Jargon is a natural part of any field or area of expertise. At its best, jargon helps people within a group understand each other and communicate more effectively. At its worst, jargon is used as a tool to identify and exclude people outside the group. 

A problem arises, though, when jargon makes things less obvious or accessible to others. Take, for instance, the term curriculum. It appears straightforward, but it can mean very different things to different educators.

Curriculum, according to some educators, refers to the official standards that the state or school’s governing body endorses for each grade level to follow. Others define curriculum as the instructional texts, resources, materials, and supplies used to teach the standards. And still, other educators define curriculum as the various classes students enroll in. The lack of clarity can lead to misunderstandings about the role of curricula in schools.  

Simply put, jargon can aid in the communication of specific concepts, but it can also cause confusion. When different people and disciplines come together, the success of the end project depends on all participants agreeing on a shared language. This is particularly important in education research.

Jargon in education research

The web of education researchers, educators, and developers who convene in the education research field frequently speak different dialects of the same language.

Consider an abstract. This is a brief summary of a research project and its findings, including key results and conclusions. But to someone outside the field of research, an abstract may be no different from an introduction, which provides the research background and an overview of previous research.

A widely-used term like case study can have different meanings for researchers and edtech companies.

For researchers this can refer to an intensive investigation of the past and current experiences and behaviors of a person, group of people, or organization. Alternatively, a case study can refer to the gathering and presentation of detailed information about a particular person or a small group of people, often including data derived from said person or people.

Edtech companies may be more familiar with the definition of case study as it applies to user experience design or design in general. This type of case study is a presentation that explains the process used to design or redesign different aspects of a product or service. 

While the end products of both case studies may have similarities, the intention is different. Researchers will choose to do a case study in order to investigate a specific phenomena and edtech companies will choose to do a case study to describe a process that’s already happened. They are both persuasive documents but the former is an unbiased investigation and the latter is more of a marketing piece.

This type of jargon, where multiple parties believe they are speaking the same language when, in fact they aren’t, is a detrimental form of jargon. If the words we use as a group aren’t interrogated and defined early in the process, we can end up working towards very different goals. 

Codesign, itself, can carry different meanings for different groups. Researchers may understand codesign as including the opinions and expertise of research participants in the design of a research project. Edtech companies may view it as soliciting user-feedback in a product that is already built, and educators may envision it as a process of designing a solution collaboratively, from the ground up.

It’s important that there’s space in the beginning of the process to define these terms collaboratively, and that stakeholders feel safe enough to raise questions about terms that they may not understand.

How codesign can help demystify jargon

The highly collaborative and participatory nature of codesign makes it a great solution when solving the problem of esoteric and field-specific  jargon.

Here are some ways codesign can achieve this.

Breaking down the insular nature of groups

The codesign principle of prioritizing relationships to build trust can be very useful in this situation.  

During the research process, different stakeholder groups may have their own intra-group dynamics and jargon, But while highly-specific language is common and easily understood within a single stakeholder group, it can make different groups more porous, weakening cohesion when all the stakeholders have to work together. 

Codesign fosters positive relationships that build trust among groups, allowing people to communicate more effectively. In other words, when different stakeholder groups trust each other, they can demystify the insular worlds of each stakeholder group and develop a common language that removes the jargon.

These are a few steps that researchers, edtech companies, and educators can use to get on the same page. 

Reflect

The first step of demystifying jargon is recognizing the jargon used in your organization or industry. This kind of introspection can be hard because industry specific terms can go from novel to quotidian very quickly. Each stakeholder group should write down and define all the terms they use that don’t have very obvious meanings. It’s not necessary to collect every single term from your organization that may be confusing to an outsider. Focus more on those terms that may occur throughout the research project. This might be an ideal task for someone on the team that’s new to the industry or organization. Your team should also list terms from other stakeholders that you want to better understand. 

Remix

Next the groups should reconvene and share the terms they listed and their meanings. This is the time to ask questions and seek clarity from other stakeholders. It’s important to interrogate all the definitions until the entire group has a concrete understanding. 

Once all the groups have presented their terms and definitions, take the time to review any terms that are used by multiple groups. Take note of any discrepancies between the definitions, however small, then rewrite the definitions to include all viewpoints. 

Redefine

Finally, the group can create a shared glossary that incorporates the terms and definitions from all stakeholders. This glossary should act as a living document that anyone can revisit during the research process to ask questions and seek clarification. At the end of the research process, this glossary should be included in the final research report.

Speaking the same language for better outcomes

Choosing a shared language is a difficult and time-consuming task, and group members require assistance and collaboration to understand unfamiliar terminology and expressions.

Thankfully, using a codesign approach to education research keeps the space open and secure for any clarifying questions that group members may have. Codesign focuses on capability development, allowing people to learn and expand their knowledge in a way that enables them to speak the same language as everyone else.