Session 8- Data Driven Decision Making

One of the areas our school, and our district, excel is in the use of data to drive decision making. We have used Accelerated Reader to maintain a treasure-trove of data about students reading. The data from AR has been used in many positive ways. Students can keep track of their own data, and determine which books to read, what level of books to pursue, genres of book enjoyed, and students can be rewarded for their reading with prizes, contests, privileges, entertainment and grades. Teachers at my school use the data from AR to create reading groups, literature circles, incentive programs, homework tracking, and to give another data piece in the literacy puzzle of each of their students. Administration has been able to use AR data to direct spending to library replacement of books, reading program support, and to justify after school library hours and summer reading programs. What makes AR such a positive way of obtaining and using data in the classroom? First, their are multitudes of ways data can be displayed and disseminated, from student friendly printouts to web-based dashboards, to detailed item analysis to in-depth reading ability evaluations. Second, AR is relatively easy to use, and students can be trained quickly and effectively to use the program. The program can also be used at home, school and at public libraries throughout the city. Third, The data that is collected can be mined easily by teachers, staff and parents to compare, contrast and confirm progress over time.

Leadership, at least at our site level, is what made this program so successful at my school. The temptation to use the program as a stick, instead of a carrot, was avoided from the very beginning, and the program was pushed to be used as it was designed- as a reading incentive program. Buy-in was gradual, and required use in all classrooms was a five year process. Rewards and incentives were the primary way the program was implemented, for both students and teachers, and early use was rewarded and successful use was demonstrated. Clear expectations of use was expressed by year 5, so that when it was a required part of our school's technological infrastructure, it was clear how it was to be used.

Although we have been successful at my school in using data driven decision making, utilizing other programs besides AR (Data Director, SASSI, On-line report cards, PearsonSuccessNet, etc), there are real concerns about using data driven decision making. One such concern is that although we have many pools of data from which to gather information, are we ignoring the areas in the curriculum that have few if any data resources? Do we simply wish away those areas? I find that areas such as art, music, PE, and especially history and science, are tossed aside curricularly and instructionally because we have no data mandates for these subjects. If we don't test it, or collect data for it, it often just does not exist in our classrooms anymore. Just because we can not quantify art, or because we do not test for science or social studies, does this mean that they are any less important than grammar? Second, we tend to value the data that is easiest to get, and ignore the more complex, and more educationally relevant, data. For example, we look at grammar and mechanics in writing far more than the student's actual ability to communicate, simply because this data is so much easier to obtain through multiple choice tests. Looking at student writing, scoring on a rubric, and imputing those scores takes time, and it is often hard to compare scores over time and across grades. So, we concentrate more and more time on teaching to the multiple choice test, and ignore the actual task that the test is supposed to prepare students for- writing. We are even taking time to teach kids how to choose the best sentence in a choice of sentences presented, not because this is good teaching, or will make them better writers in anyway, but because this form of writing assessment is on the state test.

Leadership is key. When leaders demand high quality assessments that actually get at what students can and can not do, we create assessment programs that actually test what kids know. When leadership is more interested in speed, continuity and cost, then we get multiple choice tests that assess only what their limited design allows them to assess, and all other knowledge, skill and student ability is ignored. As we lurch forward in our toddler-like way with the new world of assessment technology, it will be bold, insightful and knowledgeable leaders who will make the difference in whether assessments are either meaningful or simply mandatory.