Building Evidence-Based Cultures to Support Student Outcomes

• In Event: Reculturing Schooling: Strategies and Consequences

Abstract

Under ESGA each Ontario district had considerable freedom in the design and implementation of its reform initiatives. Nonetheless, there was substantial consistency in their strategies, though tactics differed. This paper focuses on one such consistency: the use of data to inform decisions about instructional improvement for special needs and other at-risk learners. The principal objective is to examine the cultural shifts relating to data use, elaborating on strategies, successes and ramifications.

The rationale for formative assessment is that relevant and timely data can help educators make better pedagogical decisions. In practice, a number of issues arise including the choice of instruments, time for administration, and proper interpretation of the results. Educators must also have the training and experience to use the data effectively to inform their pedagogy and to successfully implement their strategies in the classroom setting. However, as the conference theme suggests, to know is not enough. It is only when data are combined with other forms of evidence and employed by highly-functioning professional learning communities that data-driven practices become evidence-informed cultures (Hargreaves and Shirley 2009). This necessitates a shift in the culture of the school that has broader implications for students, educators and other professional staff.

Relying on a mixed methods approach, the research reported here capitalized on multiple sources of evidence, including on-site interviews of district staff, school administrators, teachers and other educational support staff. Interview data were supplemented by findings from a web-based survey of school staff, as well as examination of archival data. Among the more pertinent findings are:

-Most districts purchased access to standardized instruments focused on specific pedagogical needs and the training to use the data appropriately.

-Many districts experienced major shifts in data use, at least in some schools. These schools nurtured the development of well-functioning professional learning communities for which effective data use became integral to pedagogical practice. Principal leadership was critical to success.

-Comprehensive assessment was a necessary but not sufficient condition for successful implementation of differentiated instruction.

-In other districts, strategic data use was largely confined to the central office. District and school administrators asserted the importance of data, but teachers rarely brought this up during interviews.

-In general, survey respondents across the districts were more likely to examine student data since the introduction of ESGA. They also agreed that their schools were making better use of data to guide instruction and that students with special needs were benefitting from these practices. They noted the need for continuing professional development.

-The development of a data culture was part of a broader cultural evolution toward greater inclusion of previously marginalized students, as well as the movement toward the mainstream of faculty and professionals traditionally located at the periphery. The evolution continued even after central funding ceased.

The significance of this study lies in its detailed examination in ten heterogeneous districts of shifts in the culture of data usage as part of wider, locally designed reform initiatives specifically targeting special needs and other at-risk students.

Authors

• Henry I. Braun, Boston College

• Beth Morton, Boston College