A learner-centered ecosystem comes from a stance of recognizing all people as full human beings with stories, gifts, passions, vulnerabilities, love, and potential. Its infrastructure and systems are people-centered and aimed at the ultimate goal of supporting learners and families to thrive, learn, and develop in community. Imagining what this might look like and how it might be operationalized requires us to rethink who might contribute to an ecosystem, how they might do so, and what it might look like to enable their work. This starts with a new view on the challenge at hand—from one focused on “human capital” to one focused on people.

The current education system is built on underlying principles that value efficiency, compliance, and standardization, which results in a specific way of relating to the people in it. This approach assumes that teachers and other staff require instruction, discipline, and hierarchy to function. Yet our society also expects schools and the people who work in schools to provide not only academic instruction, but also a broader array of human services that require strong relationships and high levels of agency and skill, from childcare to preventative health supports to nutritional wellness.

This leads to schools and classrooms operating in a climate of scarcity, isolation, and mistrust. Schools are funded inequitably, leading to disparities in the preparation, compensation, development, and growth of the people who work in schools. Teachers dictate the rules of their classrooms, principals dictate the rules of their schools, and school boards and superintendents dictate the rules of their districts. (See Appendix A for more insight into the operational model of school boards.) Sometimes, these people may consult with other community members or plan collaborative projects with different organizations. But often, they are focused singularly within the scope of their domains, such as educators teaching with their doors closed, and principals focusing on the administrative demands of the system. Such opacity then leads to the scrutinization of education, often seeded in mistrust. We can observe a series of challenges for the people who operate within these education systems:

• Fragmentation: Despite their best intentions, people in education find themselves operating in fragmented ways that prevent them from adapting, growing, and realizing their own potential and that of the young learners they serve.
• Dehumanization: When people are tasked with addressing all of their communities’ concerns (for example, poverty or trauma) without adequate preparation, support, and appreciation, they find themselves overburdened, alienated, and disenfranchised.
• Limitations: Rather than imagining what is possible and maximizing the gifts of people, education systems put in place hierarchical and standardized structures with boundaries that only expand through disruptive forces (e.g., teacher strikes or parent protests).

The current systems were designed to prioritize efficiency and standardization, but we must not forget that learners and individuals alike have a common desire for work that is fulfilling, recognition within their community, and a sense of purpose and belonging. Therefore, it is essential to create systems, structures, and processes that support these fundamental human needs. This is why we refer to “people and people systems,” rather than “human capital” in this chapter. The term “human capital” evokes the industrial model that was developed to build a workforce for the factory age, which is not a suitable model for nurturing human potential.

Research by Deci and Ryan (2000) supports the idea that humans have inherent psychological needs, such as the need for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. These needs must be met to foster well-being, engagement, and motivation. By adopting a “people and people systems” approach, we can create systems that meet these fundamental needs, promote a sense of belonging, and foster human potential.

Every person in the ecosystem plays a role, whether that role is formal or informal and whether or not it is recognized, cultivated, and celebrated. Community-based, learner-centered ecosystems are built by people who fulfill a diverse set of functions—from ensuring adequate nutrition, to helping learners apply their learning to authentic problems, to providing safe and joyful spaces, to storytelling. These include caregivers, healthcare workers, business leaders, neighbors, elders, and many more. Just as we view each learner as a whole person—complex, growing, and an agent of their own learning journey—each member of the ecosystem is seen in the same way.

Given the diversity of people who will contribute to and lead in an ecosystem, we recognize that they will need systems and structures to make their contributions. We envision a set of principles that will guide such a system:

Using these principles, in the remainder of this chapter, we take a new starting point for where to think about the idea of people systems. Rather than starting with how to organize an assumed set of people, we begin with a framework for thinking about the key functions that would need to be fulfilled by those people in an ecosystem. When we think of the system holistically, what are the functions in a community-based, learner-centered ecosystem?

Through a series of conversations exploring the essential work of the ecosystem, the People and People Systems team developed the Functions Framework.

Similar to an ecological ecosystem that provides such functions as food, water, shelter, economic livelihood, recreation, and natural beauty, a healthy and diverse learner-centered ecosystem is one that provides abundant and beneficial services to its stakeholders based on the needs and aspirations of the people engaged—beginning with the learners.

The Functions Framework provides a baseline or template that describes some of the essential functions that are played by people in a community-based, learner-centered ecosystem. These descriptions are meant to be illustrative of the functions a community’s ecosystem might need. The framework is not intended to be prescriptive, exhaustive, or serve as a checklist. It is intended to serve as a general guide with the assumption that users will need to adapt the functions for their context and community.

Further, the Functions Framework does not tell us exactly who will serve these functions or how they will be organized. In fact, any one of these functions could be done by a team or a specific person; likewise, a role or person could simultaneously serve several of the functions listed. The possibilities for the who and how will vary based on the ecosystem’s unique context. An ecosystem’s approach means that these key functions do not operate in isolation or in a vacuum. Rather, these functions interact, shift, adapt, and grow dynamically.

The Ecosystems Working Group explored functions of a thriving ecosystem across three domains: the learning experience, infrastructure, and community and culture of well-being. When imagining a thriving, equitable, community-based, learner-centered ecosystem, these functions are interdependent and interconnected. Neglecting one domain can negatively impact the others, and a holistic approach is necessary.

Throughout the domains, we view the work of the ecosystem to be grounded in inclusion and equitable practices.

The Functions Framework is not meant to be an exclusive list but instead an opportunity to consider together the functions of a thriving ecosystem across the three domains.

The Functions Framework provides a baseline or template that describes some of the essential functions that are played by people in a community-based, learner-centered ecosystem. These descriptions are meant to be illustrative of the functions a community’s ecosystem might need. The framework is not intended to be prescriptive, exhaustive, or serve as a checklist. It is intended to serve as a general guide with the assumption that users will need to adapt the functions for their context and community.

Further, the Functions Framework does not tell us exactly who will serve these functions or how they will be organized. In fact, any one of these functions could be done by a team or a specific person; likewise, a role or person could simultaneously serve several of the functions listed. The possibilities for the who and how will vary based on the ecosystem’s unique context. An ecosystem’s approach means that these key functions do not operate in isolation or in a vacuum. Rather, these functions interact, shift, adapt, and grow dynamically.

The Ecosystems Working Group explored functions of a thriving ecosystem across three domains: the learning experience, infrastructure, and community and culture of well-being. When imagining a thriving, equitable, community-based, learner-centered ecosystem, these functions are interdependent and interconnected. Neglecting one domain can negatively impact the others, and a holistic approach is necessary.

Throughout the domains, we view the work of the ecosystem to be grounded in inclusion and equitable practices. This is not meant to be an exclusive list but instead an opportunity to consider together the functions of a thriving ecosystem across the three domains.

The functions explored in the framework illuminate the learning experiences, infrastructure, and community well-being that we strive to create in a thriving ecosystem. A translation of the functions into roles becomes a standing process of the ecosystem. It includes identifying roles such as advisors, learning facilitators, learning specialists, coordinators, and storytellers who fulfill essential functions and bring reliability, integrity, and transparency to the ecosystem. This new framing of translating functions into roles offers the opportunity to see beyond the idea that each function has to be aligned to a full-time role in a 1:1 ratio. Instead, it is an invitation to consider how each participating member of the ecosystem could fulfill roles based on their interests, skills, and knowledge, while still prioritizing that essential functions are fully met for the ecosystem’s operating.

If we can create individual learning journeys for each learner, we can also acknowledge that every person has a variety of gifts and assets to offer the ecosystem. The roles that are often invisible in conventional human capital systems are elevated, seen, and celebrated in an ecosystem. Roles are collectively constructed by the people who take on responsibilities, the people served by those roles, and by the broader community through reciprocal, mutually beneficial processes. All roles and the people who fill them are valued and celebrated. The roles people take on grow, shift, change, and evolve alongside the community and its learners.

In addition, this is an opportunity to recognize and integrate the vital roles that already exist in the community, such as those that may be found in afterschool programs, faith-based organizations, and caregivers for all ages. It also allows for the emergence of roles yet to be imagined by asking “How can we tap into the people and their gifts to grow and evolve as new ideas and needs emerge?”

When translating key functions into roles, many roles may be needed to fulfill a key function in a learner-centered ecosystem. Moreover, a crucial aspect of ecosystems is the collaboration across layers of operations. For example, connecting and coordinating is a key function that requires multiple people in roles across different spaces who are responsible for networking learners with community organizations (and vice versa); coordinating among learners, learning advisors, caregivers, community organizations; and much more.

When thinking about multiple roles that may be responsible for a set of functions and wondering who can serve in those roles, consider these guiding questions:

• Can a function within the Functions Framework be composed of more discrete roles? If so, who and how might you go about defining these roles?
• What roles do people in your community currently play or could play to fulfill these more discrete functions?
• Can the language we use for the roles in our learner-centered ecosystem reflect the values and ideas that resonate with, inspire, and connect the community?
  In other words, how can we communicate these roles so that community members can fill these roles with a sense of ownership?

For example, think about the function navigating and facilitating learning. This function is described as guiding and supporting learners as they design and navigate their learning journey. Facilitating learning is an immense endeavor. A large and diverse set of people could be in roles that are responsible for this function. Likewise, these roles will likely vary depending on the unique needs of learners. For example, how might navigating and facilitating learning come to life when working with learners in the earliest stages of development, compared to adolescents? What is needed to fulfill this function might also vary based on the nature of the learning. Helping learners build literacy skills or applying chemistry concepts to improve a local bakery’s recipe present different examples of the function of navigating and facilitating learning and would require different skillsets, expertise, and supports.

For further exercises in translating functions into roles, see Appendix D: Functions Vignettes.

Given the varied and interconnected ways people will fulfill functions, play roles, and work together within a learner-centered ecosystem, creating structures and norms to organize and enable their work is imperative. These will also necessarily look different than how they do in the conventional education system, as they need to advance collaboration, connection, and fluidity as opposed to fragmentation, standardization, and limitation.

In this section, we consider possible ways of organizing people and people systems. While we imagine that each learner has a unique learning journey, what kinds of teams and collaborations will be needed to meet the needs of every learner across the ecosystem and foster all of their unique learning journeys simultaneously? We might consider a “constellation of constellations” approach, whereby each learner has a cross-functional team of people there to support them and each learners’ team interacts and overlaps with those of other learners. This team or constellation approach could then be extrapolated to apply to the entire ecosystem’s functioning. This view acknowledges the multiple layers of teams that would be interconnected in an ecosystem.

Following are three possible ways of thinking about how this approach could operate, starting with a close look from the learners’ perspective and zooming out to see might work for the community and ecosystem as a whole.

In an ecosystem, the conventional role of educators as the primary deliverer of content is greatly expanded to include new possibilities of advising, facilitation, coordination, and more. Educators are seen as unique contributors—people with gifts to share. Given this, there is new opportunity for specialization and diversification, such that learners have the teams of people they need to support their growth and development. It is no longer on the shoulders of one educator.

We can imagine that each learner is embedded in a cross-functional team including but not limited to:

• Learning advisors (coach, educator, journey co-navigator)
• Caregivers (parents, guardians, siblings, extended family)
• Social workers and counselors
• Peers and mentors
• Community advisors, elders, and experts
• Network weavers (who identify opportunities for learning experiences)

The makeup of each team is tailored to the learner, their family, and their unique circumstances. Likewise, many of the same people may play similar roles on multiple learners’ cross-functional teams.

At very young ages (i.e., infancy through early childhood), the cross-functional team will necessarily play a more active role. However, as the learner grows, “the training wheels come off” and the learner assumes greater responsibility for their learning, while the team shifts to a more supportive role. Thus, the cross-functional team provides scaffolds from an early age to help the learner develop agency and assume ownership of their learning journey. Regardless of where the learner is developmentally, this team operates collaboratively with power and authority distributed equitably among members.

Responsibilities of these teams might include:

• Dynamic communication and coordination with learners, caregivers, and the broader community
• Dynamic communication and coordination with different institutions and other people in the ecosystem that can or should provide reciprocal opportunities to engage with learners and the community that deepen (and spread, when possible) impact
• Providing and ensuring access to tools, resources, and supports learners and their families may need for their well-being and to actualize their full potential

Each learner might belong to a group of peers that engage in collaborative learning, play, companionship, and mutual support as a small community. These peer learning cohorts may be characterized by:

• Mixed ages, mixed abilities, and different backgrounds, perspectives, and interests
• Dynamic interaction between learning, friendship, companionship, play, and joy
• Collective responsibility and mutual support for each member—their learning, passions, and well-being
• Fluid and porous boundaries, so a cohort can welcome new members, interact and collaborate with peers from other cohorts, and adjust when their peers may leave to pursue their learning journey

Learner-centered ecosystems recognize that learning is community-embedded. To effectively support learners, ecosystems support the overall well-being and vibrancy of their broader community. Ecosystems might have teams in place to address broader community needs, goals, and priorities, particularly as they intersect with the operations of the ecosystem. These teams may operate through participatory processes where community members reflect together, collaboratively find solutions, disrupt and innovate, celebrate and uplift, and build collective responsibility.

Some cross-sectional teams may be long-standing while some may be ad hoc. Standing cross-sectional teams may be responsible for routine day-to-day operations such as the coordination of services across various institutions. On the other hand, ecosystems may need to form ad hoc task forces. For example, an ad hoc task force might be formed to find resources to construct a new community health center or to develop an emergency response to a flood. As a new challenge or issue presents itself, ad hoc structures allow the ecosystem to rally the people that are most appropriate for those unique circumstances.

These cross-sectional teams, whether long-standing or ad hoc, are not merely composed of “representatives.” Instead, they are actively enrolling diverse community members with different perspectives. They are intentional about seeking out and inviting the voices of those who:

• Have traditionally been at the margins, but have valuable perspectives from diverse social and cultural frames
• Have unique gifts and experiences relevant to the issue addressed by the team
• Can challenge thinking with the goal of encouraging innovative approaches

There still remain several complex questions to be tackled if community-based, learner-centered ecosystems are to ensure that the collective human gifts and institutional capacities of the community are organized to optimize and increase the impact on learners. Here we offer some context for the challenges we face as we work to integrate the human talent and contributions of people and people systems in ways that most effectively support the growth and development of young learners.

Reimagining the key functions people play in a learner-centered ecosystem calls for a radical shift in the systems that prepare people who take on these roles and the teams that fulfill these functions. These are not only educator preparation programs, but also the programs that prepare school counselors, psychologists, social workers, and a vast array of roles that are vital in learner-centered ecosystems. A potential path forward may be by drawing inspiration from Grow Your Own (GYO) programs. GYO refer to local efforts to develop internal pipelines into the educator workforce by cultivating interest in young people, offering affordable preparation programs, and developing viable pathways into the teaching profession. GYOs can be reimagined and expanded in the context of communitybased, learner-centered ecosystems.

A personalized learning journey for each member of the community who wants to participate would allow for a customized pathway of support, development, and growth. Communities of practice, learning communities, shared interest groups, exploration and invention teams—are all possible structures that would help create a culture of learning for the people and people systems in a thriving ecosystem.

Learner-centered ecosystems recognize that all community members have meaningful roles to play. This approach poses a series of questions related to compensation. Not all roles in an ecosystem are necessarily publicly funded. Some may be funded through the private sector or through grants, while others may be filled by volunteers. At the same time, it is important to pay attention and ensure that community members are compensated equitably and commensurate with their contributions to the ecosystem. Equitable compensation does not only refer to pay, but also to healthcare, life insurance, vacation, paid time off, and other benefits that professions offer employees so they are able to maintain quality of life.

Even while we strive to create learning ecosystems that serve as safe havens for learners, we cannot do this by turning a blind eye to broader social injustices and how these may impact participants in the ecosystem, both children and adults. A further complication is that injustice often happens beyond the boundaries of the ecosystems, yet its impacts are deeply felt. Responding to social injustice might begin with equipping learners with the ability to discover their abilities for proactive participation in the community, healing practices, and experiences that build skills, knowledge, and compassion.

Conventional systems are designed to maximize resources by seeking efficiencies and operating with a scarcity mindset. In learner-centered ecosystems, the need of each learner leads the design of the ecosystem. Resources are maximized by accessing and harvesting the untapped potential of all people within ecosystems. However, to do so optimally means addressing practical concerns about the infrastructure underlying people systems. This includes processes such as payroll processing, procurement, budgeting, logistics, forecasting, and information systems. These are further complicated by the need to coordinate and integrate systems across institutions, as well as the coordination of people serving in formal and informal roles. It may be beneficial to begin one step at a time, as these often represent large and complex endeavors. For example, some education systems have developed information sharing systems between varied departments of education, health, labor, and human services.

Both federal and state level policies pose constraints. These constraints should not be treated as a stop sign, but rather as unique problems that need to be addressed through creative solutions. These policies include minimum student-to-teacher ratios, licensure requirements, funding formulas, standardized assessments, and much more. Potential paths forward may be using advocacy for flexibility around these requirements. This may require creating and communicating proof points as tools in this endeavor. Finally, there may be creative solutions for meeting state and federal requirements. For example, learning ecosystems may ensure there is a system for having teachers on record which are reported to the state, but these teachers on record may be complemented by other people who take on the different roles in cross-functional teams.

The vision of community-based, learner-centered ecosystems would necessarily introduce a cultural shock to both people already within the ecosystem and those who are new to the ecosystem. Cultural shock is a natural phenomenon that can and should be addressed. Failing to do so will inevitably lead to resistance and backlash. As a first step, it is important to acknowledge the risks that this vision may pose for some, such as lack of stability and familiarity to create supportive spaces to guide people along the journey. The idea of ecosystems is based on shared envisioning, strong relationships, and structures that allow participants to do their best work. Ecosystems are emergent, grown from the ground up, and should not be presented as a standardized solution. Rather, it is important to provoke and invite a community conversation that can lead to new understandings and decisions for action. Still, the ongoing work of welcoming, educating, and co-creating will need the support and facilitation of a dedicated group of people, investment from the greater community, and an environment for catalyzing invention.

Each community will have minimum requirements that the ecosystem must meet for it to fully serve their needs. Understanding these needs and requirements and attending to them ongoingly will be imperative for the ecosystem’s viability, so they might be seen as guardrails that guide the creation and choices of the ecosystem. For example, for most communities, ecosystems will need to attend to the needs of families for reliable childcare and ongoing support for their children. To do this, the ecosystem would seek the balance needed for sustainability and reliability. Knowing what families need and want, and being responsive to those needs (e.g., having multiple pathways for communication and connection, and attending to the health of each child) will build a resilient community that can collaborate to make sure that health and well-being guide decisions and long-term planning.

The following examples showcase how organizations are already creating reimagined roles to best support, engage, and develop agency of their learners, families, and communities. These glimmers offer a sample of the many transformational efforts that are emerging across the education sector, in particular. These examples are meant to inspire new thinking and highlight the exciting initiatives currently underway.