Making a genuine impact in EdTech Part 2:
Putting the pieces together
In Part 1 of this series, I discussed the importance of fostering collaboration and empathy among researchers, developers, and practitioners in the EdTech field. In Part 3, I’ll share my personal journey navigating these roles. Today, I’ll dive into the insights I gained transitioning from a Learning Sciences researcher to a team member and partner in developing widely-used education products.
As a researcher, much of my work centered on scalable approaches to integrating learning sciences into real classrooms. This involved collaborating with a diverse group, including teachers, district personnel, software developers, and EdTech companies. Occasionally, I published academic articles on processes such as The Evidence Based Curriculum Design Framework and Curricular Activity Systems. While this work gave me some preparation for jumping into the world of EdTech development, there was a lot more to learn!
Key Lessons Learned
Listen To Your Teachers (especially when they tell you about constraints)
Teachers often face more constraints than we anticipate (even when we anticipate constraints!). While it's well-known that teachers are overworked and stressed, the extent and nature of some of the constraints placed on teachers can be surprising. For example, although one may be told that teachers have substantial professional development (PD) time, teacher PD might be fragmented due to various competing demands (e.g. training on a new SIS, a new district initiative, and a school Principal’s priority project) , leaving little room for the PD necessary to effectively roll out new learning materials. As a result, we cannot depend on teachers attending PD, even when teachers are enthusiastic and assurances to the contrary are made.
Additionally, teachers often receive mandates that conflict with curricular goals. For instance, a directive to provide immediate corrective feedback might clash with a curriculum that prioritizes discussion and sensemaking. Understanding these constraints is crucial for researchers and developers aiming to create practical and effective educational solutions.
These are just two examples, intended to illustrate why anyone working with teachers should understand the importance of listening closely, developing empathy, and understanding constraints, so that we can create solutions that fit the needs of teachers and their classrooms.
Learn From Your EdTech Developer (especially when they tell you about constraints)
Upon arrival at a major EdTech firm, I expected to find development resources beyond anything I had experienced in research. And I did. Content developers, editors, UX designers, User Testing experts, software engineers, etc. I also found that EdTech companies were not only subject to the expected constraints (e.g. those I just mentioned), but I also found a surprising number of constraints that I had not experienced before.
All digital materials had to function on a range of devices that was almost unimaginable, from the oldest Chromebooks to low-end Windows laptops to the latest generation iPads. And schools could be relying on an old DSL line for Ethernet access, or could have newly installed fiber. Any new development or revision of old materials had to run on this range of devices, and preferably would be tested on this range of devices and configurations before shipping. Not an easy nor enviable task!
I was also surprised to learn that the time to respond to new Standards is shorter than meets the eye. As a researcher I would look forward to the release of new Standards or state instructional frameworks, as it was a chance to rethink classroom practices. For those in a large learning technology company with K-12 Core, Supplemental, Intervention and Assessment products, the rollout of new Standards is also an exciting time, but for different reasons. For instance, as a researcher I could choose an area to focus my research on (e.g. linear functions in the middle grades); but when developing a Core Curriculum a company needs to create all materials for all grades across K-12. This means not only the full range of content, but pacing guides, lesson plans, homework assignments, formative and summative assessments, support for multilingual learners, Teacher Guides, etc. Suddenly the glacial pace at which states would introduce, revise, finalize, and rollout new standards didn’t seem glacial at all! Instead, this wide range of materials had to all be created within very tight deadlines.
Perhaps my biggest surprise was that Learning Sciences may not always be a top priority. While aligning with Universal Design for Learning (UDL), web accessibility, multilingual learner support, and other frameworks are often mandated by states and/or adoption policies, explicit requirements for Learning Sciences alignment are rare. However, as I have pointed out before, this provides an opportunity: working with your EdTech developers to integrate Learning Sciences into the design process can enhance how developers address these mandates, offering a cohesive framework that supports effective education practices.
As someone with a background in research, it became clear that a new way of working, based on empathy, quick revisions, and making reasonable compromises, was necessary. Leading to my final set of lesson learned:
Adapting to New Realities
As a researcher transitioning to EdTech development, adopting a flexible and empathetic approach was key. Learning Scientists must balance academic values with the practical needs of teachers and design teams. This often means focusing on incremental improvements rather than sweeping changes, working within shorter timelines, and addressing immediate practical concerns.
For instance, this may mean that we do not have the luxury of extensive literature reviews and many rounds of iterations before deciding on a solution. I may mean that we have to think about how work that was typically done on an academic timeframe must now be broken into discrete tasks to fit into the structure of two-week sprints.
It also may mean focusing on areas that are outside of typical academic concerns. The hot topics in academic research are not always aligned with the nuts and bolts questions that are important to the creation of effective instructional materials designed to be used by a wide audience. Working on true problems of practice, in a way that can inform the design of products, and in a timeframe required for shipping, may require a new mindset for many learning scientists.
Final Thoughts
Navigating these constraints may not suit every Learning Scientist, but those willing to adapt can significantly impact teachers and students. My experiences have shown that being flexible while integrating a Learning Sciences perspective can lead to markedly better educational products.
In Part 3, I’ll delve into my personal journey, sharing how I’ve effectively engaged with the communities of Learning Scientists, Learning Engineers, and EdTech developers. Stay tuned!
