Data Use as Instructional Reform: Exploring Educators’ Reports of Classroom Practice
Abstract
Through policies like No Child Left Behind, the federal government incentivized the use of student performance data as a core strategy for improving student achievement. The assumption behind these efforts is that data will be used to guide teacher practice and promote high-quality instruction. This study examined how teachers describe using data in their instructional practices. Findings reveal that few teachers were able to articulate an ability to bridge the divide between using data to identify students in need of help and using data to modify instruction. We discuss factors that supported or impeded educators’ use of data.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Teachers' data literacy extends to understanding the school culture surrounding data utilization.
“Thirdly, teachers’ data literacy extends to understanding of the school culture surrounding data utilization (e.g., Andersen, 2020; Schildkamp, 2019; Wachen et al., 2018).”
From Dimensions of teachers’ data literacy: A systematic review of literature from 1990 to 2021 (2024) · cites this paper as Wachen et al., 2018
For teachers to be effective data users, they need to feel empowered to voice concerns and express frustrations with colleagues, seek help when necessary, and collaboratively develop strategies for effective collaboration within the school.
“This suggests that for teachers to be effective data users, they need to feel empowered to voice concerns and express frustrations with colleagues (Andersen, 2020; Ford, 2018; Wachen et al., 2018), seek help when necessary (Wardrip & Herman, 2018; Young, 2006), and collaboratively develop strategies for effective collaboration within the school (Datnow et al., 2013; Huffman & Kalnin, 2003; Michaud”
From Dimensions of teachers’ data literacy: A systematic review of literature from 1990 to 2021 (2024) · cites this paper as Wachen et al., 2018
Teachers' data literacy is associated with their trust in colleagues and school leaders, as well as their respect for the leadership team's role in leading data use and school improvement.
“Our findings also indicate that teachers’ data literacy is associated with their trust in colleagues and school leaders, as well as their respect for the leadership team's role in leading data use and school improvement (Andersen, 2020; Ford, 2018; Wachen et al., 2018).”
From Dimensions of teachers’ data literacy: A systematic review of literature from 1990 to 2021 (2024) · cites this paper as Wachen et al., 2018
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 77 · Cited by 15
- Authors
- Wachen, J., Harrison, C., & Cohen-Vogel, L.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Northwestern University (US)
- ,
- Corresponding author
- Wachen, John
- Venue
- Leadership and Policy in Schools
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2017-02-06
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 296-325
- ISSN
- 1570-0763 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-5043
- OpenAlex
- W2586288907
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 77
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 3.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Leadership and Policy in Schools (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Institute of Education Sciences (R305E100030)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Educational Assessment and Improvement
- Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Assessments
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Keywords
- educational data use, teaching reform, teacher practices, student performance data, No Child Left Behind Act, data-informed instruction, instructional modification, student identification, barriers to data use, academic performance
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.
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
