See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/273458622

The Impact of Data-Driven Decision Making on Mathematics Instruction: Opportunities for Professional Learning

Conference Paper · November 2012

CITATIONS READS
0 1,443

3 authors, including:

Ann R. Edwards Dana Grosser-Clarkson

WestEd University of Maryland, College Park
15 PUBLICATIONS 178 CITATIONS 20 PUBLICATIONS 64 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Dana Grosser-Clarkson on 13 March 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 CENTER for
MATHEMATICS
EDUCATION
Dr. Ann Ryu Edwards, Dana Grosser-Clarkson & Minjung Ryu
University of Maryland, College Park

Background: In compliance with federal and state accountability policies, districts are increasingly utilizing Research Questions

student data to inform decision-making at all levels. These presses assume that with the right data soundly 1. How do math teachers and school leadership use
analyzed stakeholders can make well-informed policy and instructional decisions that improve student student data to make decisions impacting middle school
performance. This study addresses this notion in the case of middle school mathematics, examining the impact of math instruction?

presses for data-driven decision-making, as an element of a high stakes accountability policy 2. How do their data use practices create or constrain
context, on math teachers’ professional learning in three schools in a large district.
opportunities for teachers’ professional learning?

Case Selection:
Data
Theoretical Background

v Three high minority middle v Semi-structured interviews
Data Driven Decision Making Framework (DDDM)
Improve student

schools in a large urban/ (teachers, asst principals,  (modified from Mandinach, Honey & Light, 2006)
DDDM

suburban mid-Atlantic district
principals, district personnel)


outcomes

v Observations
1. Driving Question or Focus of Inquiry

ELM
McNair
Park

v Informal conversations
2. Data driven decision making skills
Improve Instruction:
Size
Large
Mid
Small
v Documents/artifacts
- Data organization, collection
Changes in teacher Deep and sustained
- Summarizing, analyzing information
knowledge and practice
engagement in
Demographic practice-relevant
Changes
Increasing Large African- Increasing Method: Case study utilizing - Prioritizing, synthesizing knowledge

Subjects Cite
Latino & ELL American Latino & ELL issues in productive
as Important

Populations
Population
Populations
grounded theory
3. Technology-based tools, e.g.
collaboration

Not Met; Final - Data warehouse

AYP
Met (4 Yrs)
stage of School
Improvement

“In Danger”

- Monitoring/reporting tools
To support sustained improvement in learning and thus student
This poster focuses on analysis of opportunities of professional learning 4. Levels of context
outcomes, data-driven decision-making should support
in data chats, a district-mandated teacher meeting (dept, content- - Classroom, Building, District contexts professional learning through meaningful engagement in practice-
alike, grade teams) involving student data analysis.
require different questions and data
relevant issues (problematizing practice, Little & Horn, 2010).

Results: Data Use Practices

Discussion

Results: Opportunities for Professional Learning in 
What shapes whether and how data use
Data Use Purposes/Practices
Elm
McNair
Park
“Data Chats”
provides opportunities for professional
A. School staff examine data of grade level, subgroup,
ELM ALGEBRA DATA CHATS
MCNAIR DATA CHATS
learning?

H
H
H
Ø Comparative item analysis created Ø Expected for content-alike teams and
or school to ascertain areas for school improvement.
• Leadership (particularly response to
B. School staff examine individual student data for opportunities for:
dept meetings, but shared time difficult AYP pressure)

class placement, assignment to interventions, (e.g.,
M
H
H
• Sharing instructional strategies
logistically or not valued
• Culture of trust and collaboration

“bubble kids”). Includes developing student outcome
monitoring/prediction tools (regression models).
• Comparing pros/cons of Ø Team data chats focused on “checking • Master schedule supporting regular,
C. Teachers regularly analyze patterns of individual approaches
in” on coverage and pacing, reteaching
substantive shared planning

L
M
L

student performance to identify “failing”/“at risk” sts.
• Reflecting on what “worked” and Ø “Documentation” of shared planning • Shared vision of the use of data to
D. Teachers analyze student performance on “didn’t work” in own teaching
time was required and was resented improve student achievement

individual items/standards to align content coverage M
M
H

to exams, plan reteaching or grouping in instruction.

• Raising dilemmas or problems of and subverted by teachers
• Data system that links outcomes to
E. Teachers collaboratively analyze their student test
practice to the team
Ø Dept data chats identified students for teachers/instructional programs

H
L
--

data to compare/evaluate instructional approaches.
Ø However, little inquiry into the quality monitoring/intervention (bubble kids)
• Commitment to examining instruction
F. School leadership examine teacher gradebook data of the mathematics on the assessment Ø Efforts to encourage collaborative as source of/remedy to low student
L
H
L

to monitor teacher effectiveness/compliance.
or in the curriculum
comparative analysis met with achievement

NEED A LEGEND HERE EXPLAINING COLORS
resistance and distrust

H = high incidence; M = mid incidence; L = low incidence; -- = none

View publication stats