People within the education world and beyond often ask how we know “new” personalized, competency-based models of learning designed around learners’ needs—rather than a “one-size-fits-all” mentality—will work.
But here’s the thing: we already know that learner-centered approaches work, thanks to the Eight-Year Study. If getting to learner-centered education is like climbing a mountain, we’ve already proven the summit exists. The question now is how we help each other make the climb.
We Know the Summit Is Real: The Eight-Year Study
The Eight-Year Study is the nickname for an extensive set of research projects led by the Progressive Education Association (PEA) in the 1930s. PEA believed in the progressive educational approaches used by their network schools, but posited that the rigid university entry requirements were a barrier to using learner-centered pedagogical models.
They wanted to test the effectiveness of progressive education to build a case for wider adoption of such approaches. A key component was to match a cohort of 1,500 rising high school students from the 30 participating schools with students of similar demographic background and past academic performance to compare their learning outcomes in high school and university over the course of eight years—hence the nickname of the study.
They gained agreement from a set of selective universities to waive these requirements for the students in the study, replacing the typical admissions process for one done by recommendations from the head of school. Their study included data on the students as well as on the types of progressive approaches used in the different schools.
The headline: The students at the schools in the study with greater curricular autonomy—focusing on student growth and demonstration of learning through in-depth projects over standardized curricula—did as well on core academics and better on most of the broader set of skills and dispositions we often find in portraits of a graduate and durable skills lists today.
The studies of what the progressive schools did differently showed that the more they reimagined their learning environment, the more likely their students thrived. There are other key findings that still resonate today.
- Flexible Curricular and Assessment Approaches: The participating schools moved away from rigid, standardized curricula and developed individualized assessment methods that focused on student growth and demonstration of learning rather than seat time or grade-level expectations—a foundational principle of competency-based education.
- Holistic Student Development: The study emphasized developing the “whole student” including critical thinking, creativity, and social responsibility, which mirrors learner-centered education’s focus on broader competencies beyond academic content knowledge.
- Student Agency and Engagement: Schools in the study gave students more choice in their learning paths and greater responsibility for their education.
The summit is real. Progressive, learner-centered approaches produced better outcomes. So why are we still at the base of the mountain arguing about whether to climb?
There Are Multiple Trails to the Top
Whether my learning community designs around a portrait of a learner, project-based learning, competency-based learning, career pathways, community-connected learning, or something else, we have more in common than is different.
We can see each of these approaches as different ways up the same mountain. Different trails up the mountain aren’t competing; they’re serving different hikers with different needs, starting from different trailheads. A family with young children takes the gentle switchbacks. An experienced climber might take the technical route up a rock face. A trail runner goes solo at dawn. But they’re all valid paths to the same summit.
Too often, we get caught up in defending “our” approach or debating the exact language we should all use rather than recognizing we’re heading to the same place. When we keep our focus narrow, we miss the opportunity to become a united movement of movements, which makes it easier for defenders of the status quo to dismiss all of us.
We can see each of these approaches as different ways up the same mountain. Different trails up the mountain aren’t competing; they’re serving different hikers with different needs, starting from different trailheads.
Laurie Gagnon
We Need to Share Gear and Wisdom
Back to our mountain metaphor: whether I aim to take a leisurely day hike or run solo to the top before sunrise, we can share strategies and offer support and feedback. What should I bring for lunch? What clothes and equipment do I need? What training will help me be physically and mentally prepared? All of the hikers can benefit and have a more enjoyable, safer hike when they share information about needed gear, hiking nutrition, and the weather report.
What could it look like to “share gear and wisdom” across learner-centered approaches?
- Assessment strategies: How does a learning community know where their students are in their progress towards the learning goals? A competency-based school’s approach to demonstrating mastery can inform a project-based learning school’s rubric design or a career pathways program’s industry certification process.
- Student agency structures: How do different schools create time and space for student voice? The lessons learned by schools designed around personalized learning plans about scaffolding choice can be used by schools focused on collaborative projects.
- Community partnerships: How do we leverage the power of authentic audiences? Schools using career- and community-connected learning can share relationship-building strategies with any school trying to create more open-walled, relevant experiences.
The key is that we’re not asking anyone to abandon their trail—we’re asking them to share what they’ve learned along the way and helping everyone see they are not alone in their journey.
We’re All Preparing for the Same Journey
There is much more to learn about which approaches work best in which settings, and how best to implement and spread (or scale) learner-centered systems and practices.
There is real work ahead. Implementation is hard, context matters, and existing systems and policy are not always aligned. Moreover, learner-centered education is about a mindset shift even more than it is about the technical changes. We need to rethink what evidence of success for both students and systems can look like. This only truly happens when we design education around the fact that learners will also take different paths up the mountain.
We may want a modern-day eight-year study, yet we don’t have to wholly reinvent the wheel. To be successful and sustainable, we will need to tend to the core elements of learner-centered systems—competency-based learning, personalization, learner agency, social-embeddedness, open-walls—regardless of what language each community uses to describe them.
Just as every mountain climber needs proper footwear regardless of their trail, every learner-centered approach needs to center student agency. Just as every climber needs to understand weather patterns, every approach needs to be socially-embedded in community context.
Let’s Get to the Summit!
The summit exists—the Eight-Year Study proved that 90 years ago. We need to work together on implementation, continuing to learn what works, for which learners, in which settings. Different communities will take different trails, and that’s not just okay—it’s necessary. And, we’re better prepared for the journey when we share our stories of the journey, with both the ups and the downs.
What will you share from your trail? What do you want to learn from others? Reach out to share your story or explore emerging insights.
