Data-based decision making (DBDM) is an important element of educational policy in many countries, as it is assumed that student achievement will improve if teachers worked in a data-based way. However, studies that evaluate rigorously the effects of DBDM on student achievement are scarce. In this study, the effects of an intensive DBDM-intervention for Grade 4 teachers on students’ mathematical achievement were investigated in a randomized controlled trial. Multilevel analyses showed that although no main effect on students’ mathematical achievements was found, students who received “extended instruction” benefited significantly from the intervention. Based on the results, recommendations for the design of new DBDM-interventions and for their evaluation are presented.
BennerG. J.KutashK.NelsonJ. R.FisherM. B. (2013). Closing the achievement gap of youth with emotional and behavioral disorders through multi-tiered systems of support. Education & Treatment of Children, 36(3), 15-29.
2.
BiancarosaG.BrykA. S.DexterE. R. (2010). Assessing the value-added effects of literacy collaborative professional development on student learning. The Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 7-34. doi:10.1086/653468
3.
BraddockJ. H.SlavinR. E. (1995). Why ability grouping must end: Achieving excellence and equity in American education. In PoolH.PageJ. A. (Eds.), Beyond tracking, finding success in inclusive schools. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Education Foundation.
4.
CampbellC.LevinB. (2009). Using data to support educational improvement. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 47-65.
5.
CarlsonD.BormanG. D.RobinsonM. (2011). A multistate district-level cluster randomized trial of the impact of data-driven reform on reading and mathematics achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(3), 378-398. doi:10.3102/0162373711412765
6.
CoburnC. E.TurnerE. O. (2012). The practice of data use: An introduction. American Journal of Education, 118, 99-111.
7.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8.
CornettJ.KnightJ. (2009). Research on coaching. In KnightJ. (Ed.), Coaching approaches and perspectives (pp. 192-216). Thousand Oakes, CA: Corwin Press.
9.
DatnowA.ParkV.WohlstetterP. (2007). Achieving with data: How high-performing school systems use data to improve instruction for elementary students. Los Angeles: Center on Educational Governance University of Southern California.
10.
DesimoneL. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181-199. doi:10.3102/0013189X08331140
11.
DeunkM.DoolaardS.Smale-JacobseA.BoskerR. J. (2015). Differentiation within and across classrooms: A systematic review of studies into the cognitive effects of differentiation practices. Groningen, The Netherlands: GION onderwijs/onderzoek.
12.
DunnK. E.AirolaD. T.LoW.-J.GarrisonM. (2013). Becoming data driven: The influence of teachers’ sense of efficacy on concerns related to data-driven decision making. The Journal of Experimental Education, 81(2), 222-241. doi:10.1080/00220973.2012.699899
13.
GaretM. S.PorterA. C.DesimoneL. M.BirmanB. F.YoonK. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945. doi:10.3102/00028312038004915
14.
GoertzM. E.OláhL. N.RigganM. (2009). From testing to teaching: The use of interim assessments in classroom instruction. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
15.
GummerE. S.MandinachE. B. (2015). Building a Conceptual Framework for Data Literacy. Teachers College Record, 117(4), 1-22.
16.
HattieJ. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London, England: Routledge.
17.
HattieJ.TimperleyH. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. doi:10.3102/003465430298487
18.
HoutveenT.Van de GriftW. J. C. M. (2012). Improving reading achievements of struggling learners. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 23(1), 71-93. doi:10.1080/09243453.2011.600534
19.
IkemotoG. S.MarshJ. A. (2007). Cutting through the “data-driven” mantra: Different conceptions of data-driven decision making. In MossP. A. (Ed.), Evidence and decision making (Vol. 106, pp. 105-131). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
20.
IngramD.LouisS. K.SchroederR. G. (2004). Accountability policies and teacher decision making: Barriers to the use of data to improve practice. Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1258-1287.
21.
Inspectorate of Education. (2010a). De staat van het onderwijs. Onderwijsverslag 2008/2009 [The state of education. Education report 2008/2009]. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Inspectorate of Education.
22.
Inspectorate of Education. (2010b). Opbrengstgericht werken in het basisonderwijs [Data-driven decision making in education]. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Inspectorate of Education.
23.
Inspectorate of Education. (2014). De staat van het onderwijs. Onderwijsverslag 2012/2013 [The state of education. Education report 2012/2013]. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Inspectorate of Education.
24.
KeuningT.Van GeelM.VisscherA. J.FoxJ.-P.MoolenaarN. M. (2016). The transformation of schools’ social networks during a data-based decision making reform. Teachers College Record, 118(9), 1-33.
25.
KnightJ. (2009). Instructional coaching. In KnightJ. (Ed.), Coaching approaches and perspectives (pp. 29-55). Thousand Oakes, CA: Corwin Press.
26.
LaiM. K.SchildkampK. (2013). Data-based decision making: An overview. In LaiM. K.SchildkampK. (Eds.), Data-based decision making in education (pp. 9-21). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
27.
LedouxG.BlokH.BoogaardM. (2009). Opbrengstgericht werken: Over de waarde van meetgestuurd onderwijs [Data-driven decision making: The value of data-driven education]. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: SCO-Kohnstamm Instituut.
28.
LipseyM. W.PuzioK.YunC.HebertM. A.Steinka-FryK.ColeM. W.. . . BusickM. D. (2012). Translating the statistical representation of the effects of education interventions into more readily interpretable forms (NCSER 2013-3000). Washington, DC: The Institute of Education Sciences.
29.
LockeE. A.LathamG. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705-717.
30.
LockwoodJ. R.Sloan McCombsJ.MarshJ. A. (2010). Linking reading coaches and student achievement: Evidence from Florida middle schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 32(3), 372-388. doi:10.3102/0162373710373388
31.
LouY.AbramiP.SpenceJ. C.PoulsenC.ChambersB.d’ApolloniaS. (1996). Within-class grouping: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 423-458.
32.
MandinachE. B.GummerE. S. (2013). A systemic view of implementing data literacy in educator preparation. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 30-37. doi:10.3102/0013189X12459803
33.
MandinachE. B.GummerE. S. (2016a). Data literacy for educators: Making it count in teacher preparation and practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
34.
MandinachE. B.GummerE. S. (2016b). What does it mean for teachers to be data literate: Laying out the skills, knowledge, and dispositions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 366-376. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.07.011
35.
MarshJ. A. (2012). Interventions promoting educators’ use of data: Research insights and gaps. Teachers College Record, 114, 30-48.
36.
MarshJ. A.Sloan McCombsJ.MartorellF. (2010). How instructional coaches support data-driven decision making: Policy implementation and effects in Florida middle schools. Educational Policy, 24(6), 872-907. doi:10.1177/0895904809341467
37.
McKennaM. C.WalpoleS. (2008). The literacy coaching challenge: Models and methods for grades K-8. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
38.
MeansB.ChenE.DeBargerA.PadillaC. (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.
39.
PeughJ. L. (2010). A practical guide to multilevel modeling. Journal of School Psychology, 48, 85-112. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2009.09.002
40.
PrinceM. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
41.
SchildkampK.KuiperW. (2010). Data-informed curriculum reform: Which data, what purposes and promoting and hindering factors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 482-496.
42.
SlavinR. E.CheungA.HolmesG.MaddenN. A.ChamberlainA. (2013). Effects of a data-driven district reform model on state assessment outcomes. American Educational Research Journal, 50(2), 371-396. doi:10.3102/0002831212466909
43.
SlavinR. E.MaddenN. A.ChambersB.HaxbyB. (2009). 2 million children: Success for all. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
44.
StamanL.VisscherA. J.LuytenH. (2014). The effects of professional development on the attitudes, knowledge and skills for data-driven decision making. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 42, 79-90. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.11.002
TomlinsonC. A.BrightonC.HertbergH.CallahanC. M.ConoverL. A.ReynoldsT. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2/3), 119-145. doi:10.1177/016235320302700203
47.
Van de GriftW. J. C. M.Van der WalM.TorenbeekM. (2011). Ontwikkeling in de pedagogisch didactische vaardigheid van leraren in het basisonderwijs [Development of the pedagogical didactic abilities of teachers in primary education]. Pedagogische Studiën, 88, 416-432.
48.
van der ScheerE. A. (2016). Data-based decision making put to the test (Doctoral dissertation). Enschede, The Netherlands: University of Twente.
49.
Van der ScheerE. A.GlasC. A. W.VisscherA. J. (2017). Changes in teachers’ instructional skills during an intensive data-based decision making intervention. Teaching and Teacher Education, 65, 171-182. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2017.02.018
50.
van der ScheerE. A.VisscherA. J. (2016). Effects of an intensive data-based decision making intervention on teacher efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 34-43. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.07.025
Van GeelM.KeuningT.FoxJ.-P.VisscherA. J. (2016). Assessing the effects of a school wide data-based decision making intervention on student achievement growth in primary schools. American Educational Research Journal, 53(2), 360-394. doi:10.3102/0002831216637346
53.
Van KuijkM. (2014). Raising the bar for reading comprehension (Doctoral dissertation). Groningen, The Netherlands: Groningen Institute for Educational Research.
54.
Van VeenK.ZwartR.MeirinkJ. (2012). What makes teacher professional development effective? In KooyM.Van VeenK. (Eds.), Teacher learning that matters: International perspectives (pp. 3-21). London, England: Routledge.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
