In a March 8, 2010 Education Sector article, author Bill Tucker discussed the disparity between the billions of dollars spent on upgrading schools data systems and the actual use of data at the classroom level stating,

..despite states' and districts' tremendous progress in building data systems, policymakers are not yet routinely using these new data to improve accountability systems, support performance management processes, evaluate programs, or influence resource allocation decisions. And most importantly, the data is not yet being used where it matters most—in the classroom.

Rather than invest in data systems that show little instructional return, states and districts need to design and build data systems with a primary goal of improving classroom teaching and learning. Presently, data systems are built for technology’s sake rather than being built to provide teachers with accurate, timely, and meaningful data to drive instruction.

The most successful performance management initiatives—those that actually change practice—will engage educators and put student success and responsibility at the center (Tucker, 2010).

Tucker gives us 5 principles to better inform the design of data systems: 

1) From Institutional- to Learner-Centered: Like a GPS system, the new generation of data systems should combine both quantitative and qualitative information, enabling more specific, tailored instructional experience.

2) Allow information to flow across Institutions: Data follows the student, integrating important information from a wide variety of schools, programs, and interventions into a more complete and accurate depiction of a student's progress.

3) Usefulness and Usability Drive Adoption: More intuitive and easy to use data systems will be the most successful in implementing.

4) Common, Yet Open, Systems: This facilitates use and allows educators to easily exchange information.

5) Get the Right Data: The right data allows us to not only assess performance—for students, educators, and administrative systems—but more importantly, to understand the processes and changes that could lead to improvement. 

In response to Tucker's 5 principles, some additional notes for consideration:

1) I agree data should be used as an actual instructional tool rather than just a summative data point used for evaluation, but if we are to integrate qualitative data into our performance picture, we also need to consider better tools to capture this data. Qualitative tools should be standardized in some way to allow for benchmarking across students, schools, and districts. Building these tools will require the consensus of our educators and policy makers alike regarding what information is strictly to be used for instructional purposes and what information should be captured as a means of evaluation.

3) Enable a greater chance for successful adoptions by including teachers in the design process. Also, allow for piloting and time to react to feedback from the field. Lastly, once stories of usefulness actualize, campaign the benefits. Use teacher success stories as a means of mobilizing other schools and districts towards embracing data systems and data-driven instruction.

As we consider better design strategies for our data systems, we must not lose sight that all education reform initiatives are not developed nor successfully implemented in a vacuum. There must be a conscious effort to align other instructional supports for educators, such as better, more targeted professional development and instructional coaching supports, to any new reform initiative. In addition, if we believe the school is the ultimate locus of change for students and education, we must be prepared to engage the school’s climate and culture as part of any reform initiative; leveraging leadership at the school level to champion and adopt reform.

Related Posts

• On Relevance
• Five Priorities for Education Data
• Who Owns Student Outcomes?