Teachers’ Use of Data: Loose Coupling, Agenda Setting, and Team Norms

This article explores the influence of grade‐level team norms and district and school leadership on teachers’ data use. Using an embedded‐systems perspective to consider teachers’ data use in four schools located in two different districts, the research takes the practitioners’ perspective on what constitutes data. Findings indicate that establishing rationale for teachers to use particular data, modeling such use, and structuring time for teachers to learn about using data are deliberate agenda‐setting activities. Varying degrees of loose coupling between the case study districts underscore how grade‐level norms and agenda setting mediate teachers’ collaborative use of data.

[1]  D. Schoen The Reflective Practitioner , 1983 .

[2]  M. Honey,et al.  Linking Data and Learning: The Grow Network Study , 2005 .

[3]  W. H. Mac Williams Keynote address , 2006, AIEE-IRE '51.

[4]  R. Stiggins Student-centered classroom assessment , 1994 .

[5]  K. Weick Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems , 1976, Gestión y Estrategia.

[6]  Victoria Hoban,et al.  The Reflective Practitioner , 2013 .

[7]  M. Lachat,et al.  Practices That Support Data Use in Urban High Schools , 2005 .

[8]  W. Popham Classroom Assessment: What Teachers Need to Know , 1995 .

[9]  John M. Silvester,et al.  The Social Life of Information: Brown, J.S., & Duguid, P. (2000). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing. ISBN 0-87584-762-5. 320 pages , 2000, Internet High. Educ..

[10]  John W. Kingdon Agendas, alternatives, and public policies , 1984 .

[11]  R. Schroeder,et al.  Accountability Policies and Teacher Decision Making: Barriers to the Use of Data to Improve Practice. , 2004 .

[12]  Richard Halverson,et al.  The New Instructional Leadership: Creating Data-Driven Instructional Systems in School , 2007 .

[13]  Susan H. Fuhrman,et al.  The District Role in Instructional Improvement , 2001 .

[14]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. , 1999 .

[15]  J. Talbert,et al.  Professional Communities and the Work of High School Teaching , 2001 .

[16]  John Seely Brown,et al.  Book Reviews : The Social Life of Information By John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2000. 320 pages , 2000 .

[17]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[18]  Continuous Improvement in Community District #2, New York City , 2002 .

[19]  J. Little The Persistence of Privacy: Autonomy and Initiative in Teachers' Professional Relations , 1990, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[20]  M. Copland Leadership of Inquiry: Building and Sustaining Capacity for School Improvement , 2003 .

[21]  Julie A. Marsh,et al.  Strategies to Promote Data Use for Instructional Improvement: Actions, Outcomes, and Lessons fromThree Urban Districts , 2006, American Journal of Education.

[22]  Richard Halverson,et al.  Investigating School Leadership Practice: A Distributed Perspective , 2001 .

[23]  A. Strauss,et al.  Grounded theory methodology: An overview. , 1994 .

[24]  Jeffrey C. Wayman,et al.  Technology‐Supported Involvement of Entire Faculties in Examination of Student Data for Instructional Improvement , 2006, American Journal of Education.

[25]  Richard F. Elmore,et al.  Building a New Structure for School Leadership. , 1999 .