and the many forms it can take. Demonstrating RPPs’ “measurable, positive impact on education policy and practice” remains an enduring issue for David that hasn’t been quite solved yet, and Kylie points to the connection between producing evidence of the impact of RPPs and the ability to secure funding, improve incentives for RPP work in academia, and address criticisms of RPP work as somehow less credible. However, RPP impact can be hard to quantify or even capture, as Beth acknowledges – for example, how do you capture and quantify when RPP research impacts a practice-side leader’s decision? 

REFLECTION PROMPT IV: WHAT DO YOU IMAGINE THE QUESTIONS AROUND RPPs WILL BE IN ANOTHER 10 YEARS FROM NOW?

RPPs as THE way of doing research… with questions about how “to RPP” remaining. 

In their reflections, our contributors are both very hopeful about the future of RPP work, foreseeing a great prevalence and support for this kind of work, and realistic about the questions that would remain even ten years from now. A couple of the RPP leaders are hopeful that another ten years from now, RPPs will be THE way of doing research, so that questions will be “How did we ever work any other way?” (Laura) and “Why did we ever do research in any other way?” (Kylie). Kylie adds that she hopes that we will see a lot more youth engagement and leadership in RPPs in ten years. Reflecting on the possibility of RPPs being a widely adopted and valued way of doing research in ten years, Ruth shares that she suspects it will take yet another decade for RPP work to be valued equally across all institutions, adding: “I hope I’m wrong!” Steven and Erin also foresee that RPPs will be widespread but still not institutionalized, anticipating that we will ask: “Why are RPPs not part of the core mission of Schools of Education?”

With a greater prevalence of RPPs will also come a greater need for RPP professionals and the continued struggle to establish best practices for building and engaging in RPPs. For example, Laura expects both a more widespread acknowledgement of RPPs as a way of doing research and a lag in the supply of qualified RPP professionals, thinking we’ll ask questions around where to hire more professionals with RPP skills and how to continue to get people involved in NNERPP. Beth anticipates that we will continue to grapple with how to ensure equitable, mutual investment from all partners in the RPP and with how to attend to issues of equity, diversity, and power in who gets to participate in and benefit from RPP work, and Steven and Erin think it likely that we will continue to navigate questions about what makes an RPP an RPP.

Questions around AI, data, and technology.

The use and impact of AI emerges as a strong theme in our RPP leaders’ reflections on what questions will dominate the field in another ten years, both in terms of how AI might be helpful and harmful. They are thinking about the impact of AI tools becoming more integrated into research and partnership processes, the potential impact of AI and technology on assumptions about knowledge and evidence, and what this means for issues of equity and governance. Chris thinks we’ll ask questions about the impact of AI on RPPs and the research field as whole, and Jim sees us needing to rethink what "knowledge" and “useful evidence” even are “in an AI driven world.” Cheri thinks our questions will include how AI supports or hinders RPPs, how it impacts who shapes which problems are regarded as “worth solving” and whose interests are served by RPP research, whether it helps democratize research capacity or concentrates it more, and whether and how RPPs ensure that districts and communities get to weigh in on decisions around how AI tools are used in RPP work. Laura anticipates the use of AI-powered tools bringing up more questions around organizing new types of data we’ll be able to collect and use. Joy is also thinking about data, specifically district data, foreseeing external researchers wanting full access to this data and RPPs needing to navigate such requests and related questions. In addition to AI, Jim thinks the field will have to confront questions about technology more generally and what role it should play in RPPs.

Enduring questions around funding and the impact of RPPs.

Some of the questions that our RPP leaders named earlier as those that keep coming up currently also pop up in their reflections on the questions that will be around in another ten years. Namely, Beth sees the question of securing funding as one the field will likely always grapple with, and Steven and Erin highlight questions around the use of research evidence and the impact of RPPs: “Are RPPs leading to changes in how research evidence is produced and used? Are these changes making a difference?” 

Questions around a possible expansion of the role of RPPs.

Finally, David and Jim ponder what expanded or new roles RPPs might have taken on or will have to take on in ten years. David wonders if education RPPs might expand beyond the current core activities of producing and sharing research in a couple of ways, including incorporating additional, non-district partners “tasked with using research insights to develop coaching, professional learning, and convening activities to support system-level change” and incorporating new capacities besides research into RPP work. Jim ponders whether RPPs will have a role to play in addressing a culture of misinformation and conspiracy theories that might manifest in some local communities. 

REFLECTION PROMPT V: IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO SHARE?

We also left some space for the RPP leaders to share anything else that came to mind or that they wanted to add to their reflections. Some of them took us up on it – here’s what they shared:

Joy reflects on an imbalance in the research-and-practice dynamics that she observed over the last few years, and the need for finding a middle ground as we move forward. Due to rightfully being concerned about power dynamics that might favor the research-side in RPPs, Joy says that in the early days of RPPs, the field paid a lot of attention to practice-side partners and listening to their needs, which led to an unintentional underappreciation of the value of informed research-side partners and what they bring to the table, including “[solving] problems that practitioners haven’t yet considered needing solving!” Joy wants RPPs to push for finding a middle-ground where the needs and values of both slides are truly seen, heard, and met in a meaningful way. 

Kylie shares why doing research in partnership truly matters, asking us to reflect on the following: “If we want research to be applied, the best way to accomplish that is doing it together. If people don’t care about research and evidence being applied, why are they doing research at all? What is the point if we aren’t trying to improve outcomes using research and evidence?”

Jim and Chris both add thoughts about the role of NNERPP going forward, with Jim proposing that NNERPP might consider moving into other sectors that intersect with education, such as housing or health, and Chris agreeing that exploring deeper engagement with those doing partnership work in other issue sectors might be a step to explore in the future. 

Beth shares a good note to end on: “I would just say how incredibly proud I am of the folks in this field, the spaces they have created for applied and improved education research, and the facilitation of an organization like NNERPP that creates community for folks like us. RPP work is hard work, but goodness is it rewarding. I appreciate all the folks [in the RPP space] and can’t wait for another 10 years!” 

IN CONCLUSION

As they look back on the last decade or more, our RPP leaders observe a number of changes in the RPP field and point to both a growth in our knowledge of how to do this work well and the challenges that remain. As they look forward to the next decade, they anticipate positive changes and for the model to continue to flourish, alongside both new and old unsolved challenges. One thing they all agree on: RPP work matters.

We are grateful for these RPP professionals for taking the time to share their reflections with us and helping us take stock of where we stand. We join them in looking forward to the next decade and hope reflections like these can help us prepare well for the next ten years so we can continue supporting worthwhile RPP work! Onwards into the next decade!

Nina Spitzley is Marketing Specialist at the National Network of Education Research-Practice Partnerships (NNERPP); Cheri Fancsali is Executive Director of the Research Alliance for NYC Schools;  Erin Henrick is President of Partner to Improve and Co-Director of NashvillePeer; Kylie Klein is Senior Researcher at American Institutes for Research; Jim Kohlmoos is Principal/Co-Founder of EDGE Consulting and Senior Advisor at NNERPP; Joy Lesnick is Deputy Chief, Research, Evaluation, and Academic Partnerships at The School District of Philadelphia; Ruth López Turley is Director of the Kinder Institute for Urban Research and Professor of Sociology at Rice University; Christopher Mazzeo is Research Scholar and Program Area Director, Education at Child Trends; Steven McGee is President of The Learning Partnership and the Chicago Alliance for Equity in Computer Science (CAFÉCS); David Stevens is Director of Research Operations at the UChicago Consortium on School Research;  Beth Vaade is Senior Executive Director of Research, Assessment & Improvement at Madison Metropolitan School District and Co-Director of the Madison Education Partnership (MEP); and Laura Wentworth is Director, Research-Practice Partnership Program at California Education Partners, Director of the Stanford-SFUSD Partnership, and Lecturer at Stanford University.

Suggested citation: Spitzley, N., Fancsali, C., Henrick, E., Klein, K., Kohlmoos, J., Lesnick, J., López Turley, R., Mazzeo, C., McGee, S., Stevens, D., Vaade, B.,  and Wentworth, L. (2026). Looking Back, Looking Forward: RPP Leaders Reflect on a Decade of Change. NNERPP Extra 8(3), 4-17. https://doi.org/10.25613/01GT-ZF16

Nina Spitzley Authors

Nina Spitzley | NNERPP, with Cheri Fancsali | Research Alliance for NYC Schools, Erin Henrick | Partner to Improve and NashvillePeer, Kylie Klein | American Institutes for Research, Jim Kohlmoos | EDGE Consulting and NNERPP, Joy Lesnick | The School District of Philadelphia, Ruth López Turley | Kinder Institute for Urban Research, Rice University, Christopher Mazzeo | Child Trends, Steven McGee | The Learning Partnership and Chicago Alliance for Equity in Computer Science (CAFÉCS), David Stevens | UChicago Consortium on School Research, Beth Vaade | Madison Metropolitan School District and Madison Education Partnership (MEP), and Laura Wentworth | California Education Partners and Stanford-SFUSD Partnership

Share