Trickle-Down Accountability: How Middle School Teachers Engage Students in Data Use

Educational Policy

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 243-280

  Marsh, Julie A ^a   Farrell, Caitlin C ^b   Bertrand, Melanie ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

accountability policy; data use; data driven decision making; district context; school context; students

Indexed keywords

EID: 84957801570     PISSN: 08959048     EISSN: 15523896     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0895904814531653     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. C.Ames (1992a). Achievement goals and the classroom motivational climate. In (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom (pp. 327-348). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2. C.Ames (1992b). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271.
3. C.AmesJ.Archer (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260-267.
4. L.H.AndermanC.E.AndrzejewskiJ.Allen (2011). How do teachers support students’ motivation and learning in their classrooms?Teachers College Record, 113, 969-1003.
5. S.E.AndersonK.LeithwoodT.Strauss (2010). Leading data use in schools: Organizational conditions and practices at the school and district levels. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 9, 292-327.
6. R.L.Bangert-DrownsC.C.KulikJ.A.KulikM.Morgan (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213-238.
7. P.BlackD.Wiliam (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5, 7-74.
8. P.BlackD.Wiliam (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Accountability, 21, 5-31.
9. J.Booher-Jennings (2005). Below the bubble: “Educational triage” and the Texas accountability system. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 231-268.
10. K.E.BulkleyJ.B.ChristmanM.GoertzN.Lawrence (2008). Building with benchmarks: The role of the district in Philadelphia’s benchmark assessment system. Peabody Journal of Education, 85, 186-204.
11. K.D.CianiM.J.MiddletonJ.J.SummersK.M.Sheldon (2010). Buffering against performance classroom goal structures: The importance of autonomy support and classroom community. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 88-99.
12. C.E.CoburnE.O.Turner (2011). Research on data use: A framework and analysis. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspective, 9, 173-206.
13. S.Cosner (2011). Teacher learning, instructional considerations, and principal communication: Lessons from a longitudinal study of collaborative data use by teachers. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 39, 568-589.
14. Data Quality Campaign. (2011). Data: The missing piece to student achievement. Washington, DC: Author.
15. A.DatnowV.Park (2010). Large-scale reform in the era of accountability: The system role in supporting data-driven decision making. In (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational change (pp. 209-221). New York, NY: Springer.
16. W.E.Deming (1986). Out of crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Centre for Advanced Engineering.
17. C.S.DweckE.L.Leggett (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256-273.
18. J.L.Epstein (1988). Effective schools or effective students: Dealing with diversity. In (Eds.), Policies for America’s public schools: Teachers, equity, and indicators (pp. 89-126). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
19. C.C.Farrell (In press). Designing school systems to encourage data use and instructional improvement: A comparison of school districts and charter management organizations. Educational Administration Quarterly.
20. W.A.FirestoneR.A.Gonzalez (2007). Culture and processes affecting data use in school districts. In (Ed.), Evidence and decision making, National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook (pp. 132-154). Chicago, IL: Blackwell.
21. M.E.GoertzL.N.OlahM.Riggan (2009). From testing to teaching: The use of interim assessments in classroom instruction (CPRE Research Report No. RR-65). Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
22. L.Hamilton (2011). The role of students in data use: Commentary on Coburn and Turner’s “research on data use: A framework and analysis.”Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspective, 9, 207-210.
23. L.HamiltonR.HalversonS.JacksonE.MandinachJ.A.SupovitzJ.C.Wayman (2009). Using student achievement data to support instructional decision making (No. NCEE 2009-4067). Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
24. L.HamiltonB.StecherJ.MarshJ.S.McCombsA.RobynJ.L.RussellH.Barney (2007). Standards-based accountability under No Child Left Behind: Experiences of teachers and administrators in three states. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
25. J.M.HarackiewiczK.E.BarronP.R.PintrichA.J.ElliotT.M.Thrash (2002). Revision of achievement goal theory: Necessary and illuminating. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 638-645.
26. J.HattieH.Timperley (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112.
27. G.S.IkemotoJ.A.Marsh (2007). Cutting through the “data-driven” mantra: Different conceptions of data-driven decision making. Evidence and decision making: Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (Vol. 106, pp. 105-131). Malden, Massachusetts: National Society for the Study of Education.
28. J.L.Jennings (2012). The effects of accountability system design on teachers’ use of test score data. Teachers College Record, 114(11), 1-12.
29. J.M.Juran (1988). Juran on planning for quality. New York, NY: Free Press.
30. B.L.KennedyA.Datnow (2011). Student involvement and data-driven decision-making: Developing a new typology. Youth & Society, 43, 1246-1271.
31. A.N.KlugerA.DeNisi (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254-284.
32. M.S.KnappS.Feldman (2012). Managing the intersection of internal and external accountability: Challenge for urban school leadership in the United States. Journal of Educational Administration, 50, 666-694.
33. M.L.MaehrA.Zusho (2009). Achievement goal theory: The past, present, and future. In (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 77-104). New York, NY: Routledge.
34. E.B.MandinachE.S.Gummer (2013). Building educators’ data literacy: Differing perspectives. The Journal of Educational Research & Policy Studies, 13(2), 1-5.
35. E.B.MandinachM.Honey (Eds.). (2008). Data-driven school improvement: Linking data and learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
36. E.B.MandinachM.HoneyD.LightC.Brunner (2008). A conceptual framework for data-driven decision-making. In (Eds.), Data-driven school improvement: Linking data and learning (pp. 13-31). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
37. E.B.MandinachS.Jackson (2012). Transforming teaching and learning through data-driven decision making. Thousand Oakes, CA: Corwin.
38. J.A.MarshC.C.Farrell (in press). How leaders can support teachers with data-driven decision making: A framework for understanding capacity building. Educational Management Administration and Leadership.
39. J.A.MarshJ.S.McCombsF.Martorell (2010). How instructional coaches support data-driven decision making: Policy implementation and effects in Florida middle schools. Educational Policy, 24(6), 872-907.
40. J.A.MarshJ.F.PaneL.Hamilton (2006). Making sense of data-driven decision making in education: Washington, DC: RAND Corporation.
41. B.MeansE.ChenA.DeBargerC.Padilla (2011). Teachers’ ability to use data to inform instruction: Challenges and supports. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development.
42. B.MeansC.PadillaL.Gallagher (2010). Use of educational data at the local level: From accountability to instructional improvement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development.
43. J.L.MeeceE.M.AndermanL.H.Anderman (2006). Classroom goal structure, student motivation, and academic achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 487-503.
44. S.B.Merriam (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
45. C.MidgleyA.KaplanM.Middleton (2001). Performance-approach goals: Good for what, for whom, under what circumstances, and at what cost. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 77-86.
46. M.B.MilesA.M.Huberman (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
47. R.Mintrop (2012). Bridging accountability obligations, professional values, and (perceived) student needs with integrity. Journal of Educational Administration, 50, 695-726.
48. P.A.Moss (Ed.). (2007). Evidence and decision making, 106th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
49. T.H.NelsonD.Slavit (2007). Collaborative inquiry among science and mathematics teachers in the USA: Professional learning experiences through cross-grade, cross-discipline dialogue. Professional Development in Education, 33, 23-39.
50. T.H.NelsonD.SlavitA.Deuel (2012). Two dimensions of an inquiry stance toward student learning data. Teachers College Record, 114(8), 1-42.
51. J.O’Day (2002). Complexity, accountability, and school improvement. Harvard Educational Review, 72, 293-329.
52. L.N.OláhN.R.LawrenceM.Riggan (2010). Learning to learn from benchmark assessment data: How teachers analyze results. Peabody Journal of Education, 85, 226-245.
53. M.Q.Patton (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
54. P.R.Pintrich (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667-686.
55. D.Pope (2010). Beyond “doing school”: From “stressed-out” to “engaged in learning.”Education Canada, 50, 4-8.
56. C.Ragin (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.
57. A.K.RorrerL.Skrla (2005). Leaders as policy mediators: The reconceptualization of accountability. Theory Into Practice, 44, 53-62.
58. C.E.RouseJ.HannawayD.GoldhaberD.Figlio (2007). Feeling the Florida heat? How low-performing schools respond to voucher and accountability pressure (No. 13681). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
59. K.SchildkampM.K.LaiL.M.Earl (2013). Data-based decision making in education: Challenges and opportunities. New York, NY: Springer.
60. T.Seifert (2004). Understanding student motivation. Educational Research, 46, 137-149.
61. P.M.Senge (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Doubleday Business.
62. C.SenkoC.S.HullemanJ.M.Harackiewicz (2011). Achievement goal theory at the crossroads: Old controversies, current challenges, and new directions. Educational Psychologist, 46, 26-47.
63. G.SewellJ.R.BarkerD.Nyberg (2012). Working under intensive surveillance: When does “measuring everything that moves” become intolerable?Human Relations, 65, 189-215.
64. J.L.Smith (2004). Understanding the process of stereotype threat: A review of mediational variables and new performance goal directions. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 177-206.
65. D.SolorazanoT.Yosso (2001). From racial stereotyping and deficit discourse toward a Critical Race Theory of teacher education. Multicultural Education, 9, 2-8.
66. J.P.Spillane (2012). Data in practice: Conceptualizing the data based decision-making phenomena. American Journal of Education, 118, 113-141.
67. A.StraussJ.Corbin (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
68. T.UrdanE.Schoenfelder (2006). Classroom effects on student motivation: Goal structures, social relationships, and competence beliefs. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 331-349.
69. U.S. Department of Education. (2011). Race to the top assessment fund. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop-assessment/awards.html
70. J.C.WaymanV.Cho (2009). Preparing educators to effectively use student data systems. In (Eds.), Handbook of data-based decision making in education (pp. 89-104). New York, NY: Routledge.
71. D.Wiliam (2011). What is assessment for learning?Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37, 3-14.
72. D.WiliamS.Leahy (2007). A theoretical foundation for formative assessment. In (Ed.), Formative classroom assessment: Theory into practice (pp. 29-42). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
73. V.M.YoungD.H.Kim (2010). Using assessments for instructional improvement: A literature review. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 18(19), 1-36.