In this study, we examine the relationships between principals’ evidence-oriented attitudes and their data use in school leadership practices. Based on theoretical assumptions and existing empirical research, we develop hypotheses on the correlation of evidence-oriented attitudes, epistemological beliefs and principals’ data use. We test these hypotheses based on data collected from a sample of N = 297 principals at 153 schools of different types using structural equation modelling. The findings show that the examined attitudes and epistemological beliefs have a slight, yet significant influence on principals’ data use. In particular, principals’ skepticism towards knowledge or academia influences data use. We conclude by addressing the limitations of our study and the challenges they pose for future research as well as implications for evidence-based school improvement.
AndersonSLeithwoodKStraussT (2010) Leading data use in schools – Organizational conditions and practices at the school and district levels. Leadership and Policy in Schools9(3): 292–327.
2.
AppleMAuW (2009) Politics, theory, and reality in critical pedagogy. In: CowenRKazamiasAM (eds) International Handbook of Comparative Education. Dordrecht: Springer, pp.991–1007.
3.
BachAWursterSThillmannK, et al. (2014) Vergleichsarbeiten und schulische Personalentwicklung – Ausmaß und Voraussetzungen der Datennutzung. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft17(1): 61–84.
4.
BallS J (2003) The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Education Policy18(2): 215–228.
5.
BerkemeyerNMüllerSVan HoltN (2015) Schulinterne Evaluation – Nur ein Instrument zur Selbststeuerung von Schulen? In: AltrichterHMaag MerkiK (eds) Handbuch Neue Steuerung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag, pp.209–234.
6.
BlackPWilliamD (1998) Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappa80(2): 139–148.
7.
BoudettKPSteeleJL (2007) Data Wise in Action - Stories of Schools using Data to Improve Teaching and Learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
8.
BrooksWD (2012) South Carolina middle school principals’ use of data-driven decision making. Dissertation, University of South Carolina, SC, USA.
9.
BushT (2016) Preparing new principals: Professional and organisational socialisation. Educational Management Administration & Leadership44(1): 3–5.
10.
DederingK (2007) Change Management durch Projekte zur Qualitätsentwicklung? Eine Analyse am Beispiel eines internationalen Netzwerkprojekts [Change Management Through Quality Development Projects; an Analysis based on an International Network Project]. In: BerkemeyerNHoltappelsHG (eds) Schulische Steuergruppen und Change Management: Theoretische Ansätze und empirische Befunde zur schulinternen Schulentwicklung. Weinheim: Juventa, pp.177–200.
11.
DemskiDRacherbäumerK (2015) Principals’ evidence-based practice – Findings from German schools. In: BrauckmannSThielFKuperH, et al. (eds) School Leadership in Germany. Special Issue, International Journal of Educational Management29(6): 735–748.
12.
DemskiDRosenbuschCVan AckerenI, et al. (2012) Steuerung von Schule durch evidenzbasierte Einsicht? In: HornbergSParreira do AmaralM (eds) Deregulierung im Bildungswesen. Münster: Waxmann, pp.131–150.
13.
DormannCBinnewiesCKochAR, et al. (2016) Transferring best evidence into practice: Assessment of evidence-based school management. Journal for Educational Research8(3): 14–38.
European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice (2015) Qualitätssicherung im Bildungswesen: Strategien und Konzepte der Schulevaluation in Europa. Eurydice-Bericht. Luxemburg: Amt für Veröffentlichungen der Europäischen Union.
18.
FishbeinM (1963) An investigation of the relationship between beliefs about an object and the attitude toward that object. Human Relations16(3): 233–239.
19.
FörsterM (2015) Organisationale und motivationale Einflussfaktoren auf das Reformhandeln von Lehrkräften – Eine empirische Untersuchung mittels Strukturgleichungs- und Mixture-Analysen. Landau: Empirische Pädagogik.
20.
GeijselFPKrügerMLSleegersPJC (2010) Data feedback for school improvement: The role of researchers and school leaders. The Australian Educational Researcher37(2): 59–75.
21.
GoldringEGrissomJARubinM, et al. (2015) Make room value added – principals’ human capital decisions and the emergence of teacher observation data. Educational Researcher44(2): 96–104.
22.
Groß OphoffJ (2013) Lernstandserhebungen – Reflexion und Nutzung (Pädagogische Psychologie und Entwicklungspsychologie, Band 85). Münster: Waxmann.
23.
HairJFRingleCMSarstedtM (2013) Partial least squares structural equation modeling: Rigorous applications, better results and higher acceptance. Long Range Planning46(1-2): 1–12.
24.
HardyILewisS (2016) The ‘doublethink’ of data: Educational performativity and the field of schooling practices. British Journal of Sociology of Education38(5): 671–685.
25.
HelmkeAHosenfeldI (2005) Ergebnisorientierte Unterrichtsevaluation. In: Interkantonale Arbeitsgemeinschaft Externe Evaluation von Schulen (eds) Schlüsselfragen zur externen Schulevaluation. Bern: h.e.p.-Verlag, pp.127–151.
26.
HenrySS (2011) Principals’ use of assessment data to drive student academic achievement. Dissertation, California State University, CA, USA.
27.
HoferBK (2002) Personal epistemology as a psychological and educational construct: An introduction. In: HoferBKPintrichPR (eds) Personal Epistemology: The Psychology of Beliefs about Knowledge and Knowing. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp.3–15.
28.
HoferBKPintrichPR (1997) The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research67(1): 88–140.
29.
HoltappelsHG (2007) Schulentwicklungsprozesse und Change Management: Innovationstheoretische Reflexionen und Forschungsbefunde über Steuergruppen [School development processes and change management. Innovation-theoretical reflections and research findings on steering groups]. In: BerkemeyerNHoltappelsHG (eds) Schulische Steuergruppen und Change Management - Theoretische Ansätze und empirische Befunde zur schulinternen Schulentwicklung. Weinheim: Juventa, pp.11–40.
30.
HooglandISchildkampKvan der KleijF, et al. (2016) Prerequisites for data-based decision making in the classroom: Research evidence and practical illustrations. Teaching and Teacher Education60(2016): 377–386.
31.
HosenfeldA (2010) Führt Unterrichtsrückmeldung zu Unterrichtsentwicklung? Die Wirkung von videographischer und schriftlicher Rückmeldung bei Lehrkräften der vierten Jahrgangsstufe (Empirische Erziehungswissenschaft, Vol. 22). Münster: Waxmann.
32.
IkemotoGSMarshJA (2007) Cutting through the “data-driven” mantra - Different conceptions of data-driven decision making. In: MossPA (ed) Evidence and Decision Making. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp.105–131.
33.
JimersonJB (2014) Thinking about data: Exploring the development of mental models for “data use” among teachers and school leaders. Studies in Educational Evaluation42(2014): 5–14.
34.
KöllerOBaumertJNeubrandJ (2000) Epistemologische Überzeugungen und Fachverständnis im Mathematik- und Physikunterricht. In: BaumertJBosWLehmannR (eds) TIMSS/III. 2 - Mathematische und physikalische Kompetenzen am Ende der Gymnasialen Oberstufe. Opladen: Leske + Budrich, pp.229–269.
35.
LeithwoodKJantziD (2006) Transformational school leadership for large-scale reform: Effects on students, teachers, and their classroom practices. School Effectiveness and School Improvement17(2): 201–227.
36.
LeithwoodKTomlinsonDGengeM (1996) Transformational school leadership. In: LeithwoodKChapmanJCorsonD, et al. (eds) International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Administration. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp.785–840.
37.
LevinJADatnowA (2012) The principal role in data driven decision making - using case study data to develop multimediator models of educational reform. School Effectiveness and School Improvement23(2): 179–201.
38.
LewisS (2017) Communities of practice and PISA for schools: Comparative learning or a mode of educational governance?Education Policy Analysis Archives25(92): 1–25.
39.
McCarleyTAPetersMLDecmanJM (2016) Transformational leadership related to school climate – a multi-level analysis. Educational Management Administration & Leadership44(2): 322–342.
40.
MartinezG (2010) Investigating school principals’ personal variables related to the use of data: Implications for professional development. Dissertation, New Mexico State University, NM, USA.
41.
MingchuL (2008) Structural equation modeling for high school principals’ data-driven decision making: An analysis of information use environments. Educational Administration Quarterly44(5): 603–634.
42.
MüllerSPaechterMRebmannK (2008) Aktuelle Befunde zur Lehr-Lernforschung - Epistemologische Überzeugungen zu Wissen und Wissenserwerb. bwp@14: 1–16.
NgSSzetoSE (2016) Preparing school leaders – The professional development needs of newly appointed principals. Educational Management Administration Leadership44(4): 540–557.
45.
ParkVDatnowA (2009) Co-constructing distributed leadership: District and school connections in data-driven decision-making. School Leadership and Management29(5): 477–494.
46.
PennickxMVanhoofJDe MaeyerS, et al. (2015) Effects and side effects of Flemish school inspection. Educational Management Administration & Leadership44(5): 728–744.
47.
PietschMJankeNMohrI (2014) Führt Schulinspektion zu besseren Schülerleistungen? Difference-in-Differences-Studien zu Effekten der Schulinspektion Hamburg auf Lernzuwächse und Leistungstrends? [Does school inspections lead to better student performance?]Zeitschrift für Pädagogik60(3): 446–470.
48.
PriemerB (2006) Deutschsprachige Verfahren der Erfassung von epistemologischen Überzeugungen. Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften12: 159–175.
49.
SaundersL (2000) Understanding schools’ use of ‘value added’ data: The psychology and sociology of numbers. Research Papers in Education15(3): 241–258.
50.
SchiefeleUMoschnerBHussteggeR (2002) Skalenhandbuch SMILE-Projekt. Bielefeld: Universität Bielefeld, Abteilung für Psychologie, Unveröffentlichtes Manuskript.
51.
SchildkampKKuiperW (2010) Data-informed curriculum reform: Which data, what purposes, and promoting and hindering factors. Teaching and Teacher Education26(3): 482–496.
52.
SchildkampKLaiMK (2013) Conclusions and a data use framework. In: SchildkampKLaiMKEarlL (eds) Data-based Decision Making in Education - Challenges and Opportunities. Dordrecht: Springer, pp.177–191.
53.
SchildkampKPoortmanCL (2015) Factors influencing the functioning of data teams. Teachers College Record117(4): 1–42.
54.
SchildkampKTeddlieC (2008) School performance feedback systems in the USA and in the Netherlands: A comparison. Educational Research and Evaluation14(3): 255–282.
55.
SchildkampKKarbautzkiLVanhoofJ (2014) Exploring data use practices around Europe – Identifying enablers and barriers. Studies in Educational Evaluation42: 15–24.
56.
SchneewindJ (2006) Wie Lehrkräfte mit Ergebnisrückmeldungen aus Schulleistungsstudien umgehen – Ergebnisse aus Befragungen von Berliner Grundschullehrerinnen. Dissertation, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany.
57.
SchommerM (1990) Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology82(3): 498–504.
58.
Schommer-AikinsMDuellOKBarkerS (2003) Epistemological beliefs across domains using Biglan’s classification of academic disciplines. Research in Higher Education44(3): 347–366.
59.
SinghP (2017) Performativity, affectivity and pedagogic identities. European Educational Research Journal. Epub ahead of print 31 August 2017. DOI:10.1177/1474904117726181
60.
StummSDormannCMohrN (2010) Evidence based management – An effective approach for public agencies? In: 27th International Congress of Applied Psychology, Melbourne, Australia, 11 – 16 July 2010, p. 1147. Melbourne: Australian Psychological Society.
61.
StumpMZlatkin-TroitschanskaiaOMaterO (2016) The effects of transformational leadership on teachers’ data use. Journal for Educational Research Online8(3): 80–99. Available at: http://www.j-e-r-o.com/index.php/jero/article/view/705 (accessed 26 January 2018).
62.
ThielCSchweizerSBellmannJ (2017) Rethinking side effects of accountability in education: Insights from a multiple methods study in four German school systems. Education Policy Analysis Archives25(93): 1–32.
63.
UrhahneD (2006) Die Bedeutung domänenspezifischer epistemologischer Überzeugungen für Motivation, Selbstkonzept und Lernstrategien von Studierenden. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie20(3): 189–198.
64.
UrhahneDHopfM (2004) Epistemologische Überzeugungen in den Naturwissenschaften und ihre Zusammenhänge mit Motivation, Selbstkonzept und Lernstrategien. Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften10: 71–87.
65.
Van AckerenIBinnewiesCClausenM, et al.(Autorengruppe EviS) (2013) Welche Wissensbestände nutzen Schulen im Kontext von Schulentwicklung? Theoretische Konzepte und erste deskriptive Befunde des EviS-Verbundprojektes im Überblick. Die Deutsche Schule12: 51–73.
66.
VanhoofJVanlommelKThijsS, et al. (2014) Data use by Flemish school principals: impact of attitude, self-efficacy and external expectations. Educational Studies40(1): 48–62.
67.
VerhaegheGVanhoofJValckeM, et al. (2010) Using school performance feedback: perceptions of primary school principals. School Effectiveness and School Improvement21(2): 167–188.
68.
VisscherAJCoeR (2003) School performance feedback systems - Conceptualisation, analysis, and reflection. School Effectiveness and School Improvement14(3): 321–349.
69.
WaymanJCSpringfieldS (2006) Technology-supported involvement of entire faculties in examination of student data for instructional improvement. American Journal of Education112(August): 549–571.
70.
WaymanJCJimersonJBChoV (2012) Organizational considerations in establishing the data-informed district. School Effectiveness and School Improvement23(2): 159–178.
71.
WeschenfelderE (2014) Professionelle Kompetenz von Politiklehrkräften - Eine Studie zu Wissen und Überzeugungen. Wiesbaden: Springer.
72.
WilkinsonWKSchwartzNH (1987) The epistemological orientation of gifted adolescents: An empirical test of Perry’s model. Psychological Reports61(3): 976–978.
73.
WilliamsJ (2011) A comparison of secondary principals’ use of data systems to increase student achievement in mathematics as measured by standardized assessment. Dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA.
74.
WursterSRichterDSchliesingA, et al. (2013) Nutzung unterschiedlicher Evaluationsdaten an Berliner und Brandenburger Schulen. Rezeption und Nutzung von Ergebnissen aus Schulinspektion, Vergleichsarbeiten und interner Evaluation im Vergleich. Die Deutsche SchuleBeiheft 12: 19–50.
75.
YilmazOBayraktarDM (2014) Teachers’ attitudes towards the use of educational technologies and their individual innovativeness categories. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences116: 3458–3461.
76.
Zlatkin-TroitschanskaiaO (2016) Evidence-based actions within the multilevel system of schools - Requirements, processes, and effects (EviS). Journal for Educational Research Online8(3): 5–13. Available at: http://www.j-e-r-o.com/index.php/jero/article/view/701 (accessed 26 January 2018).
77.
Zlatkin-TroitschanskaiaOSeidelJStumpM (2013) Teachers' evidence-based actions – A comparison of different school types. In: BeckKZlatkin-TroitschanskaiaO (eds) From Diagnostics to Learning Success. Proceedings in Vocational Education and Training. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, pp. 281–924.
78.
Zlatkin-TroitschanskaiaOFörsterMPreußeD, et al. (2016) The relationship between teachers’ evidence-based actions and communication, cooperation, and participation structures at schools. Journal For Educational Research Online, 8(3), 59–79. Available at: http://www.j-e-r-o.com/index.php/jero/article/view/704
