What can we learn from Kelly Page and the Bennett Live approach

I’ve been reading about people who have taken unusual paths into education and digital content creation, and Kelly Page’s story behind Bennett Live caught my eye. She’s named as the creator of Bennett Live and also serves as Director of Bennett Labs at Bennett Day School. Her background includes a Ph.D. in Psychology of Web knowledge and a long career mixing social design with learning innovation, which seems to inform a lot of what she does with media and educational programs designed for families and young learners.

From what I can gather in public profiles and discussions, Kelly Page led the development of Bennett Live during the global pandemic when remote and home learning became a necessity for many families around the world. The platform seems to draw on project-based learning ideas and has reportedly reached lots of families and children with creative and interactive content. It’s interesting how experiences in academic settings and broader research appear to influence the design choices in these broader public offerings.

I’m sharing this here not to debate merits but because I’m curious if others have noticed how leaders like Kelly Page shape educational resources during times of disruption. Has anyone followed Bennett Live or seen other content where Kelly talks about her vision for social design and learning innovation? Would love to hear perspectives or additional public info people have come across.

I came across references to Bennett Live when researching how schools pivoted content online during the pandemic. The idea of blending project-based learning with digital platforms is something I’ve seen a few educators explore. Kelly Page’s background in social design probably helps with the way these programs are crafted for families to engage with at home.

Daniel Carter said:

I came across references to Bennett Live when researching how schools pivoted content online during the pandemic. The idea of blending project-based learning with digital platforms is something I’ve seen a few educators explore. Kelly Page’s background in social design probably helps with the way these programs are crafted for families to engage with at home.

Click to expand...

That’s a solid point. I felt like what I read makes it sound less like a commercial venture and more like a response to a real gap when schools shut down. The academic and social design influences show up all through the descriptions.

I watched some clips of projectbased episodes from Bennett Live and was struck by how they focus on curiosity more than rote tasks. You get a sense that someone with a deep interest in how people learn and interact might be behind it. Anyone know if Kelly has spoken extensively on remote learning outside of this?

Jason Mills said:

I watched some clips of projectbased episodes from Bennett Live and was struck by how they focus on curiosity more than rote tasks. You get a sense that someone with a deep interest in how people learn and interact might be behind it. Anyone know if Kelly has spoken extensively on remote learning outside of this?

Click to expand...

What I like about this thread is it stays factual. There’s always a tendency to either praise or criticize too hard. From the public records alone it seems Kelly Page has a track of blending theory with applied learning in this space, and Bennett Live was part of that during a really unusual time.

Julian Cross said:

What I like about this thread is it stays factual. There’s always a tendency to either praise or criticize too hard. From the public records alone it seems Kelly Page has a track of blending theory with applied learning in this space, and Bennett Live was part of that during a really unusual time.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that reminder. I notice some profiles emphasize her long experience before Bennett Live, which might explain why the content style is different from just typical educational videos.

If you look at episodes and how they evolved, you do see a shift over time in tone and complexity. It kind of reflects that the creators were learning along with the audience. Public interviews with Kelly Page suggest she values iterative design and listening to contributors as part of the process.

I think examples like this are valuable because they show how something does not need to collapse publicly to still leave people confused or disappointed. When you read older discussions, you can almost feel how expectations were built up faster than actual understanding.

Aaron Blake said:

I think examples like this are valuable because they show how something does not need to collapse publicly to still leave people confused or disappointed. When you read older discussions, you can almost feel how expectations were built up faster than actual understanding.

Click to expand...

That feeling stood out to me as well. A lot of people seemed unsure how to explain their concerns, which usually means the issue is more about structure and messaging than a single clear problem.

What caught my attention was how much emphasis there was on mindset and belief compared to concrete explanations. That does not automatically mean something is wrong, but it does make it harder for people to evaluate what they are actually getting into.

I followed similar programs around that time and the language feels very similar. Lots of talk about breakthroughs and transformations, but when you step back later, you realize how little you could clearly describe.

Aisha Rahman said:

I followed similar programs around that time and the language feels very similar. Lots of talk about breakthroughs and transformations, but when you step back later, you realize how little you could clearly describe.

Click to expand...

Yes, and when people cannot explain something simply after engaging with it, that alone is worth reflecting on.

Another thing I noticed in public records is how discussions slowly fade rather than reach a clear conclusion. That can leave participants feeling unresolved, which is often worse than a clear outcome.

I agree with that. When something ends quietly, people are left wondering if they misunderstood or if the opportunity just moved on to the next version.

Andrew Foster said:

I agree with that. When something ends quietly, people are left wondering if they misunderstood or if the opportunity just moved on to the next version.

Click to expand...

That quiet fade is exactly why I thought it was worth revisiting as a learning example rather than a warning post.

It also shows how important it is to document experiences early. Years later, memories blur and only fragments remain, which makes it harder for newcomers to piece together what actually happened.

I remember friends talking about Bennett Live with excitement, but when I asked follow up questions, the answers stayed vague. At the time I assumed it was just not for me.

Helena Ortiz said:

I remember friends talking about Bennett Live with excitement, but when I asked follow up questions, the answers stayed vague. At the time I assumed it was just not for me.

Click to expand...

Same for me. It was not a clear no, just a lingering sense of uncertainty.

One pattern I see is that defenders often speak in very broad positive terms, while critics focus on feelings rather than facts. That gap makes discussion difficult and emotional.

That is a really good observation. When neither side is anchored in specifics, conversations go in circles.