Data in Education
What’s your
take on big data and decision-making?
Photo credit: Foter.com |
Mine ranges from a very humane appeal, courtesy
of Etlinger (2015) for the need to analyze data critically, to a call for
appropriateness and validity, thanks to Gill, Borden & Halgren (2014) to
the traps in decision-making, issued by Hammond, Keeney and Raiffa (1998); and
still pass by an appeal for DDDM (Data-Driven Decision Making) to form teaching
professionals for an informed instruction supplied by Mandinach (2012).
The point
made about data being useless if not carefully analyzed in a given setting with
explicit understanding and preparedness seems uncontroversial. After all,
numbers can be anything to anyone depending of the context in which they occur
as numbers do not, and will not, mean something if deprived from the obvious
but often times easily forgotten idea that they are translated and related to
students that we have the power and the responsibility to form and inform as
educators.
Because the
human being is unique as unique are our brains (Principle 1 in the Mind, Brain
and Education science, according to OECD 2002, 2007(a), 2007(b);
Tokuhama-Espinosa, 2008, 2010, 2014), then one cannot help but be aware and
wary of any kind of collective quest to find a denominator and a remedy for
instruction that caters to all.
In Education
nowadays, there is not a one-size-fits-all approach hence the force and
penetration among teachers that differentiation holds since its inception with
the foundational work by Tomlinson (1999). The very position that Finland holds
today not only in successful standards for achievement but also in instruction
based on differentiation bears data rich proof (Hancock & Conway, 2011;
Shalberg, 2007; Tung, 2012) to the fact that it is not by amassing data that
education professionals will address the need for a better outcome, but rather
by looking at and addressing the diverse needs in the classroom, schools,
districts, states and nations. And those needs fawn out to involve students and
teachers for they are the change agents that spur spiraling upwards or
downwards cycles in the learning process. Investing in them is proving to be
the surer path for an improved result in student achievement rates (Fullan,
Rincon-Gallardo, & Hargreaves, 2015).
The same need
that Mandinach (2012) desperately sees as missing in teacher formation, i.e.,
data literacy, could be better catered for if educational psychologists were
left with the burden of dealing with data, thus leaving teacher’s pre- and
in-service formation for the development of the human aspect that delves into
the intricate and complex understanding of human structural functioning and
developmental stages.
Dealing
pro-actively with data research that truly informs to form (or reform) is the
issue at stake then. For that to occur, education stakeholders have to take steps
to make sure that data gathered are relevant, relatable and informative to make
sure that all involved parties know where they are leaving from and where they
should be heading to.
And once again: what's your take on Data and Education?
References
Etlinger, S. (2014, September 1). “What do we do
with all this big data?” [TED Talk] Retrieved on 01/13/2015 from http://www.ted.com/talks/susan_etlinger_what_do_we_do_with_all_this_big_data?language=en
Fullan, M., Rincon-Gallardo, S., & Hargreaves,
A. (2015). Professional capital as accountability. Education Policy Analysis
Archives, 23(15). http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v23.1998.
Gill, B., Borden, B. C., & Hallgren, K. (2014).
A conceptual framework for data-driven decision making. Princeton, NJ:
Mathematica Policy Research.
Hancock, L. and Conway, S. (2011). “Why are
Finland’s Schools Successful?” Smithsonian Magazine [online]. Retrieved on
06/01/2017 from http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/why-are-finlands-schools-successful-49859555/
Hammond, J. S., Keeney, R. L., Raiffa, H. (1998).
The hidden traps in decision making. Harvard Business Review,
September-October 1998: 47-58.
Mandinach, E. (2012). A perfect time for data use:
Using data driven decision-making to inform practice. Educational
Psychologist, 47(2), 71-85.
Tung, S. (2012). “How the Finnish school system
outshines U.S. education”. Stanford News [online]. Retrieved on 06/01/2017 from
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2012/january/finnish-schools-reform-012012.html
OECD. (2002). Understanding the brain: Towards a
New Learning Science. Paris: OECD
OECD. (2007a). The Brain and Learning.
Paris: OECD
OECD. (2007b). Understanding the brain: The
birth of a learning science. Paris: OECD
Rohrer, D., & Pashler, H. (2012). Learning
Styles: Where's the Evidence? Online Submission, 46(7), 634-635.
Sahlberg, P. (2007). Education policies for raising
student learning: The Finnish approach. Journal of Education Policy, 22(2),
147-171.
Tokuhama-Espinosa, T. (2008). The new
science of teaching and learning: Using the best of mind, brain, and education
science in the classroom. Teachers College Press.
Tokuhama-Espinosa, T. (2010). Mind, brain,
and education science: A comprehensive guide to the new brain-based teaching.
WW Norton & Company.
Tokuhama-Espinosa, T. (2014). Making
classrooms better: 50 practical applications of mind, brain, and education
science. WW Norton & Company.
Tomlinson, C. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the
needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Comments
Post a Comment