Language Matters. It Matters A Lot.

While sitting on the dock at the lake last week, I read a fascinating article written by Kelly Young, President and Founder of Education Reimagined (ER.) Education Reimagined is a Washington D.C.-based group attempting to catalyze the invention of a new public education system.

I’ve been somewhat critical in the past of Education Reimagined and its belief that the current public education system could be leaders in launching the new one. But now it seems Kelly and her group are headed in a better direction, at least in my eyes. Education Reimagined now believes in the power of community-based organizations to lead this new public education system. I don’t think they are entirely dismissive of traditional school systems that want to move in a learner-centered direction, but I do think they have lost confidence in the traditional system’s ability to commit to action the necessary steps required to become entirely learner-centered.

For my money, there is no group around today that organizes learner-centered models better than Education Reimagined. Not Tom Vander Ark’s Getting Smart. Not Will Richardson’s Big Questions Institute.

In her article titled “Distinguishing Learner-Centered Ecosystems: A Move from Disconnected to Cohesive,” Young introduces us to a continuum to help us hone our thinking about learner-centered models. She offers up four models to consider.

The first of these models is what Young calls “Disconnected – The Conventional Design and Approach of K-12 Public Education.” Young writes:

“The current conventional system of education is largely disconnected from outside experiences and partners. Of course, educators make meaningful connections when and where they can, take learners on site visits, and do their best to bring mentors into the fold. However, this is largely up to the individual educator or school site to facilitate and, as such, happens only sparingly.”

“Those experiences that young people do get outside of school are largely dependent on a parent or guardian making a connection, being available, or paying for an experience, resulting in largely inequitable opportunities. Providers and partners that engage learners in opportunities outside of a typical school day have little to no connection to educators within the classroom. If they do, the interactions are transactional and minimal at best, resulting in a largely disconnected journey of learning for the child.”

“Further, these experiences outside of school – whether they are with an organization or are just valuable learning, like learning to play the drums with a mentor or neighbor – are not recognized in the formal record of learning for the learner. So, while a learner may have extensive and varied experiences through which they’ve built diverse competencies, including those experiences they have with family and in their homes, none of that is automatically visible once they enter the classroom. Again, many educators make special effort to discover and learn about a child’s out-of-school life but it is on their shoulders to go “above and beyond” to do so with almost no ability to credential such experiences.”

The second model introduced Young identifies as “Connected – Learner-Centered, Community-Based Ecosystems.” Young explains that:

“Whereas the current public education system’s very structure is designed to consolidate and coordinate all credentialed learning into one building with one set of adults, a learner-centered ecosystem is structured to create an interconnected web of learning experiences and opportunities, enabling each child to pursue their own unique learning journey grounded in community.”

“In an ecosystem, myriad spaces of learning (what we are calling home bases, learning hubs, and field sites) speak to one another and create a continuum of learning experiences that meet the learner’s needs and goals. Already existing assets in the community, such as arts centers, museums, businesses, parks, playgrounds, civic centers, shopping malls, and theaters, would be leveraged as resources and valid (even prized) places of learning.”

“By creating these connections, skill and competency development are acknowledged and credentialed across the ecosystem, empowering the learner to show and clearly communicate what they can do and know – breaking down the barrier between formal and informal learning.”

The third model addressed in Young’s article focused on the “Connected But Outside – Connected Learning Systems of Out-of-School Learning Providers.” Boys and Girls Clubs. YMCAs. Local community networks. Local, regional, and national organizations focused on topics, such as STEM, the arts, or civic engagement.

Young writes:

“These community learning systems have found ways to build connection, integration, and communication between out-of-school, after-school, and youth development providers to support a more robust learning experience for their young people. In many cases, these are networks providing youth with learning that is more relevant and culturally responsive than they are finding in their school environments. Likewise, youth are choosing to come back day after day to these experiences because they are meeting them where they are, whether that means aligning with their interests, validating their lived experiences, or providing them with supportive peer groups and adult mentors.”

Young concludes by addressing a fourth model – “Connected but Unintegrated – Wraparound Services to Support Schools”:

“In recognizing the need to attend to more than just academics, schools across the country have connected with community partners to build wraparound services to meet young people’s physical, mental, and wellbeing needs in varied ways. These efforts are intended to remove the barriers to learning that many of our young people face, whether that is hunger, unmet physical or mental health needs, lack of stable housing, or issues of abuse or neglect.”

“What this structure does not do, however, is relinquish the centrality of the school building as the place of learning nor shift the focus away from a narrow one of academic success.”

“It brings some of the essential community resources into the school but still often leaves untouched the opportunities that exist outside of that building to influence how and where learning happens.”

“In other cases, this wraparound service approach may be taken by schools and districts located in communities that also have integrated, connected out-of-school networks. But, while this gets closer to a vision of an ecosystem, it still maintains that separation between the formal school day and the rest of a child’s life – keeping the ‘out-of-school’ opportunities uncredentialed and centralizing the authority of the school system for all academic matters. Again, it does not change how learning happens when learners are in the school building.”

I’ve been working in the learner-centered space for awhile now, after nearly 35 years of working in the traditional public school system, either as an employee or a non-profit partner. What Kelly Young presents here is some of the most important, and hopefully most impactful, thinking I’ve read, and thought about, in some time (that’s probably why I’ve included so much of her thinking in this article.)

Young gives us a continuum to use as we continue moving from what we know as these places called schools toward a new destination – a destination based on the individual learner. It’s a road map to value and, at the same time, build upon.

Young’s ecosystem continuum article builds on ER’s reputation as an organization that emphasizes the importance of language when it comes to important transformational work like this. If you wonder why I say this, look up ER’s “Practitioner’s Lexicon.” It’s one of the best works out there when it comes to learner-based terminology.

It looks like ER has hit another home run with the introduction of this learner-centered ecosystem continuum, and the conversation and activity it will hopefully produce.