Data-informed curriculum reform: Which data, what purposes, and promoting and hindering factors

Teaching and Teacher Education

Volumn 26, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 482-496

  Schildkamp, Kim ^a   Kuiper, Wilmad ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Curriculum development; Data use; Decision making; School improvement

Indexed keywords

EID: 76449086684     PISSN: 0742051X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2009.06.007     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Black P., and Wiliam D. Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education 5 1 (1998) 7-74
2. Black P., and Wiliam D. Inside the black box: raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan 80 2 (1998) 139-148
3. Booher-Jennings J. Below the bubble: "educational triage" and the Texas accountability system. American Educational Research Journal 42 2 (2005) 231-268
4. Boudett K.P., and Steele J.L. Data wise in action. Stories of schools using data to improve teaching and learning (2007), Harvard Education Press, Cambridge
5. Breiter A., and Light D. Data for school improvement: factors for designing effective information systems to support decision-making in schools. Educational Technology & Society 9 3 (2006) 206-217
6. Brunner C., Fasca C., Heinze J., Honey M., Light D., Mandinach E., et al. Linking data and learning: the grow network study. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 10 3 (2005) 241-267
7. Burbank M.D., and Kauchak D. An alternative model for professional development: investigations into effective collaboration. Teaching and Teacher Education 19 5 (2003) 499-514
8. Chen E., Heritage M., and Lee J. Identifying and monitoring students' learning needs with technology. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 10 3 (2005) 309-332
9. Choppin, J. (April 2, 2002). Data use in practice: Examples from the school level. Paper presented at the American educational research association, New Orleans.
10. Coburn C.E., and Talbert J.E. Conceptions of evidence use in school districts: mapping the terrain. American Journal of Education 112 (2006) 469-495
11. Codding R.S., Skowron J., and Pace G.M. Back to basics: training teachers to interpret curriculum-based measurement data and create observable and measurable objectives. Behavioral Interventions 20 3 (2005) 165-176
12. Cousins B.J., and Leithwood K.A. Enhancing knowledge utilization as a strategy for school improvement. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization 14 3 (1993) 305-333
13. Datnow A., Park V., and Wohlstetter P. Achieving with data. How-high performing school systems use data to improve instruction for elementary students (2007), Center on Educational Governance University of California, San Francisco
14. Davenport T.H., and Prusak L. Working knowledge. How organizations manage what they know (1998), Harvard Business School Press, Boston
15. Diamond J.B., and Spillane J.P. High-stakes accountability in urban elementary schools: challenging or reproducing inequality. Teachers College Record 106 6 (2004) 1145-1176
16. Earl, L. M. (August 7-9, 2005). From accounting to accountability: Harnessing data for school improvement. Paper presented at the ACER research conference, Melbourne.
17. Earl L.M., and Fullan M. Using data in leadership for learning. Cambridge Journal of Education 33 3 (2003) 383-394
18. Earl L.M., and Katz S. Leading schools in a data-rich world. Harnessing data for school improvement (2006), Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks
19. Ehren M.C.M., Leeuw F.L., and Scheerens J. On the impact of the Dutch Educational Supervision Act: analyzing assumptions concerning the inspection of primary education. American Journal of Evaluation 26 1 (2005) 60-76
20. Ehren M.C.M., and Visscher A.J. The relationships between school inspections, school characteristics and school improvement. British Journal of Educational Studies 56 2 (2008) 205-227
21. Feldman, J., Tung, R. (April 10-14, 2001). Whole school reform: How schools use the data-based inquiry and decision making process. Paper presented at the American educational research association conference, Seattle.
22. Hendriks M., Doolaard S., and Bosker R.J. Using school effectiveness as a knowledge base for self-evaluation in Dutch schools: the ZEBO-project. In: Visscher A.J., and Coe R. (Eds). School improvement through performance feedback (2002), Swets & Zeitlinger B.V., Lisse 115-142
23. Honig M.I., and Coburn C. Evidence-based decision making in school district central offices: toward a policy and research agenda. Educational Policy 22 4 (2008) 578-608
24. Huffman D., and Kalnin J. Collaborative inquiry to make data-based decisions in schools. Teaching and Teacher Education 19 6 (2003) 569-580
25. Ingram D., Louis S.K., and Schroeder R.G. Accountability policies and teacher decision making: barriers to the use of data to improve practice. Teachers College Record 106 6 (2004) 1258-1287
26. Inspectie van het Onderwijs. Onderwijsverslag over het jaar 2001 (Education report for 2001) (2002), SDU, Den Haag
27. Janssens F.J.G. Toezicht in discussie: Over onderwijstoezicht en educational governance (School inspections and educational governance) (2005), Universiteit Twente, Enschede (Inaugural Lecture)
28. Janssens F.J.G. Supervising the quality of education. In: Böttcher W., and Kotthoff H.G. (Eds). Schulinspektion: Evaluation, Rechenschaftsleging und Qualitätsentwicklung [School inspection: Evaluation, accountability and quality development] (2007), Waxman, Münster
29. Kennedy M.M. How evidence alters understanding and decisions. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 6 3 (1984) 207-226
30. Kerr K.A., Marsh J.A., Ikemoto G.S., Darilek H., and Barney H. Strategies to promote data use for instructional improvements: actions, outcomes, and lessons from three urban districts. American Journal of Education 112 (2006) 496-520
31. Kimball S.M. Analysis of feedback, enabling conditions and fairness perceptions of teachers in three school districts with new standards-based evaluation systems. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 16 4 (2002) 241-268
32. King M.B. Professional development to promote schoolwide inquiry. Teaching and Teacher Education 18 3 (2002) 243-257
33. Kluger A.N., and DeNisi A. The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin 119 2 (1996) 254-284
34. Mingchu L. Structural equation modeling for high school principals' data-driven decision making: an analysis of information use environments. Educational Administration Quarterly 44 5 (2008) 603-634
35. Ministerie v.O.C.&.W. Variëteit en waarborg: Voorstellen voor de ontwikkeling van het toezicht oponderwijs [Diversity and a guarantee: Proposals for the development of the supervision of education] (1999), Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur & Wetenschappen, Zoetermeer
36. Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur & Wetenschappen; Ministerie van Landbouw, Natuur en Visserij. Wet op het onderwijstoezicht (Education supervision act) (2000-2002), SDU, Den Haag
37. Onwuegbuzie A.J., and Leech N.L. Validity and qualitative research: an oxymoron?. Quality and Quantity: International Journal of Methodology 41 2 (2007) 233-249
38. Park, V., & Datnow, A. (2008). Co-constructing distributed leadership: District and school connections in data-driven decision making. Paper presented at the American educational research association.
39. Renkema G. Kwaliteitszorg, wat levert het op? (Quality assurance - What are the gains?). Basisschoolmanagement vol. 15(8) (2002), Samsom, Alphen aan den Rhijn
40. Riege A.M. Validity and reliability tests in case study research: a literature review with "hands-on" applications for each research phase. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 6 2 (2003) 75-86
41. Schmoker M. First things first: demystifying data analysis. Educational Leadership 60 5 (2003) 22-24
42. Schildkamp K. The utilisation of a self-evaluation instrument for primary education (2007), Universiteit Twente, Enschede
43. Schildkamp K., and Teddlie C. School performance feedback systems in the USA and in the Netherlands: a comparison. Educational Research and Evaluation 14 3 (2008) 255-282
44. Schildkamp K., Visscher A.J., and Luyten H. The effects of the use of a school self-evaluation instrument. School Effectiveness and School Improvement 20 1 (2009) 69-88
45. Sharkey N.S., and Murnane R.J. Tough choices in designing a formative assessment system. American Journal of Education 112 (2006) 572-588
46. Slavin R.E. Evidence-based education policies: transforming educational practice and research. Educational Researcher 21 7 (2002) 15-21
47. Slavin R.E. A reader's guide to scientifically based research. Educational Leadership 60 5 (2003) 12-16
48. Smylie M.A. Teacher participation in school decision making: assessing willingness to participate. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 14 1 (1992) 53-67
49. Stecker P.M., Fuchs L.S., and Fuchs D. Using curriculum-based measurement to improve student achievement: review of research. Psychology in the Schools 42 8 (2005) 795-819
50. Sutherland S. Creating a culture of data use for continuous improvement: a case study of an Edison project school. The American Journal of Evaluation 25 3 (2004) 277-293
51. Teddlie C., Kochan C., and Taylor D. The ABC+ model for school diagnosis, feedback, and improvement. In: Visscher A.J., and Coe R. (Eds). School improvement through performance feedback (2002), Swets & Zeitlinger B.V., Lisse 75-114
52. The Standing International Conference of Central and General Inspectorates of Education. Effective school self-evaluation (2003), SICI, County Down
53. Tokar D.M., Fischer A.R., and Mezydlo Subich L. Personality and vocational behavior: a selective review of the literature, 1993-1997. Journal of Vocational Behavior 53 (1998) 115-153
54. Visscher A.J. A framework for studying school performance feedback systems. In: Visscher A.J., and Coe R. (Eds). School improvement through performance feedback (2002), Swets & Zeitlinger B.V., Lisse 41-72
55. Walsh K. After the test: How schools are using data to close the achievement gap (2003), Bay Area School Reform Collaborative, San Francisco
56. Wayman J.C. Involving teachers in data-driven decision making: using computer data systems to support teacher inquiry and reflection. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 10 3 (2005) 295-308
57. Wayman J.C., Cho V., and Johnston M.T. The data-informed district: A district-wide evaluation of data use in the Natrona County School District (2007), The University of Texas, Austin
58. Wayman, J. C., Midgley, S., Stringfield, S. (April 11-15, 2005). Collaborative teams to support data-based decision making and instructional improvement. Paper presented at the American educational research association conference, Montreal.
59. Wayman J.C., Midgley S., and Stringfield S. Leadership for data-based decision making: collaborative educator teams. In: Danzig A., Borman K., Jones B., and Wright B. (Eds). New models of professional development for learner centered leadership (2006), Erlbaum 189-205
60. Wayman J.C., and Stringfield S. Data use for school improvement: school practices and research perspectives. American Journal of Education 112 (2006) 463-468
61. Wayman J.C., and Stringfield S. Technology-supported involvement of entire faculties in examination of student data for instructional improvement. American Journal of Education 112 4 (2006) 549-571
62. Wohlstetter P., Datnow A., and Park V. Creating a system for data-driven decision-making: applying the principal-agent framework. School Effectiveness and School Improvement 19 3 (2008) 239-259
63. Young V.M. Teachers' use of data: loose coupling, agenda setting, and team norms. American Journal of Education 112 (2006) 521-548