Abstract
Data-driven decision-making (DDDM) refers to the process of using data to inform educational decisions. Due to DDDM’s positive effects on student achievement and the pressure for educational accountability, DDDM has become a recent focus of numerous educational policies. However, few teachers fully utilize DDDM. While, broadly, DDDM may use various types of data to make different types of decisions, the current study focuses on the use of formative assessment data to guide instructional adaptations. This study serves as an elicitation study to explore teachers’ perceptions of DDDM, illuminating both facilitating and inhibitory factors affecting assessment practices. The Theory of Planned Behavior was applied as a theoretical framework, which suggests that individuals’ behaviors can be explained by their attitudes, perceptions of social norms, and perceived behavioral control. Nine elementary teachers from Indiana (the USA) participated in focus groups. The findings indicated teachers (a) had positive thoughts (e.g., helpful) but negative feelings (e.g., stressful) about DDDM, (b) were highly impacted by their schools’ culture of assessment, and (c) had mixed perceptions about their capacity and autonomy in conducting DDDM. These findings will be used to develop a quantitative instrument for future research. Furthermore, these findings can be used to support educational leaders’ efforts to provide better professional development and to facilitate more supportive school environments to ensure teachers can successfully implement DDDM practices.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2010). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471–499. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466601164939.
Armstrong, J., & Anthes, K. (2004). How data can help. The American School Board Journal, 188(11), 38–41.
Bernard, H. R., Wutich, A., & Ryan, G. W. (2017). Analyzing qualitative data (2nd ed.). Sage.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102.
Brown, G. T. L., & Hirschfeld, G. H. F. (2008). Students’ conceptions of assessment: Links to outcome. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 15(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/09695940701876003.
Brunner, C., Fasca, C., Heinze, J., Honey, M., Light, D., Mandinach, E., & Wexler, D. H. (2005). Linking data and learning: The grow network study. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10, 241–267. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327671espr1003_2.
Carlson, D., Borman, G. D., & Robinson, M. (2011). A multistate district-level cluster randomized trial of the impact of data-driven reform on reading and mathematics achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33, 378–398. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373711412765.
Chien, S. P., Wu, H. K., & Hsu, Y. S. (2014). An investigation of teachers’ beliefs and their use of technology-based assessments. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 198–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.037.
Cohen-Vogel, L., & Harrison, C. (2013). Leading with data: Evidence from the National Center on scaling up effective schools. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 12(2), 122–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2013.792934.
Copland, M. A., Knapp, M. S., & Swinnerton, J. A. (2009). Principal leadership, data, and school improvement. In T. J. Kowalski & T. J. Lasley II (Eds.), Handbook of data-based decision making in education (pp. 153–172). New York, NY: Routledge.
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2008). Attributes of effective formative assessment. https://www.ccsso.org/resource-library/attributes-effective-formative-assessment.
Cumming, J. J., Van Der Kleij, F. M., & Adie, L. (2019). Contesting educational assessment policies in Australia. Journal of Education Policy, 34(6), 836–857.
Curry, K. A., Mwavita, M., Holter, A., & Harris, E. (2016). Getting assessment right at the classroom level: Using formative assessment for decision making. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 28, 89–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-015-9226-5.
Darker, C. D., French, D. P., Longdon, S., Morris, K., & Eves, F. F. (2007). Are beliefs elicited biased by question order? A theory of planned behaviour belief elicitation study about walking in the UK general population. British Journal of Health Psychology, 12(1), 93–110. https://doi-org.proxy.bsu.edu/10.1348/135910706X100458.
Datnow, A., Park, V., Wholstetter, P., & Center for Educational Governance, University of Southern California. (2007). Achieving with data: How high-performing school systems use data to improve instruction for elementary students. http://www.csai-online.com/sites/default/files/resource/imported/AchievingWithData.pdf.
Downs, D. S., & Hausenblas, H. A. (2005). Elicitation studies and the theory of planned behavior: A systematic review of exercise beliefs. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 6(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2003.08.001.
Dunn, K. E., Airola, D. T., Lo, W.-J., & Garrison, M. (2013a). What teachers think about what they can do with data: Development and validation of the data driven decision-making efficacy and anxiety inventory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38(1), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.11.002.
Dunn, K. E., Airola, D. T., Lo, W.-J., & Garrison, M. (2013b). Becoming data driven: The influence of teachers’ sense of efficacy on concerns related to data-driven decision making. The Journal of Experimental Education, 81, 222–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2012.699899.
Firestone, W. A., & González, R. A. (2007). Culture and processes affecting data use in school districts. In P. A. Moss (Ed.), Evidence and decision making (Vol. 106, pp. 132–154). Blackwell Publishing.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior. Psychology Press.
Ford, T. G. (2018). Pointing teachers in the wrong direction: understanding Louisiana elementary teachers’ use of Compass high-stakes teacher evaluation data. Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability, 30, 251–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-018-9280-x.
Fuller, M. B., & Skidmore, S. T. (2014). An exploration of factors influencing institutional cultures of assessment. International Journal of Educational Research, 65, 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2014.01.001
Fushell, M. (2013). A case of teacher opposition to school district assessment and evaluation policy. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 142, 18–32. https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/cjeap/article/view/42844.
Gilgun, J. F. (2005). Qualitative research and family psychology. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(1), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.19.1.40.
Gilgun, J. F. (2009). Qualitative research and family psychology. In J. H. Bray & M. Stanton (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of family psychology (pp. 85–99). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444310238.ch6.
Graham, S., Hebert, M., & Harris, K. R. (2015). Formative assessment and writing. The Elementary School Journal, 115, 523–547. https://doi.org/10.1086/681947.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
Hinde, E. R. (2004). School culture and change: An examination of the effects of school culture on the process of change. Essays in Education, 12, 1–13.
Hoover, N. R., & Abrams, L. M. (2013). Teachers’ instructional use of summative student assessment data. Applied Measurement in Education, 26, 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2013.793187.
Howley, M. D., Howley, A., Henning, J. E., Gilla, M. B., & Weade, G. (2013). Intersecting domains of assessment knowledge: School typologies based on interviews with secondary teachers. Educational Assessment, 18, 26–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2013.761527.
Huffman, D., & Kalnin, J. (2003). Collaborative inquiry to make data-based decisions in schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 569–580. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(03)00054-4.
Indiana Department of Education. (2017). Indiana department of education school & community nutrition programs. https://www.doe.in.gov/nutrition/school-nutrition-programs.
Lucariello, J., Tine, M. T., & Ganley, C. M. (2014). A formative assessment of students’ algebraic variable misconceptions. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 33, 30–41. https://doi-org.proxy.bsu.edu/10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.09.001.
Maier, A., & Indiana Department of Education. (2012). Indiana teacher effectiveness rubric 2.0. http://www.doe.in.gov/sites/default/files/evaluations/rise-rubric-2-0-final.pdf.
Mandinach, E. B. (2012). A perfect time for data use: Using data-driven decision making to inform practice. Educational Psychologist, 47, 71–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.667064.
Mandinach, E. B., & Gummer, E. (2013). A systematic view of implementing data literacy in educator preparation. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 30–37. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12459803.
Marsh, J. A., & Farrell, C. C. (2015). How leaders can support teachers with data-driven decision making. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 43, 269–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143214537229.
McEachan, R., Taylor, N., Harrison, R., Lawton, R., Gardner, P., & Conner, M. (2016). Meta-analysis of the reasoned action approach (RAA) to understanding health behaviors. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 50, 592–612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-016-9798-4.
Means, B., Padilla, C., Gallagher, L., & SRI International. (2010). Use of education data at the local level: From accountability to instructional improvement. https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/use-of-education-data/index.html?exp=2.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (2nd ed.). Jossey Bass.
Morrissette, J. (2011). Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory from the point of view of teachers. McGill Journal of Education, 46(2), 247–265.
Office of Management and Budget. (2000). Standards for defining metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas; Notice. (Federal Register Vol. 65). https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/ruraled/exhibit_a.asp.
Otero, V. K. (2006). Moving beyond the “get it or don’t” conception of formative assessment. Journal of Teacher Education, 57, 247–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487105285963.
Park, V., & Datnow, A. (2009). Co-constructing distributed leadership: District and school connections in data-driven decision making. School Leadership and Management, 29, 477–494. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632430903162541.
Pierce, R., & Chick, H. (2011). Teachers’ intentions to use national literacy and numeracy assessment data: A pilot study. The Australian Educational Researcher, 38, 433–447. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-011-0040-x.
Pizmony-Levy, O., & Woolsey, A. (2017). Politics of education and teachers’ support for high-stakes teacher accountability policies. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 25(87). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.25.2892.
Quinn, D. M. (2020). Experimental evidence on teachers’ racial bias in student evaluation: The role of grading scales. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 42(3), 375–392.
Schifter, C. C., Natarajan, U., Ketelhut, D. J., & Kirchgessner, A. (2014). Data-driven decision making: Facilitating teacher use of student data to inform classroom instruction. Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher Education, 14(4), 419–432. https://citejournal.org/volume-14/issue-4-14/science/data-driven-decision-making-facilitating-teacher-use-of-student-data-to-inform-classroom-instruction.
Schildkamp, K. (2019). Data-based decision-making for school improvement: Research insights and gaps. Educational Research, 61(3), 257–273.
Schildkamp, K., & Poortman, C. (2015). Factors influencing the functioning of data teams. Teachers College Record, 117(4), 1–24. https://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentID=17851.
Steinmetz, H., Knappstein, M., Ajzen, I., Schmidt, P., & Kabst, R. (2016). How effective are behavior change interventions based on the theory of planned behavior? Zeitschrift Für Psychologie, 224, 216–233. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000255.
Sutton, S. (1998). Predicting and explaining intentions and behavior: How well are we doing? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1317–1338. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01679.x.
Trepanier-Street, M. L., McNair, S., & Donegan, M. M. (2001). The views of teachers on assessment: A comparison of lower and upper elementary teachers. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 15, 234–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568540109594963.
Ungar, O. A. (2016). Understanding teachers’ attitude toward educational reforms through metaphors. International Journal of Educational Research, 77, 117–127.
Vanlommel, K., Vanhoof, J., & Van Petegem, P. (2016). Data use by teachers: The impact of motivation, decision-making style, supportive relationships and reflective capacity. Educational Studies, 42, 36–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2016.1148582.
Xu, Y., & Brown, G. T. L. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy in practice: A reconceptualization. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 149–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.010.
Yan, Z. (2014). Predicting teachers’ intentions to implement school-based assessment using the theory of planned behaviour. Educational Research and Evaluation, 20, 83–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2013.877394.
Yan, Z., & Cheng, E. C. K. (2015). Primary teachers’ attitudes, intentions and practices regarding formative assessment. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 128–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.10.002.
Young, V. M., & Kim, D. H. (2010). Using assessments for instructional improvement: A literature review. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 18(19), 1–40. https://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/809.
Young, J. E. J., & Jackman, M. G. A. (2014). Formative assessment in the Grenadian lower secondary school: Teachers’ perceptions, attitudes and practices. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 21, 398–411. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2014.919248.
Zuber, J., & Altrichter, H. (2018). The role of teacher characteristics in an educational standards reform. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 30(2), 183–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-018-9275-7.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix. Focus group protocol
Appendix. Focus group protocol
-
1.
Definition/frequency of behaviors:
-
a.
How do you define formative assessment?
-
b.
What types of formative assessment do you use? How frequently do you use formative assessments? Do you rely on one type more frequently?
-
c.
How do you define DDDM?
-
d.
How often do you conduct DDDM based on these assessments?
-
e.
Can you give me an example of the last time you conducted DDDM based on formative assessments?
-
a.
-
2.
Attitudes:
-
a.
What do you think about conducting DDDM?
-
b.
How do you feel about conducting DDDM?
-
a.
-
3.
Social norms:
-
a.
What individuals or groups approve of you conducting DDDM? Disapprove?
-
b.
What individuals or groups do you think are most likely to conduct DDDM? Least likely?
-
c.
Do people who are important to you think you should conduct DDDM? How often?
-
d.
Do people like you conduct DDDM? How often?
-
a.
-
4.
Perceived behavioral control:
-
a.
How confident are you in your ability to conduct DDDM? (Follow-ups: Mathematically minded? Personality?)
-
b.
Is conducting DDDM something you choose to do?
-
a.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schelling, N., Rubenstein, L.D. Elementary teachers’ perceptions of data-driven decision-making. Educ Asse Eval Acc 33, 317–344 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-021-09356-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-021-09356-w