The DOI matches its Crossref record; 87 of the 87 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 65 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Data teams for school improvement
Open accessAbstract
The use of data for educational decision making has never been more prevalent. However, teachers and school leaders need support in data use. Support can be provided by means of professional development in the form of “data teams”. This study followed the functioning of 4 data teams over a period of 2 years, applying a qualitative case study design. The findings show that data use is not a linear process, and that teams go through different feedback loops to reach higher levels of depth of inquiry. The data team procedure is a promising way of enhancing data-based decision making in schools.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This qualitative case study followed four Dutch secondary school data teams over two years as they implemented an eight-step data team procedure. It finds that data use was not linear, with teams moving through feedback loops, and that the procedure is a promising way to enhance data-based decision making in schools.
Key findings
- Data use was not a linear process: all teams returned to earlier steps, and three of four teams developed new knowledge through feedback loops; two teams (W and C) moved to action and outcomes.
- Team W reduced grade repetition from over 30% to 23% after implementing measures; Team C found student results did not significantly decline in percentages and fractions after repetition and differentiation measures.
- Depth of inquiry varied: Teams W, C, and G reached higher depth in final meetings, while Team B remained mostly at low/average depth, did not turn information into knowledge or action, and terminated after Meeting 6 (after 9 months).
- Attribution shifted in the more successful teams: Teams W and C moved from external to internal causes and took action at the level of their own functioning; Team G did not reach implementing measures related to its own functioning.
Methods
- Qualitative case study using a micro-process perspective; followed 4 data teams with members from 6 Dutch secondary schools over 2 years, focused on problems including grade repetition, mathematics achievement, and pre-vocational entrants’ performance.
- Data included audio-recorded 34 data team meetings (1–1.5 hr) and 24 interviews (1 hr) conducted about six months after teams started; transcripts were coded in Atlas.ti using the theoretical framework of data-based decision making, depth of inquiry, and attribution.
- Analysis used within-case summaries and cross-case matrix displays; interrater agreement was a Cohen’s Kappa of 0.76 on approximately 10% of observation transcripts, and researchers who did not facilitate the teams conducted the analyses.
Limitations
- Stated: the study is a small pilot in a specific context; the authors cannot conclude that improvements were caused by the data teams alone, and further research is needed on enabling factors, larger scale, and long-term effects.
- Stated/evident: data availability and quality were sometimes problematic, especially for Teams B and G; Team G had only six meetings within 1 year, and Team B terminated early, limiting comparison across teams.
- Evident: one researcher developed and facilitated the data team procedure, although analyses were conducted by non-facilitators; teams voluntarily approached the University of Twente, so selection and context may limit generalizability.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
52 Own result · 24 No full text of the sources · 11 No basis given · 10 Sources not found · 10 Not checked yet · 10 Own interpretation · 8 Own method
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, in Meetings 6 and 7 they continued to discuss the results of the student motivation survey at a more basic level (average depth).”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: data-based decision making
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Team B did not succeed in turning any information into knowledge, action, or subsequent outcomes, therefore.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: attribution
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results of our study show that even if teams get beyond the analysis phase (from data to information to knowledge), they still need support in coming up with concrete actions.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > M1 M2
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“According to the analyses by the facilitator, the grades of students entering the 4th year from the vocational lower level track did not differ significantly from the grades of students who already came from the middle level.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Case summary functioning Team G
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The subsequent outcome they measured was that the number of students repeating a class turned out to be less than 30%, namely 23%.”
- Also stated in: § M1 M2 · plain
“After implementing their measures, the number of students repeating a class at Team W's school decreased in 1 year from over 30% to 23%.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: data-based decision making
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § M1 M2 · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, the availability of complete and reliable data was sometimes problematic, especially for Teams B and G.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Data-based decision making in the teams
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The collected data showed that a considerable part of the problem could be explained by failing students' absenteeism (15,6%).”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: data-based decision making
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the team did develop new knowledge with regard to their problem (conceptual use).”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Case summary functioning Team G
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Team members also mentioned causes at the level of their own functioning from the start:”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team C: attribution
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the cases of Team W and Team C, conceptual use also led to instrumental data use.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Data-based decision making in the teams
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 46
- The quote only partly states this claim. 8
- Probably not a substantial claim. 29
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Team B remained far behind: Most of their meetings were only focused on defining the problem and setting related criteria and personal experiences and opinions about possible solutions.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Depth of inquiry in the teams
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When finally moving on to hypotheses and collecting data, many of the proposed data were not available.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: attribution
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Only Team C and Team W, however, actually investigated hypotheses related to their own functioning, and consequently took action at this level.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Attribution in the teams
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They only had six meetings within the period of the pilot study, within which they did not reach the level of turning knowledge into action and outcomes.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Case summary functioning Team G
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Three of the four teams went through several feedback loops and were able to develop new knowledge based on data.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Data-based decision making in the teams
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, the data do not always directly lead to action, but the data have challenged the assumptions of the data team members.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > M1 M2
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We calculated the interrater agreement and found a satisfying Cohen's Kappa of 0.76.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Reliability and validity
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The findings show that data use is not a linear process, and that teams go through different feedback loops to reach higher levels of depth of inquiry.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The evaluation after a couple of months showed the outcome that students advanced considerably from the pretest to the first posttest, and subsequently student results did not significantly decline from the first to the second posttest.”
- Also stated in: § M1 M2 · plain
“Team C implemented several measures to improve mathematic achievement, and the outcome was that student results did not significantly decline in percentages and fractions anymore.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team B: attribution
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § M1 M2 · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the first two meetings, the strong feeling that the lower level intake in the middle-level stream was problematic guided the team in formulating hypotheses.”
- Also stated in: § Team G: depth of inquiry · plain
“Although these hypotheses were not supported by the data, several team members returned to this feeling in later meetings.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team G: depth of inquiry
boosteddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Team G: depth of inquiry · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the first two meetings, team members talked about the problem based on their own experiences, and not based on data.”
- Also stated in: § Team C: depth of inquiry · plain
“From Meetings 6 to 11, more data were collected and used as a basis for drawing conclusions about the problem, hypotheses, and solutions.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team C: depth of inquiry
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § Team C: depth of inquiry · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The teachers reached two important understandings by the time of Meeting 4: (a) the problem was caused by more than one issue, and (b) they needed to start looking at internal causes, such as problems with their curriculum and their own functioning.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: data-based decision making
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The more advanced analyses, carried out by the external facilitator, showed that the scores dropped considerably.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team B: attribution
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With help of the facilitator, it became clear that there were too few cases to draw meaningful conclusions.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Case summary functioning Team G
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The teachers further mentioned many external possible causes for the problem, such as the difficulty of mathematics or the (starting) level of students.”
- Also stated in: § Team B: attribution · plain
“However, they sometimes also brought up their own functioning from the start.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team B: attribution
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Team B: attribution · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This means that depth of inquiry was confined to the lowest levels in the meetings, and typically did not exceed the”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: attribution
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This came as a surprise to the team:”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Case summary functioning Team G
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Other hypotheses concerned strictness of transfer rules and motivation.Data showed that these hypotheses were incorrect.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: data-based decision making
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the motivation survey results showed that students (both in the failing and passing group) needed help in planning and needed more feedback from teachers on their planning activities.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: data-based decision making
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Meeting 5, the team compared the results of failing and passing students and tried to relate the answers to different questions; also discussing their own functioning in relation to the students' opinions about this.The team was developing new knowledge based on the collected data (high depth).”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: data-based decision making
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One of the challenges was that the data related to the suspected problem were not readily available, and the teachers had to first construct and coordinate the tests to find out more about the problem.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team B: attribution
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although some hypotheses about their own functioning and at the level of students were considered, the team mainly focused on hypotheses at the school level in the first meetings.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: data-based decision making
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After extensive discussion, the problem was finally, although not convincingly or explicitly, acknowledged as late as the fifth meeting.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: attribution
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With regard to purpose, the teams generally started discussing the problem from their own experience, investigating the more external hypotheses.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Data-based decision making in the teams
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Meeting 8, the team started with discussing the absenteeism results.It turned out that this explained a substantial part of the problem, and that the school's absenteeism measures should be improved.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: data-based decision making
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Additionally, it seemed that teachers did not check homework regularly.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: data-based decision making
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By the time of the final meetings, the teachers had structurally implemented the repetition measure in their lessons, both for fractions and percentages, and were using the online programs to differentiate instruction.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team B: attribution
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Depth of inquiry was nearly all the time confined to the lowest levels in Meetings 1 and 2: The discussion focused mostly on own personal experiences and anecdotes.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: data-based decision making
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In general, the different members of the team actively contributed to the discussions, asked each other clarifying questions, and complemented each other.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: data-based decision making
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Teams W and C managed to successfully complete Steps 1 to 8 within the pilot study period, create new knowledge, and base related decisions on data.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > M1 M2
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The findings show that our theory of action seems to be applicable in practice, but also that teachers and school leaders go through different feedback loops, and that some are able to reach the action and outcomes phase, whereas others are not.”
- Also stated in: § Implications for practice and recommendations for further research · plain
“Some teams were able to engage and use data to make improvements, whereas others were not.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Implications for practice and recommendations for further research
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Implications for practice and recommendations for further research · plain
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The use of data for educational decision making has never been more prevalent”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Abstract
What the sources say
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In 2010, only 20% of the Dutch secondary schools applied data use according to the Dutch Inspectorate”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Context
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Inspectie van het Onderwijs, 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In these teams, teachers explore underlying assumptions, question their own practice, revise their conceptions of teaching and learning, and adjust their practice accordingly.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Depth of inquiry and attribution
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, it does not lead to solving the problem as often there is nothing that the teachers can do about this external cause.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Depth of inquiry and attribution
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the Dutch Inspectorate increasingly holds schools accountable for making use of data to improve the quality of their education”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Context
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Verbeek & Odenthal, 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Our data use theory of action (Schildkamp & Poortman, 2015, p. 5) is based on the analyses of several data use models and frameworks”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Data-based decision making in data teams
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The focus of data teams, however, is on professional development specifically in data use and school improvement, ultimately measured in student achievement outcomes; rather than on teachers building their own practical theories of teaching”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Whitehead & McNiff, 2006 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Investigating causes outside the school contributes to the learning process (learning how to use data), but often these assumptions are incorrect”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Depth of inquiry and attribution
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ingram et al., 2004 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“teachers often do not use data to its best effect, if at all”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Introduction
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A qualitative, descriptive approach is most useful to describe the process of the functioning of data teams in its context”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Method
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Krathwohl, 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The framework acknowledges that data-based decision making is a complex and non-linear process, involving several feedback loops.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Data-based decision making in data teams
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Collaboration helps teachers to learn from each other how to use data, and allows for a fertile exchange of ideas and strategies”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Introduction
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Capturing the entire conversations in the meetings provides much more depth and specificity than we would achieve using observation protocols or field notes alone”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Data collection and instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Little, 2012 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“According to Ball and Cohen (1999), the inquiry component of PLCs is crucial as this can improve instruction, which in turn can lead to increased student achievement.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ball & Cohen, 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Action research is often organized around a certain cycle of inquiry (Johnson, 2003) and can also be conducted collaboratively in a PLC (Capobianco & Feldman, 2010).”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Johnson, 2003
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Capobianco & Feldman, 2010 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“How individuals attribute causes of a problem has behavioral consequences (Weiner, 2010) in terms of possible improvement actions based on data.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Depth of inquiry and attribution
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Weiner, 2010 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The policy aim of the Ministry of Education is that by 2018, at least 90% of the primary and secondary schools apply data use.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Context
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Dutch schools can use several data sources to improve their education, such as data on intake, transfer, and school leavers; school inspection and selfevaluation data; assessment and examination results; and student and parent questionnaire data”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Context
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Schildkamp & Kuiper, 2010 source
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Data teams can take two possible actions: The hypothesis is incorrect and the action is to go back to formulating new hypotheses (a feedback loop is created), or the hypothesis is correct and the data team takes action based on the data.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Data-based decision making in data teams
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Marsh, Pane, & Hamilton, 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Marsh, 2012 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“the interaction between data and people, in a certain context, results in decisions regarding what action to take.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Data-based decision making in data teams
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The team needs to filter the data (e.g., are the data valid and reliable; if not, additional data need to be collected and a feedback loop is created)”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Data-based decision making in data teams
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For objectivity reasons, the researchers who did not facilitate the data team conducted the analyses.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Data analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“This study provided more insight into what happens when teachers engage with data in data teams (opening the “black box” of the collaborative inquiry in PLCs; Butler & Schnellert, 2012).”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Implications for practice and recommendations for further research
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Butler & Schnellert, 2012 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although we cannot conclude that these improvements were caused by the work of the data teams alone, it is likely that the work of the data teams contributed to the improvements.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > M1 M2
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The team collected data from their own school registration system, which were considered sufficiently reliable and valid.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team W: data-based decision making
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, this led to new knowledge with regard to what did not cause their specific problem (conceptual data use).”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Team B: attribution
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All data team meetings and interviews were audiorecorded, allowing for thorough analysis of the data.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Reliability and validity
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Also, the instruments were based on our theoretical framework and existing instruments.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Reliability and validity
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, these actions also led to the desired outcomes: These teams were able to solve their educational problem and increase student achievement”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Data-based decision making in the teams
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“As stated by Marsh and Farrell (2015), data team procedures seem to be promising capacity building interventions.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Implications for practice and recommendations for further research
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Marsh and Farrell (2015) source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, two researchers coded approximately 10% of the same observation transcripts.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Reliability and validity
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“We enhanced external validity in terms of analytical generalization by providing casespecific and cross-case thick descriptions (also including citations of respondents), and describing the congruence with the theoretical framework”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Reliability and validity
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Poortman & Schildkamp, 2012 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After initially coding a sample of the data, the coding scheme was refined, based on discussions between the researchers about the applicability of the scheme and the meaning of the data.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Data analysis
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“We should therefore take into account the organizational context in which data use is taking place, but also the characteristics of the data and data systems available, as well as the influence of policy on data use at the macrolevel, and personal characteristics of the individual data users at the microlevel, as these all interact (Coburn & Turner, 2011, 2012;Marsh, 2012).”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Implications for practice and recommendations for further research
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Coburn & Turner, 2011, 2012
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Marsh, 2012 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“As stated by Horn and Little (2010), contextual factors may account for the differences in the practices of different teams.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Implications for practice and recommendations for further research
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Horn and Little (2010) source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Duke (2015) found that long-term school improvement requires focus, continuous planning, and inquiry into the causes of problems (e.g., low performance) using data.”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Implications for practice and recommendations for further research
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Duke (2015) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“These may refer to school organizational characteristics, such as the role of the school leader (e.g., facilitation, encouragement) (Knapp, Copland, & Swinnerton, 2007;Knapp, Swinnerton, Copland, & Monpas-Huber, 2006), and the degree to which teams have a measurable and shared goal (Datnow et al., 2007;Earl & Katz, 2006;Kerr et al., 2006;Wayman & Stringfield, 2006;Wohlstetter et al., 2008).”
§ Data teams for school improvement > Implications for practice and recommendations for further research
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Knapp, Copland, & Swinnerton, 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Datnow et al., 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Earl & Katz, 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper relies on this without support.
Teachers and school leaders need support in using data.
“However, teachers and school leaders need support in data use.”
The paper relies on this without support.
School leaders' participation in a data team helps ensure that the action plan is implemented at the end.
“Furthermore, their participation will help ensure implementation of the action plan at the end of the process.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Teachers have a central role in achieving sustainable and significant improvement in teaching and learning.
“Teachers have a central role in realizing sustainable and significant improvement of teaching and learning practices.”
The paper relies on this without support.
It is important that teachers at some stage take responsibility for their students' learning and begin to examine internal causes.
“It is important that at some stage teachers take the responsibility for their students' learning and start to look at internal causes (internal attribution).”
The paper relies on this without support.
More knowledge is needed on how to support schools in using data.
“However, we need more knowledge on how to support schools in the use of data.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The ability of a process or system to continue functioning effectively over a long period of time enables long-term school improvement (Schildkamp et al., 2016).”
From Using information and communication technology (ICT)-based data systems to support teacher data-driven decision-making: Insights from the literature (2013–2023) (2024) · cites this paper as Schildkamp et al., 2016
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The outcomes of the sense-making process described above can lead to di ff erent types of improvement actions (see Figure 1). For example, it may lead to curriculum changes and to changes in instruction. It may also lead to changes to the assessment practices in a school, such as the implementation of more formative assessments instead of overreliance on summative assessment”
From Data-based decision-making for school improvement: Research insights and gaps (2019) · cites this paper as Schildkamp, Poortman, and Handelzalts 2016
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“in order for this to happen, we argue that there is a need for them to connect the data to their own functioning (Schildkamp, Poortman, and Handelzalts 2016).”
From Data-based decision-making for school improvement: Research insights and gaps (2019) · cites this paper as Schildkamp, Poortman, and Handelzalts 2016
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Key drawbacks of the definitional spectrum include its lack of current utility in school districts and research studies, inability to provide information about the etiology or function of a school attendance problem, and lack of association with prevention or intervention protocols for this population (Schildkamp et al., 2016; Balfanz and Byrnes, 2018).”
From Reconciling Contemporary Approaches to School Attendance and School Absenteeism: Toward Promotion and Nimble Response, Global Policy Review and Implementation, and Future Adaptability (Part 1) (2019) · cites this paper as Schildkamp et al., 2016
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Data teams for school improvement > Introduction
“(Earl & Katz, 2006;Wayman, Midgley, & Stringfield, 2006)”
§ Data teams for school improvement > References
“65. Wayman, J. C., Midgley, S., & Stringfield, S. (2007). Leadership for data-based decision-making: Collaborative data teams.”
Citations
Cites
(1984) · Cited by 81,983
Case Study Research: Design and Methods
Chaiklin, H. (1991) · The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · doi:10.1097/00005053-199102000-00025 · Cited by 39,639
What Makes Professional Development Effective? Results From a National Sample of Teachers
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/00028312038004915 · Cited by 5,047
Desimone, L. M. (2009) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x08331140 · Cited by 4,862
Professional Development and Teacher Learning: Mapping the Terrain
Borko, H. (2004) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x033008003 · Cited by 4,208
Becoming Critical: Education, Knowledge, and Action Research
Newsome, G. L., Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1988) · Canadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation · doi:10.2307/1495177 · Cited by 3,449
Professional Development and Teacher Change
Guskey, T. R. (2002) · Teachers and Teaching · doi:10.1080/135406002100000512 · Cited by 3,403
Education at a glance: OECD indicators, 2002
(2003) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.40-4369 · Cited by 2,757
Professional Learning Communities: A Review of the Literature
Stoll, L., Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Wallace, M., & Thomas, S. (2006) · Journal of Educational Change · doi:10.1007/s10833-006-0001-8 · Cited by 2,570
Becoming Critical: Education Knowledge and Action Research
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986) · doi:10.4135/9781446270134.n7 · Cited by 2,527
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Datnow A., 2007, Achieving with data: How high-performing school systems use data to improve instruction for elementary students
- Fullan M., 2000, Phi Delta Kappan, 81, 581
- Inspectie van het Onderwijs, 2011, De staat van het onderwijs: Onderwijsverslag 2009/2010
- Jimerson J. B., 2012, Branding educational data use through professional learning: Findings from a study in three districts
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2010, Education at a glance 2010: OECD indicators
- Schildkamp K., 2012, Data teams for school improvement
- 10.1007/978-94-007-4816-3 · DOI
- Verbeek C., 2014, Leidinggeven aan onderzoekende scholen
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Data-based decision-making for school improvement: Research insights and gaps
Schildkamp, K. (2019) · Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00131881.2019.1625716 · Cited by 347
Self-citationEditorial: the datafication of education
Jarke, J., & Breiter, A. (2019) · Learning Media and Technology · doi:10.1080/17439884.2019.1573833 · Cited by 367
Misconceptions about data-based decision making in education: An exploration of the literature
Mandinach, E. B., & Schildkamp, K. (2021) · Studies in Educational Evaluation · doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100842 · Cited by 209
“Educators sometimes fail to conduct the right types of analysis, and even more often they have difficulties with connecting the data to their own instruction in the classroom and translating the data into an action plan (e.g., Brown, Schildkamp, & Hubers, 2017; Schildkamp & Kuiper, 2010; Schildkamp & Poortman, 2015; S…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationFactors Influencing the Functioning of Data Teams
Schildkamp, K., & Poortman, C. (2015) · Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education · doi:10.1177/016146811511700403 · Cited by 185
“The data team members go back and forward between the steps (see also Figure 1) (Schildkamp, Handelzalts, & Poortman, 2012; Schildkamp & Ehren, 2012, p. 56–57): 1.”
BackgroundSelf-citationData-based decision making in education: challenges and opportunities
Schildkamp, K., Lai, M., & Earl, L. (2013) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-4816-3 · Cited by 211
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Schildkamp, K., Poortman, C. L., & Handelzalts, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Twente (NL)
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Schildkamp, Kim
- Venue
- School Effectiveness and School Improvement
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2015-06-26
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 228-254
- ISSN
- 0924-3453 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-5124
- OpenAlex
- W2179527361
- Cited by
- 229
- References
- 80
- Citations by year
- 2026: 24 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 4
- FWCI
- 64.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- research.utwente.nl
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- School Effectiveness and School Improvement (publishedVersion)
- University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- VU Research Portal (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Improvement
- Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
- Social Sciences › Education › School Leadership and Teacher Performance
- Keywords
- data teams, data-driven decision making, school improvement, professional development, teacher support, school leadership, feedback loops, educational data use
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
