Support for data-driven instruction did not increase teachers' data use or change their instructional practices¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r? · q3
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The intervention did not increase teachers' data use and did not change their instructional practices. → Philip Gleason 2019

Evidence¶

Philip Gleason 2019¶

Philip Gleason, Sarah Crissey, Greg Chojnacki, Marykate Zukiewicz, Tim Silva, Sarah Costelloe, Fran O'Reilly. (2019). Evaluation of Support for Using Student Data to Inform Teachers' Instruction. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/

q3 · i? · causal · r?

Key finding from the random assignment study: "The support for data-driven instruction intervention did not increase teachers’ data use or change their instructional practices." No effect size is printed for this null finding on either outcome.

"The support for data-driven instruction intervention did not increase teachers’ data use or change their instructional practices."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Support for data-driven instruction did not increase key data-related activities despite additional resources and emphasis — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• In the data-driven instruction evaluation, most aspects of the intervention were implemented as planned — related
• Teachers used ASSISTments reports to adjust instruction and make problem review more frequent, targeted, and data driven — reports the opposite
• Districts with data systems in place still face challenges in the strategic use of data — related