CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 11Educational Assessment and ImprovementTeacher Education and AssessmentsScience Education and Pedagogy

Science teachers’ data use practices: A descriptive analysis

Open access
Snodgrass Rangel, Virginia, Monroy, Carlos, Bell, Elizabeth·2016·Education Policy Analysis Archives
DOI 10.14507/epaa.24.2348
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

There is a debate on students’ low science achievement in the United States, particularly among low income, African American students, and Latino students. An important part of the education community’s response to low achievement generally and in science specifically has been the implementation of high stakes accountability policies. Because of accountability’s emphasis on educator data use, much research has examined different facets of it throughout educational organizations, but research has not focused on the extent to which data use might be content-specific. The purpose of this paper, then, was to investigate the data use practices of science teachers. Drawing from a broader study of science teachers in grades 5-8 across six school districts, this study reports results from teacher surveys and interviews. The findings indicate that while there were examples of science-specific data use, most of the science teachers used data in ways consistent with previous content-agnostic research. Implications for future research, policy, and practice are discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.14507/epaa.24.2348

Cites

79 of 79 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 use data to inform lesson plans, set lesson objectives, develop differentiated instructions, and provide feedback to students.

    “With respect to teaching enhancement purposes, teachers use data to inform their lesson plans (Ford, 2018; Gelderblom et al., 2016; Snodgrass Rangel et al., 2016; Reeves et al., 2016), set lesson objectives (Kallemeyn, 2014; Snodgrass Rangel et al., 2016; Reeves et al., 2016), develop differentiated instructions (Beck et al., 2020; Datnow et al., 2012; Farley-Ripple et al., 2019), and provide”

    From Dimensions of teachers’ data literacy: A systematic review of literature from 1990 to 2021 (2024) · cites this paper as Snodgrass Rangel et al., 2016

    The Summary of Findings (page unavailable) says science teachers used assessment data for day-to-day instructional planning, supporting the lesson-planning part. The District assessments section says teachers identified objectives students struggled with and planned reteaching or interventions, but it does not clearly say they used data to set lesson objectives. This citation is attached to those two parts of the printed sentence, not to differentiated instruction or feedback. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Data-literate teachers leverage student assessment data to evaluate learning progress.

    “Specifically, data-literate teachers leverage student assessment data to evaluate learning progress (Abrams et al., 2016; Jimerson, 2014; Jimerson & Wayman, 2015; Jimerson et al., 2016; Snodgrass Rangel et al., 2016), to tailor classroom instruction based on data insights (Mokhtari et al., 2009; Poortman & Schildkamp, 2016; Staman et al., 2017; van der Scheer & Visscher, 2018), and to ensure”

    From Dimensions of teachers’ data literacy: A systematic review of literature from 1990 to 2021 (2024) · cites this paper as Snodgrass Rangel et al., 2016

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 81 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Horn, I. S., Kane, B. D., & Wilson, J. (2015). Making Sense of Student Performance Data: Data Use Logics and Mathematics Teachers' Learning Opportunities. American Educational Research Journal. doi: 0002831215573773.
  2. Khattri, N., & Sweet, D. (1996). Assessment reform: Promises and challenges. In M. B. Kane & R. Mitchell (Eds.), Implementing performance assessment (pp. 1-22). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  3. McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2008). Inquiry and scientific explanations: Helping students use evidence and reasoning. In J. Luft, R. Bell, & J. Gess-Newsome (Eds.), Science as inquiry in the secondary setting (pp. 121 -134). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.
  4. National Research Council (2011). Successful K-12 STEM Education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Snodgrass Rangel, V., Monroy, C., & Bell, E.
Affiliations
Rice University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Education Policy Analysis Archives
Publisher
Mary Lou Fulton College for Teaching and Learning Innovation
Published
2016-08-08
Volume
24
Pages
86
ISSN
1068-2341 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.14507/epaa.24.2348
OpenAlex
W2481344026
Cited by
11
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
2.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-sa
Locations
  • Education Policy Analysis Archives (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Redalyc (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (1417705)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Educational Assessment and Improvement
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Assessments
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
Keywords
science teachers, teacher data use, educational data mining, high-stakes accountability, science achievement, low-income students, African American students, Hispanic students, elementary school science, education policy

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