Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

In this study, we examine principals’ data use within four districts are engaged in district-level professional learning around equity. Drawing on Gutierrez's framework for dimensions of equity, we consider how principals engage in data use in light of the dimensions of access, achievement, identity, and power. Findings suggest each district had its own definition of equity and engaged in work at advancing equity based on this unique definition. We conclude with implications for policy, preparation, and practice related to these different understandings of equity.

Keywords

data use equity principal leadership district context superintendency

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bertrand

Marsh

J. A.

(2015). Teachers’ sensemaking of data and implications for equity. American Educational Research Journal, 52(5), 861–893. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831215599251

Bertrand

Rodela

K. C.

(2018). A framework for rethinking educational leadership in the margins: Implications for social justice leadership preparation. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 13(1), 10–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775117739414

Blackmore

(2010). Preparing leaders to work with emotions in culturally diverse educational communities. Journal of Educational Administration, 48(5), 642–658.

Blanc

Christman

J. B

., Liu

Mitchell

Travers

., & Bulkley

K. E.

(2010). Learning to learn from data: Benchmarks and instructional communities. Peabody Journal of Education, 85(2), 205–225.

Bonilla-Silva

(2017). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in America (5th ed). Rowman and Littlefield.

Boyatzis

(1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Sage.

Braaten

Bradford

Kirchgasler

K. L.

Barocas

S. F.

(2017). How data use for accountability undermines equitable science education. Journal of Educational Administration, 55(4), 427–446. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-09-2016-0099

Brown

Benkovitz

Muttillo

A. J.

Urban

(2011). Leading schools of excellence and equity: Documenting effective strategies in closing achievement gaps. Teachers College Record, 113(1), 57–96.

Bryk

(2020). Improvement in action: Advancing quality in America's Schools. Harvard Education Press.

10.

Bryk

A. S.

Gomez

L. M.

Grunow

LeMahieu

(2015). Learning to improve: How America's Schools can get better. Harvard Education Press.

11.

Bulkley

K. E.

(2013). Conceptions of equity: How influential actors view a contested concept. Peabody Journal of Education, 88(1), 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2013.752309

12.

Cho

., & Wayman

J. C.

(2014). Districts’ efforts for data use and computer data systems: The role of sensemaking in system use and implementation. Teachers College Record, 116(2), 1–45.

13.

Christman

J. B.

Neild

R. C.

Bulkley

Blanc

Liu

Mitchell

(2009). Making the Most of Interim Assessment Data. Lessons from Philadelphia. Research for action.

14.

Chubb

J. E.

Loveless

(2004). Bridging the achievement gap. Brookings Institution Press.

15.

Coburn

C. E.

Turner

E. O.

(2011). Research on data use: A framework and analysis. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research & Perspective, 9(4), 173–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/15366367.2011.626729

16.

Cohen

Thapa

(2017). School climate improvement: What do U.S. Educator believe, need and want? International Journal on School Climate and Violence Prevention, 2(1), 90–116. http://www.ijvs.org/3-6224-Article_id_153_tarticle_0.html

17.

Cohen-Vogel

Osborne-Lampkin

L. T.

(2007). Allocating quality: Collective bargaining agreements and administrative discretion over teacher assignment. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(4), 433–461.

18.

Crabtree

L. M.

Richardson

S. C.

Lewis

C. W.

(2019). The gifted gap, STEM education, and economic immobility. Journal of Advanced Academics, 30(2), 203–231.

19.

Cramer

Little

M. E

., & Mchatton

P. A.

(2018). Equity, equality, and standardization: Expanding the conversations. Education and Urban Society, 50(5), 483–501.

20.

Creighton

T. B.

(2001). Data analysis and the principalship. Principal Leadership, 1(9), 52–57.

21.

Darling-Hammond

(2015). Want to close the achievement gap? Close the teaching gap. American Educator, 38(4), 14–18.

22.

Darling-Hammond

Friedlaender

Snyder

(2014). Student-centered schools: Policy supports for closing the opportunity gap. Policy Brief from Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education. Retrieved from https://edpolicy. stanford. edu/sites/default/files/scope-pub-studentcentered-policy. pdf.

23.

Datnow

Park

(2018). Opening or closing doors for students? Equity and data use in schools. Journal of Educational Change, 19(2), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-018-9323-6

24.

Davis

S. H.

Leon

R. J.

Fultz

(2013). How principals learn to lead: The comparative influence of on-the-job experiences, administrator credential programs, and the ISLLC standards in the development of leadership expertise among urban public school principals. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 8(1).

25.

Duncan

Range

Scherz

(2011). From professional preparation to on-the-job development: What do beginning principals need?. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 6(3), 1–20.

26.

Farrell

C. C.

(2015). Designing school systems to encourage data use and instructional improvement: A comparison of school districts and charter management organizations. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51(3), 438–471. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X14539806

27.

Fergus

(2016). Solving disproportionality and achieving equity: A Leader's Guide to using data to change hearts and minds. Corwin Press.

28.

Ford

D. Y.

(2011). Reversing underachievement among gifted Black students. Prufrock Press.

29.

Freire

(1970). The adult literacy process as cultural action for freedom. Harvard Educational Review, 40(2), 205–225.

30.

Fusarelli

L. D.

(2004). The potential impact of the No Child Left Behind Act on equity and diversity in American education. Educational Policy, 18(1), 71–94.

31.

Gannon-Slater

La Londe

P. G.

Crenshaw

H. L.

Evans

M. E.

Greene

J. C.

Schwandt

T. A.

(2017). Advancing equity in accountability and organizational cultures of data use. Journal of Educational Administration, 55(4), 361–375. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-09-2016-0108

32.

Garner

Thorne

J. K.

Horn

I. S.

(2017). Teachers interpreting data for instructional decisions: Where does equity come in? Journal of Educational Administration, 55(4), 407–426. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-09-2016-0106

33.

Gay

(2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.

34.

Green

T. L.

(2017). Community-based equity audits: A practical approach for educational leaders to support equitable community-school improvements. Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(1), 3–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X16672513

35.

Grissom

J. A

., & Harrington

J. R.

(2010). Investing in administrator efficacy: An examination of professional development as a tool for enhancing principal effectiveness. American Journal of Education, 116, 583–612. doi:10.1086/653631.

36.

Grissom

J. A.

Redding

(2015). Discretion and disproportionality: Explaining the underrepresentation of high-achieving students of color in gifted programs. AERA Open, 2(1), 2332858415622175. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858415622175

37.

Gutiérrez

. (2008). Research commentary: A gap-gazing fetish in mathematics education? Problematizing research on the achievement gap. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(4), 357–364.

38.

Gutiérrez

(2012). Context matters: How should we conceptualize equity in mathematics education? In Equity in discourse for mathematics education (pp. 17–33). Springer.

39.

Gutiérrez

(2018). Introduction: The need to rehumanize mathematics. In I.

Goffney

Gutiérrez

Boston

(Eds.), Rehumanizing Mathematics for Black, Indigenous, and Latinx Students (pp. 1–10). Reston, VA: NCTM.

40.

Halverson

Grigg

Pritchett

Thomas

(2015). Creating data-driven instructional systems in school: The new instructional leadership. Journal of School Leadership, 25, 447–481. https://doi.org/10.1177/105268461502500305

41.

Hess, F., & Kelly, A. (2007). Learning to lead: What gets taught in principal-preparation programs. Teachers College Record, 109(1), 244–274.

42.

Illinois State Board of Education (2017). Illinois state board of education state template for the consolidated state plan under the every student succeeds Act. Illinois State Board of Education. Retrieved from https://www.isbe.net/Documents/ESSAStatePlanforIllinois.pdf.

43.

Irizarry

J. G.

(2007). Ethnic and urban intersections in the classroom: Latino students, hybrid identities, and culturally responsive pedagogy. Multicultural Perspectives, 9(3), 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/15210960701443599

44.

Jimerson

J. B.

(2014). Thinking about data: Exploring the development of mental models for “data use” among teachers and school leaders. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 42, 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.10.010

45.

Jimerson

J. B.

McGhee

M. W.

(2013). Leading inquiry in schools: Examining mental models of data-informed practice. Current Issues in Education, 16(1). Retrieved from http://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/view/1163

46.

Johnson

(2014). Culturally responsive leadership for community empowerment. Multicultural Education Review, 6(2), 145–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/2005615X.2014.11102915

47.

Karp

D. R.

Breslin

(2001). Restorative justice in school communities. Youth & Society, 33, 249–272.

48.

Kendi

I. X.

(2019). How to be an antiracist. One World/Ballantine.

49.

Khalifa

M. A.

Gooden

M. A.

Davis

J. E.

(2016). Culturally responsive school leadership: A synthesis of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1272–1311. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316630383

50.

Khalifa

M. A.

Jennings

M. E.

Briscoe

Oleszweski

A. M.

Abdi

(2014). Racism? Administrative and community perspectives in data-driven decision making: Systemic perspectives versus technical-rational perspectives. Urban Education, 49(2), 147–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085913475635

51.

Lac

V. T.

Cumings Mansfield

(2018). What do students have to do with educational leadership? Making a case for centering student voice. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 13(1), 38–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775117743748

52.

Lachat

M. A.

Smith

(2005). Practices that support data use in urban high schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at risk, 10, 333–349.

53.

Ladson-Billings

(2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding achievement in U.S. Schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X035007003

54.

Ladson-Billings

(2009). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children. John Wiley & Sons.

55.

Lambert

S. D.

Loiselle

C. G.

(2008). Combining individual interviews and focus groups to enhance data richness. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(2), 228–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04559.x

56.

Lasater

Bengtson

Albiladi

W. S.

(2020). Data use for equity?: How data practices incite deficit thinking in schools. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 100845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100845

57.

Leverett

(2002). Warriors to advance equity: An argument for distributing leadership. Spotlight on student success (Vol. 709). Mid-Atlantic Regional Educational Laboratory.

58.

Levin

H. M.

(2010). A guiding framework for measuring educational equity. INES Network for the Collection and the Adjudication of System-Level Descriptive Information on Educational Structures, Policies and Practices, 6. Retrieved from https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/9789264201132-6-en.pdf?expires=1637350179&id=id&accname=ocid43013819&checksum=ADEF1AA039EE3E3E96B0F056271449D9

59.

List

., & Dykeman

(2021). Disproportionalities in gifted and talented education enrollment rates: An analysis of the US civil rights data collection series. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 65(2), 108–113.

60.

Loveless

(2011). The tracking wars: State reform meets school policy. Brookings Institution Press.

61.

Mabokela

R. O.

Madsen

J. A.

(2003). “Color-Blind” leadership and intergroup conflict. Journal of School Leadership, 13(2), 130–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/105268460301300201

62.

Madhlangobe

Gordon

S. P.

(2012). Culturally responsive leadership in a diverse school: A case study of a high school leader. NASSP Bulletin, 96(3), 177–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636512450909

63.

Mandinach

E. B.

Gummer

E. S.

(2013). Building educators’ data literacy: Differing perspectives. The Journal of Educational Research & Policy Studies, 13(2), 1–5. Retrieved from http://www.waymandatause.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/JERPS_april-2013.pdf#page=4

64.

Mansfield

K. C.

Welton

., & Halx

. (2018). Listening to student voice: Toward a more holistic approach to school leadership. Journal of Ethical Educational Leadership, 1, 10–27.

65.

Means

Padilla

Gallagher

(2010). Use of education data at the local level: From accountability to instructional improvement (Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, U.S. Department of Education. SRI International.

66.

Meyers

(2012). The centralizing role of terminology: A consideration of achievement gap, NCLB, and school turnaround. Peabody Journal of Education, 87(4), 468–484. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2012.705149

67.

Nelson

S. W

., De La Colina

M. G.

Boone

M. D.

(2008). Lifeworld or systemsworld: What guides novice principals?. Journal of Educational Administration, 46, 690–701.

68.

Neumerski

C. M.

(2013). Rethinking instructional leadership, a review: What do we know about principal, teacher, and coach instructional leadership, and where should we go from here?. Educational Administration Quarterly, 49(2), 310–347.

69.

New Jersey Department of Education (2015). Every student succeeds Act: New jersey plan. New Jersey Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/essa?src = rn.

70.

Nowell

L. S.

Norris

J. M.

White

D. E.

Moules . (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

71.

Park

., Daly

A. J

., & Guerra

A. W.

(2013). Strategic framing: How leaders craft the meaning of data use for equity and learning. Educational Policy, 27(4), 645–675. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904811429295

72.

Patton

M. Q.

(2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage Publications.

73.

Penuel

., Meyer

., & Valladares

M. R.

(2016). Making the Most of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA): Helping States Focus on School Equity, Quality and Climate. National Education Policy Center.

74.

Peterkin

R. S.

Jewell-Sherman

Kelly

Boozer

(2011). Every child, every classroom, every day: School leaders who are making equity a reality. Jossey-Bass.

75.

Petersen

G. J.

Young

M. D.

(2004). The No Child Left Behind Act and its influence on current and future district leaders. JL and Educ, 33, 343.

76.

Pollack

T. M.

Zirkel

(2013). Negotiating the contested terrain of equity-focused change efforts in schools: Critical race theory as a leadership framework for creating more equitable schools. The Urban Review, 45(3), 290–310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-012-0231-4

77.

Quinn

D. M.

Desruisseaux

T. M.

Nkansah-Amankra

(2019)). “Achievement gap” language affects teachers’ issue prioritization.. Educational Researcher, 48(7), 484–487.

78.

Roegman

Samarapungavan

Maeda

Johns

(2018). Color-neutral disaggregation? Principals’ practices around disaggregating data from three school districts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(4), 559–588. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X18769052

79.

Roegman

Allen

Leverett

Thompson

Hatch

(2019). Equity visits: A new approach to supporting equity-focused school and district leadership. Corwin Press.

80.

Roegman

(2020). Central office foci and principal data use: A comparative study of equity-focused practice in six districts. education analysis policy archives, 28(181), 1–27. DOI: 10.14507/epaa.28.5304

81.

Saldaña

(2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage Publications.

82.

Saunders

W. M

., Goldenberg

C. N.

Gallimore

(2009). Increasing achievement by focusing grade-level teams on improving classroom learning: A prospective, quasi-experimental study of Title I schools. American Educational Research Journal, 46(4), 1006–1033.

83.

Schildkamp

(2019). Data-based decision-making for school improvement: Research insights and gaps. Educational Research, 61(3), 257–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2019.1625716

84.

Seidman

(2013). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences (4th). Teachers College Press.

85.

Sherman

W. H.

(2008). No child left behind: A legislative catalyst for superintendent action to eliminate test-score gaps? Educational Policy, 22(5), 675–704. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904807307063

86.

Skiba

R. J.

Simmons

A. B.

Ritter

Gibb

A. C.

Rausch

M. K.

Cuadrado

. (2008). Achieving equity in special education: History, status, and current challenges. Exceptional Children, 74(3), 264–288.

87.

Skrla

Scheurich

J. J.

Garcia

Nolly

(2004). Equity audits: A practical leadership tool for developing equitable and excellent schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(1), 133–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X03259148

88.

Smith

E. J.

Harper

S. R.

(2015). Disproportionate impact of K-12 school suspension and expulsion on black students in southern states. Philadelphia: Pennsylvania University, Center for the Study of Race and Equity in Education. Available: http://www.gse.upenn.edu/equity/sites/ gse.upenn.edu.equity/files/publications/Smith_Harper_Report.pdf

89.

Souto-Manning

(2009). Negotiating culturally responsive pedagogy through multicultural children's Literature: Towards critical democratic literacy practices in a first grade classroom. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 9(1), 50–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798408101105

90.

Tate

W. F.

(1995). School mathematics and African American students: Thinking seriously about opportunity-to-learn standards. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31(3), 424–448. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X95031003006

91.

Theoharis

Haddix

. (2011). Undermining racism and a whiteness ideology: White principals living a commitment to equitable and excellent schools. Urban Education, 46(6), 1332–1351.

92.

Thomas

J. Y.

Brady

K. P.

(2005). Chapter 3: The elementary and secondary education Act at 40: Equity, accountability, and the evolving federal role in public education. Review of Research in Education, 29(1), 51–67. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.3102/0091732X029001051

93.

Tuters

Portelli

(2017). Ontario school principals and diversity: Are they prepared to lead for equity? International Journal of Educational Management, 31(5), 598–611. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-10-2016-0228

94.

Wayman

J. C.

Stringfield

(2006). Technology-supported involvement of entire faculties in examination of student data for instructional improvement. American Journal of Education, 112(4), 549–571. https://doi.org/10.1086/505059

How Conceptions of Equity Inform Principal Data Use: A Purposeful Examination of Principals From Four School Districts

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References