Chapter 3: Why Narrow Definitions of How, Where, and When Learning Happens Undermine Equity: How OST Leaders Can Help

Narrow, compartmentalized definitions of learning—definitions that prioritize certain functions and experiences and ignore others, as the quote from our University of Chicago Consortium on School Research colleagues explain, can severely limit adults’ effectiveness as educators, mentors, or life coaches.

Equally important, narrow definitions of learning contribute to the persistent under-education and under-valuation of marginalized groups. There is overwhelming agreement that didactic linear teaching, tight age and ability groupings, content versus concept mastery, and standardized outcome measures that undergird U.S. education dampen overall levels of engagement in and effectiveness of youth and adults in our public schools. Volumes of studies show that these outdated approaches are less well suited for—but nonetheless used more with—marginalized student groups (Cantor et al., 2021). This extreme mismatch of approaches has tipped the scales in favor of white, affluent, non-immigrant, abled students so much and for so long that, until recently, persistent “achievement gaps” were interpreted as capacity and motivation gaps, not “opportunity gaps” (e.g., McClellan et al., 2018). Unless rigorously challenged, these narrow definitions of how learning happens will continue to undermine well-meaning attempts to upend inequity. They will dampen appetites to describe, assess, and increase the “multitude of rich developmental experiences” imperative to the success of young people currently experiencing a multitude of inequities (Nagaoka et al., 2015, p. 7).