Student group differences in examination results and utilization for policy and school development

School Effectiveness and School Improvement

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 229-255

  Schildkamp, Kim ^a   Rekers Mombarg, Lyset T M ^b   Harms, Truus J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

assessment; data driven decision making; ethnicity; final examinations; school improvement

Indexed keywords

EID: 84859566038     PISSN: 09243453     EISSN: 17445124     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09243453.2011.652123     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Black, P. and Wiliam, D. 1998a. Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5: 7-74.
2. Black, P. and Wiliam, D. 1998b. Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80: 139-148.
3. Breiter, A. and Light, D. 2006. Data for school improvement: Factors for designing effective information systems to support decision-making in schools. Educational Technology & Society, 9(3): 206-217.
4. Brunner, C., Fasca, C., Heinze, J., Honey, M., Light, D., Mandinach, E. and Wexler, D. 2005. Linking data and learning: The Grow Network Study. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10: 241-267.
5. Campbell, C. and Levin, B. 2009. Using data to support educational improvement. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21: 47-65.
6. Cawelti, G. and Protheroe, N. 2001. High student achievement: How six school districts changed into high-performance systems, Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.
7. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. 2002. Jaarboek onderwijs in cijfers, 2002. Feiten en cijfers over het onderwijs in Nederland [Year book education in figures, 2002. Facts and figures about education in The Netherlands], Den Haag, The Netherlands: Author.
8. Coburn, C. E. and Talbert, J. E. 2006. Conceptions of evidence use in school districts: Mapping the terrain. American Journal of Education, 112: 469-495.
9. Davenport, T. H. and Prusak, L. 1998. Working knowledge. How organizations manage what they know, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
10. De Lange, M. and Dronkers, J. Groeide de ongelijkwaardigheid van het eindexamen tussen scholen verder in 2005? Discrepanties tussen de cijfers voor het schoolonderzoek en het centraal examen in het voortgezet onderwijs: 2005 versus 1997-2004. [Is the inequality of the final examination between schools growing further in 2005? Discrepancies between grades for school examination and central examination in secondary education: 2005 versus 1997-2004]. Paper presented at the Onderwijsresearchdagen. June. Groningen, The Netherlands
11. De Lange, M. and Dronkers, J. Hoe gelijkwaardig blijft het eindexamen tussen scholen? Discrepanties tussen de cijfers voor het schoolonderzoek en het centraal examen in het voortgezet onderwijs tussen 1998 en 2005. [How equal is the final examination between schools? Discrepancies between grades for school examination and central examination insecondary education between 1998 and 2005]. Nijmegen. The Netherlands/SanDomenico di Fiesole, Italy: Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen/European University Institute.
12. Earl, L. M. From accounting to accountability: Harnessing data for school improvement. Paper presented at the ACER Research conference. August. Melbourne, Australia
13. Earl, L. and Fullan, M. 2003. Using data in leadership for learning. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33: 383-394.
14. Earl, L. M. and Katz, S. 2006. Leading schools in a data-rich world. Harnessing data for school improvement, Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
15. Feldman, J. and Tung, R. Whole school reform: How schools use the data-based inquiry and decision making process. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. April. Seattle, WA
16. Hendriks, M., Doolaard, S. and Bosker, R. J. 2002. "Using school effectiveness as a knowledge base for self-evaluation in Dutch schools: The ZEBO-project". In School improvement through performance feedback, Edited by: Visscher, A.J. and Coe, R. 115-142. Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
17. Honig, M. I. and Coburn, C. E. 2008. Evidence-based decision making in school district central offices: Toward a policy and research agenda. Educational Policy, 22: 578-608.
18. Huffman, D. and Kalnin, J. 2003. Collaborative inquiry to make data-based decisions in schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19: 569-580.
19. Ikemoto, G. S. and Marsh, J. A. 2007. "Cutting through the "data driven" mantra: Different conceptions of data-driven decision making". In Evidence and decision making, Edited by: Moss, P.A. 105-131. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
20. Inspectie van het Onderwijs. 2007. Discrepanties tussen de cijfers op het schoolexamen en het centraal examen in de periode 2004-2006 [Discrepancies between school-based marks andnational assessment marks in final examinations in the years 2004-2006], Utrecht, TheNetherlands: Author.
21. Kelly, A. and Downey, C. 2010. Value-added measures for schools in England: Looking inside the "black box" of complex metrics. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 22: 181-198.
22. Kelly, A., Downey, C. and Rietdijk, W. 2010. Data dictatorship and data democracy: Understanding professional attitudes to the use of pupil performance data in English secondary schools, Reading, UK: CfBT Education Trust. Retrieved from http://www.cfbt.com/evidenceforeducation/pdf/Data%20Dictatorship%20web%20PDF%20v1.pdf
23. Kennedy, M. M. 1984. How evidence alters understanding and decisions. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 6: 207-226.
24. Kerr, K. A., Marsh, J. A., Ikemoto, G. S., Darilek, H. and Barney, H. 2006. Strategies to promote data use for instructional improvements: Actions, outcomes, and lessons from three urban districts. American Journal of Education, 112: 496-520.
25. King, M. B. 2002. Professional development to promote schoolwide inquiry. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18: 243-257.
26. Kuyper, H. and Van der Werf, M. P.C. 2003. VOCL'99: De resultaten in het eerste leerjaar [VOCL'99: The results of the first study year], Groningen, The Netherlands: GION.
27. Lai, M. K., McNaughton, S., Amituanai-Toloa, M., Turner, R. and Hsiao, S. 2009. Sustained acceleration of achievement in reading comprehension: The New Zealand experience. Reading Research Quarterly, 44: 30-56.
28. Onwuegbuzie, A. J. and Leech, N. L. 2007. Validity and qualitative research: An oxymoron?. Quality & Quantity, 41: 233-249.
29. Poortman, C. L. and Schildkamp, K. 2011. Alternative quality standards in qualitative research?. Quality and Quantity, Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s11135-011-9555-5
30. Riege, A. M. 2003. Validity and reliability tests in case study research: A literature review with "hands-on" applications for each research phase. Qualitative Market Research, 6: 75-86.
31. Sharkey, N. S. and Murnane, R. J. 2006. Tough choices in designing a formative assessment system. American Journal of Education, 112: 572-588.
32. Schildkamp, K. 2007. The utilisation of a self-evaluation instrument for primary education, Enschede, The Netherlands: Universiteit Twente.
33. Schildkamp, K., Bourne, P., Breiter, A., Burns, C., Grinyte, L., Karbautzi, L.... and Stauke, E. 2011. Comparative analyses data use in Germany, The Netherlands, Lithuania, Poland and England: Internal report for the EU data use project, Comenius Multilateral Project 510477-2010-LLP-PL, Enschede, The Netherlands: University of Twente.
34. Schildkamp, K. and Handelzalts, A. Datateams for school improvement. Paper presented at the International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement. January. Nicosia, Cyprus
35. Schildkamp, K. and Kuiper, W. 2010. Data-informed curriculum reform: Which data, what purposes, and promoting and hindering factors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26: 482-496.
36. Schildkamp, K., Lai, M. K. and Earl, L. in press. Data-driven decision making around the world: Challenges and opportunities, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
37. Schildkamp, K. and Teddlie, C. 2008. School performance feedback systems in the USA and in The Netherlands: A comparison. Educational Research and Evaluation, 14: 255-282.
38. Schildkamp, K. and Visscher, A. J. 2009. Factors influencing the utilization of a school self-evaluation instrument. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 35: 150-159.
39. Schildkamp, K., Visscher, A. and Luyten, H. 2009. The effects of the use of a school self-evaluation instrument. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 20: 69-88.
40. Sutherland, S. 2004. Creating a culture of data use for continuous improvement: A case study of an Edison Project school. The American Journal of Evaluation, 25: 277-293.
41. Van Berkel, K. 1999. Steekproef voor VOCL'99 [Sample for VOCL'99], Heerlen, TheNetherlands: CBS.
42. Vanhoof, J., Van Petegem, P., Verhoeven, J. C. and Buvens, I. 2009. Linking the policymaking capacities of schools and the quality of school self-evaluations: The view of school leaders. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 37: 667-686.
43. Verhaeghe, G., Vanhoof, J., Valcke, M. and Van Petegem, P. 2010. Using school performance feedback: Perceptions of primary school principals. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21: 167-188.
44. Visscher, A. J. 2002. "A framework for studying school performance feedback systems". In School improvement through performance feedback, Edited by: Visscher, A. J. and Coe, R. 41-72. Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
45. Vreeburg, B. Leerresultaten en risicogestuurd toezicht in het voortgzet onderwijs. Validiteit en betrouwbaarheid van kengetallen voor de bepaling van het verschil tussen schoolexamen en centraal examen [Validity and reliability of indicators for differences between school-based and central examinations]. Paper presented at the Onderwijsresearchdagen, Groningen, The Netherlands. June.
46. Wayman, J. C. 2005. 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: 295-308.
47. Wayman, J. C., Cho, V. and Johnston, M. T. 2007. The data-informed district: A district-wide evaluation of data use in the Natrona County School District, Austin, TX: The University of Texas.
48. Wayman, J. C., Midgley, S. and Stringfield, S. 2006. "Leadership for data-based decision making: collaborative educator teams". In New models of professional development for learner centered leadership, Edited by: Danzig, A., Borman, K., Jones, B. and Wright, B. 189-205. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
49. Wayman, J. C. and Stringfield, S. 2006a. Data use for school improvement: School practices and research perspectives. American Journal of Education, 112: 463-468.
50. Wayman, J. C. and Stringfield, S. 2006b. Technology-supported involvement of entire faculties in examination of student data for instructional improvement. American Journal of Education, 112: 549-571.
51. Wohlstetter, P., Datnow, A. and Park, V. 2008. Creating a system for data-driven decision-making: Applying the principal-agent framework. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 19: 239-259.
52. Young, V. M. 2006. Teachers' use of data: Loose coupling, agenda setting, and team norms. American Journal of Education, 112: 521-548.