A Quality Education Process: Improving Student Achievement

owever, to acknowledge that educators at all levels could do a better job of using data is only the first step. The articles that make up this newsletter show that there are almost as many ways of using data as there are people with different interests. Each article is rich in examples of how to use data for decisions involving instruction, alignment, school improvement, and policy development. As I reflect on them, I am struck also by a few cross-cutting themes and underlying assumptions. First, data inform decisions; data do not replace them. One danger in the current environment is that we lose sight of the fact that decisions are judgments about what needs to be done within a particular set of circumstances and in light of a school’s local mission and shared values. For example, if a school discovers that its testing program and curriculum are misaligned, it could embark on one of four possible paths: do nothing, change the curriculum, change the tests, change both. Which path it chooses would depend on its local circumstances and the professional judgments of its staff. The data on misalignment, student achievement, and school demographic make-up inform that decision; but the decision on what to do sti l l requires professional judgment. Second, learning how to use and actually using data well take time and effort. As can be seen in almost every single article in this newsletter, technical knowledge is needed for someone to ensure that the data are relevant to the decisions that must be made and that time is needed to analyze and summarize those data so that they are in a form that can be used. People need to learn how to use data. Third, when gathering information, we should have its uses in mind. There are two dangers here. The first is that data gathering may become an end in itself. I have been at numerous meetings H NCREASINGLY, EDUCATORS AND INTERESTED POLICY MAKERS USE TERMS LIKE “USING