Conclusions and a data use framework

Data-based Decision Making in Education: Challenges and Opportunities

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 177-191

  Schildkamp, Kim ^a   Lai, Mei Kuin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Coherence; Kelly

Indexed keywords

EID: 84903740693     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-4816-3_10     Document Type: Chapter

References (41)

1. Breiter, A., & 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.
2. Carlson, D., Borman, G., & Robinson, M. (2011). A multistate district-level cluster randomized trial of the impact of data-driven reform on reading and mathematics achievement. Education and Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(3), 378-398.
3. Chen, E., Heritage, M., & Lee, J. (2005). Identifying and monitoring students’ learning needs with technology. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10(3), 309-332.
4. Comenius project using data for improving school and student performance. (2011). Comparative analysis data use in Germany, the Netherlands, Lithuania, Poland and England. Retrieved from: http://www.datauseproject.eu/home/documents. Accessed 4 Jan 2012.
5. Datnow, A., Park, V., & Wohlstetter, P. (2007). Achieving with data. How-high performing school systems use data to improve instruction for elementary students. San Francisco: Center on Educational Governance University of California.
6. Diamond, J. B., & Spillane, J. P. (2004). High-stakes accountability in urban elementary schools: challenging or reproducing inequality. Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1145-1176.
7. Earl, L. M. (August 7-9, 2005). From accounting to accountability: Harnessing data for school improvement. Paper presented at the ACER research conference, Melbourne.
8. Earl, L. M., & Katz, S. (2006). Leading schools in a data-rich world. Harnessing data for school improvement. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.
9. Ehren, M. C. M., &Swanborn, M. S. L. (2012). Strategic data use in accountability systems. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 23(2), 257-280.
10. 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.
11. Hamilton, L. S., Stecher, B. M., & Yuan, K. (2009). Standards-Based Reform in the United States: History, Research, and Future Directions. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation. Retrieved http://www.rand.org/pubs/reprints/RP1384. Accessed 15 Nov 2011.
12. Handelzalts, A. (2009). Collaborative curriculum development in teacher design teams. Enschede: Universiteit Twente.
13. Huffman, D., & Kalnin, J. (2003). Collaborative inquiry to make data-based decisions in schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(6), 569-580.
14. 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: CfBT Education Trust.
15. Kerr, K. A., Marsh, J. A., Ikemoto, G. S., Darilek, H., & 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.
16. King, M. B. (2002). Professional development to promote schoolwide inquiry. Teaching andTeacher Education, 18(3), 243-257.
17. Lachat, M.A., & Smith, S. (2005). Practices that support data use in urban high schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10(3), 333-349.
18. Lai, M. K., & McNaughton, S. (2008). Raising student achievement in poor, urban communities through evidence-based conversations. In L. Earl & H. Timperley (Eds.), Evidence-based conversations to improve educational practices (pp. 13-27). Netherlands: Kluwer/Springer Academic.
19. Lai, M. K., McNaughton, S., Amituanai-Toloa, M., Turner, R., & Hsiao, S. (2009). Sustained acceleration of achievement in reading comprehension: The New Zealand experience. Reading Research Quarterly, 44(1), 30-56.
20. Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., & McElheron-Hopkins, C. (2006). The development and testing of a school improvement model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(4), 441-464.
21. Levin, J. A., & Datnow, A. (2012). The principal role in data-driven decision making: using casestudy data to develop multi-mediator models of educational reform. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 23(2), 179-202.
22. Louis, K.,&Marks, H. (1998). Does professional learning community affect the classroom teachers’ work and student experience in restructured schools? American Journal of Education, 106(4), 532-575.
23. Mingchu, L. (2008). Structural equation modeling for high school principals’ data-driven decision making: An analysis of information use environments. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 603-634.
24. Robinson, V. M. J, & Lai, M. K. (2006). Practitioner research for educators: A guide to improving classrooms and schools. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.
25. Robinson, V. M. J., Phillips, G., & Timperley, H. (2002). Using achievement data for school-based curriculum review: A bridge too far? Leadership and Policy in Schools, 1(1), 3-29.
26. Rossi, P. H., Freeman, H. E., & Lisey, M.W. (1999). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
27. Schildkamp, K., & Kuiper, W (2010). Data-informed curriculum reform: Which data, what purposes, and promoting and hindering factors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 482-496.
28. Schildkamp, K., & Teddlie, C. (2008). School performance feedback systems in the USA and in the Netherlands: a comparison. Educational Research and Evaluation, 14(3), 255-282.
29. Schildkamp, K., & Handelzalts, A. (2011, April). Data teams for school improvement. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Conference, New Orleans, USA.
30. Sharkey, N. S., &Murnane, R. J. (2006). Tough choices in designing a formative assessment system. American Journal of Education. 112, 572-588.
31. 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(3), 277-293.
32. Tolley, H. & Shulruf, B. (2009). From data to knowledge: the interaction between data management systems in educational institutions and the delivery of quality education. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1199-1206.
33. Verhaeghe, G., Vanhoof, J., Martin, V., & van Petegem, P. (2010). Using school performance feedback: Perceptions of primary school principals. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21(2), 167-188.
34. Visscher, A. J. (2002). A framework for studying school performance feedback systems. In A. J. Visscher & R. Coe (Eds.), School improvement through performance feedback (pp. 41-72). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger B.V.
35. Wayman, J. C., & Stringfield, S. (2006a). Data use for school improvement: school practices and research perspectives. American Journal of Education. 112, 463-468.
36. Wayman, J. C., & Stringfield, S. (2006b). Technology-supported involvement of entire faculties in examination of student data for instructional improvement. American Journal of Education, 112(4), 549-571.
37. 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.
38. Wayman, J. C., Cho, V., & Johnston, M. T. (2007). The data-informed district: A districtwide evaluation of data use in the Natrona County School District. Austin: The University of Texas.
39. Weiss, C.H. (1998). Have we learned anything new about the use of evaluation? American Journal of Evaluation, 19(1), 21-33.
40. Wohlstetter, P., Datnow, A., & Park, V. (2008). Creating a system for data-driven decision-making: Applying the principal-agent framework. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 19(3), 239-259.
41. Young, V. M. (2006). Teachers’ use of data: loose coupling, agenda setting, and team norms. American Journal of Education. 112, 521-548.