CREATEd Co-Design Toolkit
from the Center for Research Use in Education
PREPARE
IDEATE & NEGOTIATE
PROTOTYPE & REFINE
MOBILIZE
You are embarking on an exciting journey to transform research into action.
In this very first stage, you will:
Clarify your entry point into the co-design process;
Identify research to be transformed;
Develop a clear definition of the problem or challenge to be addressed in co-design;
Build a co-design team of researchers, practitioners (e.g., educators), and communication and design experts;
Attend to relationships among team members as the process begins; and
Orient the team to the process.
The goal:
Get organized for an effective co-design process: clarify your entry point, identify research, define the problem, and build the team.
The participants:
Team Members:
To be determined — literally. Co-design can be initiated by researchers, practitioners, intermediaries, and other interestholders. Stage 0 is the entry point for this process and the place where the team is actually built.
The deliverables:
-
Problem definition statement
-
Selected research
-
Confirmed team
-
Orientation communication (the team understands the process)
Tools for this Stage:
Suggested stage plan
Clarifying your entry point into the co-design process
There are many possible entry points into the co-design process, which means the path to getting started will be different for each case. We provide some probable (but not exhaustive!) starting points below, along with a visual showing how those paths might shape initial work. Please note these starting points and paths are intended to be illustrative, rather than prescriptive, so do not feel bound by these options.
What are some possible starting points for entering into co-design?
An educator looking to bring research-informed practices into their classroom
A problem has been identified within educational practice that practitioners would like help solving
A problem has been identified within educational policy (including curriculum or assessment) that practitioners or other interestholders would like help solving
Researchers or research institutions are looking to have a positive impact on educational equity
Leaders or policymakers would like to become more evidence-informed
An education advocacy organization would like to design and advance equitable education policies
A professional learning or curriculum provider is seeking to turn equity-centered research into products that can be shared through or integrated into their services
Research-practice partnerships are ready to transform local evidence into local policies or practices
A researcher or knowledge broker would like to use a particular piece or research, report or review to change practice or policy
Research has been produced that provides a framework or is explicitly design-centred and can be used to evaluate current work
When you have decided (and agreed!) which of these examples seems to best fit your starting point, move on to the section below.
Where to start?
The Venn diagram below shows some possible entry points into the codesign process. Click into different options to see what feels most similar or appropriate to your situation. Then, explore how different aspects of preparing for co-design (i.e., Stage 0) might flow based on that starting point. This will help you set a useful ordering for your preparation activities, which you can see laid out later in the plans for this stage. In other words, you may need to work through the next sections in a slightly different order than the one presented in this document, depending on which section of the map you are working through.
Once you have identified your starting point and the path forward, you can engage in the following activities in the order that best meets your needs.
Before the work of collaborative design begins, it is important to be fully prepared. This is perhaps the most important phase of the work because it is the foundation on which all other activities build. We strongly recommend engaging in this stage two or more months ahead of the start of the work to ensure the team’s availability.
Defining the problem
Defining the problem is a critical component of co-design, because it sets the foundation for whose experiences, needs, and knowledge guide the work. In an equity-centered approach, problem definition is not simply a technical step of identifying gaps or inefficiencies—it is a social and political process.
When problems are defined collaboratively—with practitioners, policymakers, and researchers working together—co-design can uncover how issues are experienced differently across groups and contexts. This helps avoid solutions that reinforce inequities by addressing only surface-level symptoms or privileging dominant perspectives. Instead, it enables the team to name underlying systemic or structural causes and to frame the problem in ways that invite multiple forms of evidence, including lived experience and local knowledge, alongside research evidence.
In short, defining the problem with those most affected ensures that the co-design process starts from a shared understanding of what matters, for whom, and why—leading to resources that are more relevant, just, and sustainable in practice.
Our Defining the Problem tool engages a diverse group of individuals who reflect different lived experiences, backgrounds, and expertise so that the problem definition does not reflect one-sided assumptions or biases, even if well-intentioned. It is particularly important that those who are closest to the problem have the most input at this stage.
Note also that depending on when in this stage you (or the team) define the problem, there may be an opportunity to revise or refine the problem moving forward. For example, a problem definition might be the starting point for the project, but once the team is built, there is an opportunity to re-engage with the problem, now with a broader set of perspectives that will support the work moving forward.
Identifying and selecting research
One step in preparing for co-designing research-informed products is identifying useful and relevant research. This decision can relate to who participates in the design team. For example, research with implications for classroom practice should engage classroom teachers, whereas research on funding formulas should engage policymakers responsible for those decisions in the design team, and in particular should acknowledge lived expertise. For example, if using/choosing research that references decisions about teaching practice, then it is particularly important that the voices of practitioners are initially centred when discussing and responding to it. In a moment, you will look at a tool that explores some of the main types of research, and their purposes (which are quite varied) as a way of helping you decide what might be a good fit for your project. Sometimes, people bring research to the table because of the number of citations it has, or the credibility of the researcher or the university it is from - but this may not be the best indicator of quality, because those things are not necessarily linked to elements of research that make it effective, and they may even get in the way of being equitable. That’s why it is a good idea to question the reasons for considering research as ‘good’ as a key part of this process.
The decision as to which research to use is important, because it is related to:
-
Ideas of what counts as ‘evidence’ and who creates it
-
Whose knowledge is seen as important and valued
-
Who feels empowered to reject, critique, question, and adapt ideas from research
This means that having a conversation about these ideas (the context of research use) is just as important as choosing which research to use.
Access
The research you choose needs to be accessible to everyone in several ways:
Everyone needs to be able to directly access the document, book, or chapter in the sense of immediate, unimpeded access, whether digital (via a clickable, non-paywalled link) or physical (like a printout), or both
Everyone needs to be able to understand the language used in the research and use it to access the ideas explained there
Everyone needs inclusive, adaptive access in ways that are not affected by any disability they may have (for example dyslexia, visual impairment, colour blindness)
PRO TIP
Members of the education community have a wide range of skills related to reading, understanding, and evaluating research. If you are unsure about evaluating and selecting research, it may be helpful to engage a colleague with experience reading or doing research or a local researcher.
Deciding if research is ‘good’
No matter what the entry point into the co-design process, it is important to be critical about identifying research that will inform policy and practice. Here are three particularly important ways of evaluating research for co-design:
-
Evaluating research methods. Before starting a process designed to help research findings become part of policy or practice, we must be confident in those findings.
For example, we could ask: Does the way the study has been conducted or undertaken support the claims that are made? This requires evaluating the quality of evidence in terms of methods by thinking about whether, for example, claims about cause and effect are adequately supported; whether the measures appropriate and valid; and whether the sample or case study allows us to make more general claims and/or explain what has been observed.
-
Evaluating research for relevance and applicability. A longstanding criticism of educational research is that it isn’t relevant to the problems and decisions policymakers or practitioners make and is therefore not useful. Therefore, the selected research should:
-
Uncover new ideas, concepts, or issues that help policymakers or practitioners develop new understandings about challenges at hand (what we sometimes call “conceptual” use) or
-
Provide insights or strategies that help policymakers or practitioners address real issues they face in their work.
Your evaluation should also focus on whether the research is likely to be useful in particular local contexts, or where you know the system constraints, long-term goals, and available resources.
-
-
Evaluating implications for equity. You should also consider the ways in which issues of equity are or are not addressed in both the way the research has been conducted and the implications of the research. Unknowingly using research that has been conducted inequitably, has uninterrogated biases and assumptions, and/or that reinforces stereotypes or uses framing that is harmful to marginalized peoples can result in policies or practices that cause harm and/or perpetuate systemic injustices.
PRO TIP
The research you choose needs to be accessible to everyone in several ways:
-
Everyone needs to be able to directly access the document, book, or chapter in the sense of immediate, unimpeded access, whether digital (via a clickable, non-paywalled link) or physical (like a printout), or both.
-
Everyone needs to be able to understand the language used in the research and use it to access the ideas explained there.
-
Everyone needs inclusive, adaptive access in ways that are not affected by any disability they may have (for example dyslexia, visual impairment, colour blindness).
Tools for evaluating and selecting research
If you choose to use a journal article, it is useful for everyone to understand the type of article it is (as part of assessing what makes it ‘good’). Use the Guide to Types of Research tool to categorise any journal articles you are thinking of using, and agree on whether it is good quality (clearly written, answers its research questions, and presents useful and logical conclusions).
Research Evaluation Guide: This tool can be used by whoever is initiating the process to evaluate the quality of research.
PRO TIP
Members of the education community have a wide range of skills related to reading, understanding, and evaluating research. If you are unsure about evaluating and selecting research, it may be helpful to engage a colleague with experience reading or doing research or a local researcher.
Building the team
People—or teams—are the cornerstone of co-design, and attending to them at the beginning is likely to prove foundational for good quality work together where everyone feels welcome and safe to share ideas. This is an important moment to consider the Dimensions of Equity tool described in the Introduction. Equity can be understood in terms of who is included in the co-design process and it is important to understand and attempt to mitigate logistical, cultural, and psychological barriers to participation in order to build a diverse and functional team.
Membership
The codesign process involves multiple interestholders throughout the process, with a core team identified from the start. Below are the roles and broad responsibilities of team members. Keep in mind that throughout the other stages of the process there may be opportunities to bring others into the conversation to provide input, feedback, or other resources to support the project.
PRO TIP
Because starting points may vary (i.e. a researcher initiates co-design to help their work have broader impact, or a teacher is seeking an evidence-informed resource to solve a classroom challenge), how a team is built may look different. No matter who is initiating a co-design, it may be beneficial to identify a facilitator early in the team building process. Identifying and preparing the facilitator in advance of building the larger team enables them to be prepared to engage team members and set the tone and timeline for the process.
The Facilitator
The co-design process should be facilitated by the person most familiar with the process and with the skills and dispositions to engage in the activities described in the toolkit. This may or may not be the person initiating the work and is a very important decision at this phase. The facilitator:-
Leads and manages the co-design process
-
Ensures adherence to team norms and a trusting, respectful process
-
Helps the team to navigate conflict, maintain focus, and use resources successfully
-
Availability to participate within the planned timeline for the project
-
Serves as project manager
-
The Researcher
A researcher (or multiple researchers) play a key role in supporting engagement with research evidence as part of the process. This includes ensuring the team has access to research information and understands the research and its limitations. The researcher is also likely to have a role in generating and/or revising content in final products.When working with a single research article or set of articles, it may be helpful to involve the author(s) of the articles as team members, as they will bring deep knowledge of the work but also an interest in helping it to have a positive impact.
When working with a larger body of research or research syntheses, it may be appropriate to have an expert in that research, even if they aren’t the author of the specific piece/s being used. Their knowledge of the broader literature and its strengths and weaknesses can help the team understand the nuances during co-design.
Policymakers & Practitioners
Key to collaborative design is the participation of those most likely to be impacted by the work. This could include students, parents, teachers, leaders, community members, intermediary organizations, school board members, legislative staff, legislators, and/or others. Policymakers and/or practitioners help ensure the team understands the needs, values, and practices of the end users and can push for designs that are useful in addressing real issues and challenges. They also contribute to the final product and be instrumental in mobilizing and disseminating the product.
The Designer
Designers are an equally critical part of this process. They are responsible for helping the team to be creative, work within set resources, prototype, and finalize the product. While no designer is an expert in everything, an ideal partner would have experience working on educational issues and have skills to offer a wide range of options.
Other Team Members
At the start of the process, the most important participants are those listed above. However, during the course of the process, it may be necessary to engage additional experts and partners. These considerations are indicated throughout the toolkit, but can include:
-
Content experts: individuals with particular expertise in relevant research or practices that are needed beyond the expertise of the initial team. For example, if a team would like to develop a guide for coaches as well as teachers, but only has a teacher on the team, they might bring a coach in during Stage 3. Alternatively, the researcher may wish to engage a colleague with a particular specialization to contribute to the content of the product.
-
Design experts: individuals who bring additional expertise related to the particular product being developed. For example, the communications designer may need to engage a colleague with a particular skill (e.g. web design, video production, etc).
-
Mobilization partners: individuals or organizations whose mission is aligned to the work of the team and may be helpful in supporting dissemination or implementation of the resource.
External evaluators or researchers: additional capacity and expertise may be useful in Stage 8, which focuses on planning and implementation of evaluation.
-
When inviting team members, consider your initial goals for scope. If the purpose of co-design is to address a local (e.g., community, district, or state) need, engaging local policymakers and practitioners can be highly effective. If the purpose is to address issues at a national scale, working with members of larger associations and networks may be helpful.
Additionally, when identifying specific participants and the number of participants for each role, it is important to consider:
Whether members have a strong interest in and commitment to the educational issue
Who will bring relevant experiences and knowledge to the team
What perspectives are needed to strengthen collaboration among researchers and practitioners or policymakers?
Racial, linguistic, gender, and other forms of diversity that offer important perspectives on the issue (as you recruit, pay particular attention to access - you may not reach team members who are disabled or otherwise minoritized unless you intentionally prioritize access)
Ensuring the team size remains manageable
"I think the most valuable thing about that process was bringing together so many different perspectives…it's a diversity of voices in the room helping to solve a problem that's going to have the best effect. And I think that just bringing so many different lived experiences at the table was the most beneficial thing about [the] entire experience."
ELISABETH D.
RESEARCHER ON A
CODESIGN TEAM
Attending to relationships
It is important to attend to relationships among team members. Identifying and recruiting a diverse team is an important first step – but not the end of preparing for co-design. Teams need to develop relationships that are trusting and productive. Throughout the toolkit, team-building is emphasized in each stage of work, but the work is strengthened by attending to relationships early in the work.
A key stumbling block for collaborative work is a lack of clarity about roles and expected contributions. To mitigate some of those challenges, we have created a set of guides for each team role:
These require slight modifications to reflect project aims and available resources, and then should be shared with each team member at the point of invitation, ideally by the facilitator, to help them understand what they are committing to and how to be prepared for the work.
Importantly, these guides are an initial step in setting norms. They explicitly address the goals of co-design in disrupting unequal power dynamics common in research-practice relationships, as well as the necessity of addressing educational equity in every aspect of the work. It may also be useful for all team members to understand the centrality of equity in the co-design process. Consider sharing the Dimensions of Equity tool with them as well.
Here are some ideas about how to attend to relationships among the co-design team:
-
Acknowledge identities and histories: Recognize that members bring intersecting identities shaped by historical, cultural, and institutional contexts.
-
Cultivate awareness: Reflect on how social and historical dynamics influence relationships and collaboration within the team. Developing a shared understanding and recognition of those can strengthen trust.
-
Stay open and embrace changes: Avoid constraining how people identify—roles and identities are intersectional, and may emerge and shift over the course of the project (no one is “just” a teacher or researcher).
-
Build empathy intentionally: Create space to understand others’ experiences, motivations, and constraints.
-
Establish trust: Listen authentically, ask rather than assume, and ensure everyone’s voice is heard.
-
Set norms and boundaries: Co-create and uphold team agreements for respectful communication, shared decision-making, and conflict navigation.
Tools and resources in the Building and Supporting an Effective Team resource, which is embedded throughout in the co-design toolkit, reflect these ideas and remind the facilitator and team to revisit and actively work to strengthen their relationships over the course of the project.
Final preparations
Getting tools and technology ready
This section is about preparing instrumentally. That means making sure:
-
Every has the technology they need downloaded, logins and passwords sorted, understand how to use it, and how to troubleshoot if things go wrong
-
Everyone understands the systems/tools for communication and collaboration that they will be using
-
Everyone is able to view/edit the necessary documents
-
Everyone knows what to expect
Orienting and preparing the team
The last step before the co-design process begins is to get everyone ready. The facilitator takes responsibility for:
Completing prework, and
Communicating with team members about the path ahead.
Prework
Facilitators become familiar with or or refresh their knowledge of facilitation techniques, projects management, and carefully read through the co-design toolkit resources. Each stage includes guidance and a set of team resources to help the facilitator get started. We strongly recommend reviewing these before moving forward in the co-design process.
Communicating about the path ahead
Now is the time to establish strong communication with the team. At this point, team members have ideally been identified, have committed to the process, and are aware of their roles and responsibilities. If the facilitator was not the person recruiting team members, introductory emails and opportunities to talk on the phone or remotely are highly recommended. These meetings need not take long, but they are an opportunity to:
-
answer questions about the process,
-
reaffirm roles and responsibilities,
-
learn more about team members’ needs and goals in participating,
-
clarify any logistical needs or challenges (e.g., meeting times, preferred methods of communication, additional needs including disabilities) team members might have, and
-
develop an understanding of the knowledge, expertise, experience, and other assets team members will bring to the table.
After initial conversations with team members, and informed by what was learned, the facilitator should communicate clearly with all team members about both the plan for accomplishing team goals and any tasks they need to complete before the first meeting. This message should be specific about when and how work will be accomplished (in person, remotely, asynchronously), a timeline for the project, any tools they will need to sign up for or create an account for, and how the team will communicate. Further, this task should clarify expectations for the first meeting (see Stage 1): that all members come prepared to discuss and critique the selected research.
Wrapping up
It’s now time to get the co-design process started!
Is the team ready to begin? Review this list of mental "double-checks" that all communications and supports needed for Stage 1 have been attended to:
🔲 There is a clear and shared understanding of the problem being addressed through the co-design process.
🔲 Team members have been thoughtfully identified and recruited for the project
🔲 Facilitator
🔲 Researcher(s)
🔲 Policymaker(s) or practitioner(s)
🔲 Communication designer
🔲 Other team members
🔲 Team members have received information about their roles and responsibilities as well as other aspects of participation, such as compensation
🔲 Strategies are in place to support positive, equitable relationships among team members
🔲 Research that is being considered has been identified and evaluated for quality, relevance and application, and equity or the team is/will be engaged in this work in preparation for Stage 1.
🔲 The facilitator has:
🔲 completed all pre-work and is familiar with stage resources,
🔲 met with all team members,
🔲 communicated plans for managing the project,
🔲 clarified any tasks to be completed before the first meeting, and
🔲 has created a team management system and filed all communications and documents there for future reference by the team.
