This post is part of Education Northwest’s 60 Years of Partnership series: an exploration of effective partnerships, what they look like in practice, and the possibilities they generate for education systems and communities.

As a new mom, I found walking with a two-year-old to be like walking through wet cement. The constant need to stop, look, and explore would set my toe tapping, eagerly waiting for my inquisitive little redhead to pick up the pace.

However, on one memorable walk, his pleas of, “Mama, come look!” brought us to witness the exact moment a butterfly emerged from its cocoon. I’m sure this contributed to his ongoing love for all things animal related. For me, it was a reminder that new perspectives allow us to see things we otherwise might miss.

For 60 years Education Northwest has walked alongside our partners to improve teaching and learning. Their communities bring diverse perspectives, often informed by deeply personal experiences with education. When individuals, communities, and systems with different priorities try to address challenges together, conflict can arise. Navigating these situations can feel like walking through wet cement. However, when we slow down and embrace the tensions, we can uncover opportunities for deep learning.

When we slow down and embrace the tensions, we can uncover opportunities for deep learning.

Why We Embrace Tension

The status quo is not working for every student. Expanding access to high-quality learning requires us to locate points of tension in our systems, examine them from multiple perspectives, and lift up new learnings and possibilities.

Expanding access also requires listening to those who have not always had access. That means centering communities who have been marginalized due to their race, ethnicity, disability, language, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, housing status, parenting status, foster care involvement, or justice-system involvement.

Additionally, by engaging a wide range of voices, we can foster innovation and excellence. Broader involvement leads to new and better ideas.

Authentic engagement also generates the community buy-in and will to make change. Research and evaluation reports that ignore community input or tension often gather dust on the shelf. (I’m sure you’ve seen a few of those.) Embracing tension produces learnings that are relevant and actionable, leading to recommendations that education systems can actually use.

Strategies for Surfacing Tension

External partners like Education Northwest can play a unique role in surfacing productive tension in education systems. We often serve as mediators, helping communities identify and navigate disagreement. We engage points of tension with curiosity and an outsider’s perspective. In my eight years as a researcher at Education Northwest, I have found the following strategies especially effective at surfacing productive tension.

Strategic Planning

Strategic planning is an opportunity to pause and intentionally consider what you want your program or initiative to accomplish. When I lead a strategic planning process, I start by speaking with invested parties to identify key points of agreement (and disagreement) about strategy, initiative, or program design; desired outcomes; and goals for overall impact. By stitching together information from internal and external groups with existing research and literature, I help partners identify gaps and opportunities. Working through tensions among groups, or between individuals and literature, ensures that strategies address key needs of the field and work toward agreed-upon outcomes.

Advisory Groups

Advisory groups, research-practice partnerships, and other advisory bodies are ways to engage communities in research and evaluation. I like to engage these groups across a project, from helping shape research questions or methods to translating the analysis into actionable, relevant findings.

Advisory groups are often made up of individuals from different sectors, disciplines, geographic regions, and more, meaning they often find plenty to disagree on. Instead of shying away from these disagreements, I engage them in facilitated discussion to ensure we center their voice in study design, analysis, and reporting.

Collaborative Meaning-Making

Even when it isn’t possible to convene a full advisory group, I never produce findings in a bubble. I work closely with partners to make meaning of data, for example, using dashboards or sharing areas where interviewees disagreed or were at odds with other pieces of our analysis. My goal is to identify contextual information that may impact findings, such as when a systemic barrier or bureaucratic challenge gets in the way of the intervention. Those systemic tensions can be powerful points of leverage for our partners to bring about change.

Policy Analysis

In my role facilitating the Alternative Education Policy Network, I conduct policy analysis and develop briefs for the field. Education policy is rife with tension. I navigate these tensions by centering the student experience and looking at policy through a nonpartisan lens. Again, this is not done in a bubble. I work with an incredible group of state leaders in the State Action Collaborative for High School Alternatives who are working to change policies in eight states across the country.

Adaptable—and Rigorous—Research and Evaluation

Some researchers and evaluators see themselves as objective external experts. They look at numbers and say, “That’s just what the data are” without taking time to engage diverse perspectives and really understand the context. They think adaptability comes at the expense of rigor.

But I believe it is quite the opposite. Rigorous research and evaluation are never neutral. Evidence-based solutions also depend on a deep understanding of the context in which education operates. Collaborating with partners to understand their context, community values, goals, and points of tension is how we guarantee that we measure what matters.

Collaborating with partners to understand their context, community values, goals, and points of tension is how we guarantee that we measure what matters.

I have walked at different paces with partners. Sometimes, we haven’t walked slowly enough to allow for productive tension. We had to retrace our steps or make additional efforts to include other voices. The moments when we stopped to explore new ideas often produced opportunities for deep learning. It is through that clarity, gained through embracing tension, that we make progress on our mission: to use evidence to help partners solve educational challenges and improve learning.

Ashlie Denton is a managing researcher with expertise in alternative education, STEM, and youth and community engagement. Thanks to her background in public affairs and policy, she analyzes complex educational challenges through a systems lens that considers how learning environments, policies, practices, and networks help and hinder student success.