ECOLOGICAL LEARNING PARTNERS

Contemplative mapping makes visible the relational dynamics and institutional patterns shaping how practitioners work — and gives educational leaders the tools to build conditions that change them.

City street at sunset with the sun shining directly down the street, creating a bright glow and sun rays. Tall buildings line the street, and pedestrian crossing lines are visible on the asphalt.

Working Together

We start by listening. We learn your priorities, your history, and what practitioners are navigating — through conversations that bring multiple voices into the room.

We document and map together. Working with practitioners, we document their experiences and look for patterns — making visible what's actually shaping what's possible, rather than what's assumed.

We examine position and context. We help practitioners understand how their own positions relate to and shape what they experience — and how institutional context influences what they can see and do.

We build infrastructure that holds people. We think with you about the structures — space, resources, collaboration — that give practitioners what they need to do their work well.

Methodology:

Contemplative Mapping

Contemplative mapping combines systematic observation with contemplative inquiry to make visible the relational dynamics and institutional patterns shaping practitioners’ work.

The methodology includes three approaches:

  • Life mapping - Practitioners draw their own educational journeys as maps, uncovering how their personal experiences shape how they teach, respond, and relate. What they find is almost always a source of strength they hadn't named before.

  • Situational mapping - Teams map the people, policies, and conversations shaping their work to see where collaboration is already strong and what conditions need to be built to support it better.

  • Practice mapping - Practitioners observe and document their own daily practices over time, noticing what feels easy, what feels hard, and where adjustments might be possible.

Together these approaches build practitioners' discriminative awareness — the capacity to observe institutional dynamics and relational patterns clearly, creating space for more skillful responses.

Wooden boardwalk leading towards a sunset with a hill silhouette and a partly cloudy sky.
A woman with black hair wearing a black leather jacket and a black top, standing outdoors in an urban area with blurred background.

About Sarika S. Gupta, Ph.D.

I'm a learning ecologist specializing in contemplative mapping of practice architectures in early childhood and educational systems.

Over 25 years I've worked at every level of early childhood and educational systems — as a classroom teacher, researcher, clinical program coordinator, university faculty member, and in federal policy. I've directed large-scale mixed-methods studies, managed research portfolios and teams, and coordinated clinical preparation programs across multiple institutions. I hold a Ph.D. in Special Education and am completing an M.S. in Data Science to scale contemplative mapping through computational methods. That range showed me something specific: the gap between how systems are designed and how they work looks different depending on where you're standing inside them.

Through my own contemplative practice, I found what was missing: professional development asks practitioners to engage in complex relational work without providing the foundational capacity to notice what's happening in their own bodies, to understand how their positions shape what they see and experience, or to recognize how context influences their beliefs and actions. That grounding in self and position is essential — it's where more complex work like culturally responsive practice begins.

Through contemplative mapping, I work with practitioners to observe and map the relational infrastructure and institutional patterns they're embedded in — using their own contemplative capacity as the instrument. That map becomes the basis for helping educational leaders build the practice architectures that make sustainable implementation possible. I founded Ecological Learning Partners to do that work in partnership with early childhood and educational communities.

Let’s Talk

We partner with districts, state agencies, higher education institutions, and early childhood programs to make visible the relational dynamics shaping their work — and build the conditions that change them. Reach out to start a conversation.

Publications Across Ecological Levels

    • Gupta, S. S., Cheatham, G. A., Strassfeld, N., Zhu, X., Medellin, C. & Nagasawa, M. (2024). Examining the ecology of preschool inclusion in New York City: A mixed-methods study underway. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood. https://doi.org/10.1177/14639491241229229

    • Gupta, S. S. & Rous, B. S. (2016). Understanding change and implementation. How leaders can support inclusion. Young Children, 71(2), 82-91. https://www.jstor.org/stable/ycyoungchildren.71.2.82

    • Lieber, J., Butera, G., Hanson, M., Palmer, S., Horn, E., Czaja, C., Diamond, K., Goodman-Jansen, G., Daniels, J., Gupta, S., & Odom, S. (2009). Factors that influence the implementation of a new preschool curriculum: Implications for professional development. Early Education and Development, 20(3), 456-481. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409280802506166

    Technical Reports:

    • Gupta, S. S. & Guha, M. L. (2019). Conversations About Inclusion at the Center for Young Children at the University of Maryland, College Park: Final Summary. New York: Hunter College CUNY. 33 pages.

    Book:

  • Technical Reports:

    • Tirrell-Corbin, C., Sweet, S., Gupta, S., & Lieber, J. (2016). Evaluation of the birth to five service delivery models in Maryland – Phase I. College Park: University of Maryland Center for Early Childhood Education and Intervention. 269 pages.

    • Tirrell-Corbin, C., Lieber, J., Cummings, K., Jones Harden, B., Klein, E., Silverman, R., & Gupta, S. (2016). Evaluation of the efficacy of Maryland's Race to the Top—Early Learning Challenge grant. College Park: University of Maryland Center for Early Childhood Education and Intervention. 183 pages.

    • Ruggiero, T., Gupta, S., Nicholas, A., & Mauzy, D. (2016). State spotlight on data use. Maryland: Establishing partnerships to build data use capacity. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.

    • LaRocco, D. J., Bruns, D. A., Gupta, S. S. & Sopko, K. M. (2014). National early childhood special education leadership summit: Final report February 2014.

    • Gupta, S. S. (2011). Strategies to facilitate and sustain the inclusion of young children with disabilities [Policy Brief]. Denver, CO: The Colorado Center for Social Emotional Competence and Inclusion. 4 pages.

    • Sarpatwari, S. S. (2006). A qualitative analysis of the 1st Annual Joint Technical Assistance and Dissemination Conference. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. 10 pages.