Digital Promise's Inclusive Innovation model

Product or Programme · All products and programmes
Evidence · 17 claims (16 for, 1 mixed) · 7 studies (5 qualitative, 2 design), q2 · 0 of 7 report an effect size · 17 claims rest on one study

Description

An equity-centered research-and-development framework created by Digital Promise that places historically marginalized communities at the center of identifying, designing, developing, and implementing educational and workforce technologies.

Components

• Inclusive Innovation model centering marginalized communities in design and development: Digital Promise's Inclusive Innovation model holds that existing R&D models often fail historically marginalized populations, and that innovation must move beyond inviting marginalized voices to conversation. As the report states, "it places them at the center of design, development, and implementation." In this project the model was operationalized as co-design: frontline workers served as participant-advisors in three cohorts of bi-weekly video design sessions, with a Technical Work Group and LER pilots iterating on the resulting principles, followed by a broader survey for validation. (Inclusive Design Principles for Learning and Employment Records: Co-Designing for Equity)
• Inclusive Innovation model: a phased process in which people closest to the challenge lead, participate in, and benefit from innovation: The Inclusive Innovation model is a formalized co-design framework guiding the San Diego STEM Pathways Initiative. The report defines it as "a formalized process by which the people closest to the challenge lead, participate in, and benefit from innovation". Figure 3 presents phases from Readiness and Connect & Commit through Inquire & Investigate, Design & Develop, Implement & Iterate, and Sustain & Scale, each with associated artifacts such as a Community Charter, Solution Prototype, and Codified Solution. The Community Advisory Committee used the model to structure its collaboration, moving from establishing core values and root cause analysis to developing solution concepts. (Babineau et al. (2025))
• The Inclusive Innovation model: an equity-centered R&D process with five phases that prioritizes the voices of those most impacted: The report describes the Inclusive Innovation approach as "An equity-centered R&D model that engages communities—students, parents, families, and community leaders—in partnership with district leaders, educators, researchers, and developers to create novel solutions to complex educational challenges." It encompasses five phases: connect and commit, inquire and investigate, design and develop, implement and iterate, and sustain and scale. The model intentionally prioritizes the perspectives, experiences, and ideas of those most impacted by a challenge, and in this project it structured LEA Design Teams' work from problem identification through pilot launch. (Recruitment and Retention: Pilot Solutions Designed by Teachers of Color (Phase I))
• Collaborative Innovation model: Collaborative Innovation is Digital Promise's research and development model underpinning its regional pathways work: "a structured process where those most directly impacted by educational challenges lead, shape, and benefit from the solutions". As an R&D model, it engages communities and schools in the co-research and co-design of innovative approaches, centering the voices of students, families, educators, and community members alongside researchers and solution developers. The report claims the resulting solutions are more effective, relevant, and responsive, particularly for rural learners and historically underserved communities, and it grounded the co-design of district cybersecurity pathways in the national initiative. (Babineau et al. (2025))
• Two-by-two equity-innovation matrix for analyzing whether a solution is adapted or radical and who has access: The report offers a two-by-two matrix as a tool for analyzing innovation and equity in a given project or proposed solution. The x-axis indicates whether the project is closer to being adapted from something existing or closer to radical, i.e., significantly different and ready to scale; the y-axis analyzes who has access and whether access promotes equity or reinforces opportunity gaps. Inclusive Innovation seeks to move solution designs towards quadrants C and D, which are intentionally designed for the most marginalized. (Angevine et al. (2019))
• Collaborative Innovation: a six-phase co-research and co-design R&D model: Collaborative Innovation is "a structured approach to research and development that brings together districts, schools, communities, and program partners to co-research educational challenges and co-design solutions that directly benefit students furthest from opportunity." It is grounded in co-leadership, co-research, and co-design, and "unfolds through six phases: Readiness; Connect and Commit; Inquire and Investigate; Design and Develop; Implement and Iterate; and Sustain and Scale." It extends the earlier Inclusive Innovation framework developed with more than 30 districts across 10 projects. (Latia P. White (2026))
• Context expertise framework: four types of proximate knowledge holders in education R&D: Drawing on the Tamarack Institute's work on context experts (Attygalle, 2017), the article defines context expertise as "first-hand understanding of what it means to live in a community, know the student and community needs, and experience the impact of inequity." The framework identifies four types of context expertise relevant to education R&D: the expertise of students, the expertise of teachers, the expertise of families, and the expertise of community-based organizations. Inclusive Innovation honors content and context expertise on an equal plane, prioritizing context expertise in researching root causes and developing solutions. Individuals with context expertise are described as more (Smith et al. (2024))
• Inclusive Innovation: an equity-centered R&D process with five phases and six Core Tenets: Inclusive Innovation is an equity-centered research and development process in which "district-community equity challenges are co-researched and innovative equity-centered solutions centering the needs of HSE students are co-designed in partnership with district and community stakeholders." Districts and communities work on Core Teams that co-construct an inclusive team culture enabling power-sharing and equitable decision-making. The process moves through five phases — Connect and Commit, Inquire and Investigate, Design and Develop, Implement and Iterate, and Sustain and Scale — and is anchored by six Core Tenets (Collective Leadership; Student Voice and Leadership; Context Expertise and Pr (Johnson et al. (2023))
• Inclusive Innovation: an equity-first education R&D framework that reimagines authority, decision-making, and risk: Inclusive Innovation is an overarching framework for education R&D grounded in what the authors call a radical commitment to equity. It reimagines authority, decision-making, and risk so that people closest to the challenge lead, participate in, and benefit from innovation. The paper states it provides an overarching framework for authentically engaging underrepresented stakeholders at the earliest stages and shifting their roles to leaders, participants, and beneficiaries, placing them at the center of the innovation ecosystem rather than merely inviting them in. (Angevine et al. (2019))
• Inclusive Innovation: a co-research and co-design R&D framework enabling co-leadership among students, teachers, parents, community members, and district leaders: Inclusive Innovation is a paradigm for education R&D in which district-community Core Teams of 7-10 participants (district leaders, teachers, parents, community members, students) share leadership. The report states it is "a paradigm shift in research and development (R&D), enabling co-leadership among students, teachers, parents, community members, and district leaders." Teams progress through Inquire and Investigate, Design and Develop, and Implement and Iterate stages, formulating problem statements, defining outcomes, co-designing solution prototypes, and assessing effectiveness through local knowledge and lived experience. Core Tenets center students and families from historically and s (Realizing District-Community Driven Outcomes Through Inclusive Innovation)
• Inclusive Innovation model with Core Tenets of co-leadership with those most proximate to the challenge: Inclusive Innovation is an education R&D model that brings students, families, and community members together with educators, researchers, and solution providers to address challenges affecting historically and systematically excluded communities. It depicts a readiness stage and five main phases, the last being Sustain & Scale. It is predicated on Core Tenets holding that "those who are most proximate to the challenge should be in co-leadership in researching the problem, defining the outcomes, and designing or determining the solution." Participants most often cited sustaining three tenets: student voice and leadership, honoring context expertise and multiple perspectives, and continuity of (Viki M. Young et al. (2024))
• Inclusive Innovation R&D model: six core tenets for equity-centered education research and development: The Inclusive Innovation R&D model is an equity-centered education research and development framework organized around six core tenets that Digital Promise developed and refined over three years with over 30 school districts. Four practice tenets (Collective Ownership, Student Voice and Leadership, Context Expertise and Proximity, Continuity of Equity) describe how the R&D process is conducted, and two impact tenets (Reimagine Progress, Build Capacity) describe the outcomes it targets. The model is premised on the understanding that "practice informs product" so that solutions enabling historically and systematically excluded students to thrive must reflect inclusive practices. It defines hi (Smith et al. (2024))

Claims

• Cross-sector committee members report that an organizing intermediary's structure made collaboration generative and productive [+M]
• Committee members hold that driving systems-level change requires actively and directly engaging local communities rather than passively asking for feedback [+M]
• Staff reflections identify partner skills, knowledge, and dispositions that support full participation in Collaborative Innovation [+M]
• Deeper co-leadership emerges when staff support lets partners progressively take on responsibility, but recedes when staff carry the process [+W]
• Dispositions such as openness and shared responsibility are shaped by conditions, not fixed individual traits [+W]
• Knowledge alone did not ensure meaningful participation; it became influential when clearly communicated and built into programming [+W]
• Participation supports were most effective when deliberately matched to the specific constraints participants faced [+W]
• One school district experienced a 25 percent increase in the recruitment of Black male educators through Inclusive Innovation [+W]
• Over 90 percent of Bristol teachers who participated in student-led mental health PD reported being more conscious of the experiences of students of color in school [+W]
• Most RCS Core Team members who completed the Inclusive Innovation Survey showed positive beliefs and efficacy aligned with the Inclusive Innovation Core Tenets [+M]
• The RCS Core Team's root cause analysis identified fear and political influence, lack of comprehensive and inclusive curriculum, and lack of awareness as central causes of the discourse challenge [+M]
• Post-implementation survey responses after each Socratic Circles implementation cycle trended affirmative toward the team-defined outcomes [+W]
• Educators sustained the student voice and leadership tenet by incorporating student input and co-leadership into their ongoing roles [+M]
• District-community Core Team participants across four pilot districts perceived their co-designed solutions successfully met the team-defined intended outcomes [+M]
• Core Teams identified communication challenges, school and district leadership turnover, and teacher burnout as barriers that influenced solution success [~M]
• Interviews after the Inclusive Innovation pilots identified multi-level buy-in, implementation iteration, embedding in existing systems, and demonstrating benefits as key lessons for sustaining district-community solutions [+W]
• Sunnyside students participating in the Compact Writing Assignments pilot completed quarterly research papers at a rate more than 15 percent higher than non-participants [+W]

Related Products and Programmes

-

Key Sources

• Cacicio, S., Tinsley, B., Miller, A., & Luke Luna, C. (2022, April). Inclusive design principles for learning and employment records: Co-designing for equity. Digital Promise. https://doi org/10 51388/20 500 12265/154
• Iloh, C. (2024, February). Recruitment and Retention: Impact of Pilot Solutions Designed by Teachers of Color (Phase II). Digital Promise. https://doi.org/10.51388/20.500.12265/216
• Inclusive Innovation: Increasing Recruitment and Retention of Teachers of Color — Summation of Digital Promise Design Studios with Teachers of Color. (2021). Digital Promise. https://digitalpromise.org/inclusive-innovation/
• Latia P. White, Ed. D. (2026). Beyond Participation: The Capacities That Shape Engagement in Collaborative Innovation. Digital Promise, Center for Learner Pathway Innovations. https://digitalpromise.dspacedirect.org/items/e933ec0e-f153-4046-842b-61b696b00ba2
• Smith, K., & Young, V. M. (2024). A New Narrative: How Unlocking the Power of R&D Through Inclusive Innovation Can Transform Education. Digital Promise, Center for Inclusive Innovation. https://digitalpromise.dspacedirect.org/items/73f2e0fa-dca8-4cd0-a8da-eb18b59453c4. doi:10.51388/20.500.12265/202
• Johnson, A. M., & Lenderman, K. (2023). Socratic Circles: Building OER Tools for Racial Equity Classroom and Community Discourse. Digital Promise, Center for Inclusive Innovation. https://digitalpromise.org/inclusive-innovation. doi:10.51388/20.500.12265/200
• Angevine, C., Cator, K., Liberman, B., Smith, K., & Young, V. (2019). Designing a Process for Inclusive Innovation: A Radical Commitment to Equity. Digital Promise. https://digitalpromise.dspacedirect.org/items/d6db3e76-2dc9-4ea6-ae68-49814c88e6b6. doi:10.51388/20.500.12265/86
• White, L. P. and Merritt Johnson, A. (2024, May). Realizing District-Community Driven Outcomes Through Inclusive Innovation. Digital Promise. https://doi.org/10.51388/20.500.12265/214
• Viki M. Young, Ph.D. and Alexandra Merritt Johnson, Ph.D. (2024). Sustainability in Inclusive Innovation: District-Community Solutions, Mindsets, and Practices. Digital Promise, Center for Inclusive Innovation. https://digitalpromise.dspacedirect.org/items/94695da1-ad96-49e5-b461-b759d617ae25

Page metadata

Field	Value
type	product
id	digital-promises-inclusive-innovation-model
aliases	inclusive-innovation
title	Digital Promise's Inclusive Innovation model
description	An equity-centered research-and-development framework created by Digital Promise that places historically marginalized communities at the center of identifying, designing, developing, and implementing educational and workforce technologies.
status	review
moved_from	theory/collaborative-innovation-model, theory/context-expertise-four-types-framework, theory/inclusive-innovation-equity-centered-rd-process, theory/inclusive-innovation-equity-first-rd-framework, theory/inclusive-innovation-framework, theory/inclusive-innovation-model-core-tenets, theory/inclusive-innovation-six-tenets-framework
product_kind	framework
generated	by process:settle-candidates on 2026-10-09
trust	unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources	6 — latia-p-white-2026, smith-2024, johnson-2023, angevine-2019, white-l-p-and-merritt, viki-m-young-2024

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.