By: Chris Scorer FCCT, MA, BA, PGCE, CELTA
Nobody likes letting go, but if done properly, it can be both liberating and empowering. This applies to school data as much as it applies to other areas of our work or life.
Data can be gold in the classroom, but it is difficult to master, and there are risks. Fryer (2017) undertook a longitudinal study and established that perhaps the greatest indicator of life chances was the use of baseline tests in schools coupled with focused interventions. There are few truly longitudinal studies on such things, so Fryer may be open to questioning the details, but the details don’t matter – the concept is sound, data is powerful, and when used properly, it can shape lives for the better.
A school’s data landscape has often grown organically and not strategically; previous post holders used a particular assessment, and that has carried on to sidestep the ruffling of feathers. Different staff have responsibilities for different areas of the school – the pastoral and academic split is an obvious example – where the data is collected and may be used, but it is not coherent or joined up. Arguably, if you persist with an organic data landscape, you will mitigate buy-in, and teachers will question the value or purpose, privately, if not publicly. So perhaps stage one is to review your data landscape and focus on making it coherent, defining your purpose and selling both of those ideas to staff before you begin.
Data-led versus data-driven
Many schools are effective data collectors but often reluctant users, and this stems from who needs to use the data for it to be effective. Where there is embedded use, this often falls short of embedded engagement. There is a world of difference between being data-led and data-driven. For data to generate those life chances that we have already mentioned, arguably, we need to move beyond compliance to something close to genuine buy-in by teachers and maybe even children and parents.
Teacher buy-in is essential.
Let’s start with teachers. Why? Teachers are the agents of delivery; they work with the children directly. If you want to embed good data practice in your school, then how can that happen without the teachers having access and expertise? Schools often have a data gatekeeper, and that gatekeeper is likely conversant with the management and manipulation of assessment data in their school’s context. Is your gatekeeper good at sharing? Few are. It may be that your gatekeeper or data lead has reservations about sharing data in anything other than a very controlled fashion, perhaps with good reason. A corrupted spreadsheet is time-consuming and poor judgement around how to respond to assessment data can create anything from a stand-alone parental complaint through to a social media storm – I have personally had to manage the anxiety of parents as it has grown from an ill-placed comment or two on WeChat. Neither of these situations are easy to resolve.
While there is much in the way of exemplary practice around data sharing, some schools, many even, settle into an impasse – very limited data sharing and very limited data use. As a result, there is very little impact on the students’ outcomes. This is a huge missed opportunity and arguably something we should not accept as educators. Every child matters, every child deserves the best, and every child has needs that should be met. as educators, we are duty-bound to do the very best we can every day.
Exploration
Steve Munby (2019) talks about the difference between delegation and distributed leadership, the former being instructional and the latter being the passing of ownership. His book, Imperfect Leadership, is all about the compromises that are inherent in effective leadership. He argues that for buy-in and engagement with anything, leadership must be distributed and where you delegate instead, you may see compliance, but rarely will you see genuine buy-in. To embed data use in your school, your teachers need to see the value of the data and have the chance to explore the meaning in an environment that doesn’t make them anxious. This is no different to how we work with children in our classes. We look for ways to give them safe spaces to explore and discuss without fear of humiliation. We accept mistakes and perhaps even celebrate them as learning experiences.
Munby talks at length about how distributed leadership will inevitably lead to errors and mistakes and argues in favour of them, suggesting that leadership in schools is duty bound to create that same safe space you might create for your students in class. He argues that as leaders, we should mitigate the risks and safeguard against serious consequences without locking down the opportunity for ownership of judgement and action amongst teachers.
The journey to autonomy and mastery
Libby Nicholas and John West-Burnham (2018) discuss how you can move staff from controlled and compliant behaviour to autonomy and mastery. There is a phase of collaboration, and collaboration is a way to engage without pressure, a way to educate without anxiety and a way to ensure staff are able to reflect and grow away from the gaze of those they are immediately accountable to, in short – a trust-based development model. He argues that it is only through this process that you can really expect mastery to be embedded in your organisation.
I have seen schools create dialogue spaces around multiple areas of endeavour, a dialogue space is where staff are given something to review or work with and given parameters away from their school’s accountability processes. This is where your gatekeeper can start sharing – but they may need encouragement.
Dialogue space and evolution
Choose some low-stakes assessment data, some reports, or something similar, and get staff to buddy up to discuss how they view the data. Buy cake if need be, allow the staff to choose their own buddies, use a time slot where they will be grateful for the time and let them loose. Don’t skimp on the cake; it would be a false economy. This process creates a sense of ownership which allows staff to ask silly questions, to confirm or question their own understanding and to engage with assessment data at a level they are comfortable with. If you need structure here, some loose questions to answer or even topics for discussion will suffice. Then, and only then, should you move to something more formal.
Some training around the data you collect is a good next step. Here, you might see a dialogue grow where teachers begin to request access to further assessment data or further training. This dialogue is healthy, and it would be remiss to arbitrarily deny these requests. Find a way to share safely, find a way to educate staff on the safe and effective use of assessment data, what it can and can’t do, what rules should be followed, and how to contextualise the data they see and use it to support their professional judgement. You can even use this as a process to elicit feedback on how your school’s data landscape should be designed. The opportunity for input should help generate buy-in and ownership.
This process of collaboration should not be brief and it should be carefully planned, accounting for the profile of your staff, their workload and perhaps even parental appetite for information.
All of this sounds very easy, it isn’t. As a consultant, I no longer face the daily turbulence of teaching or school leadership. I understand very well that the headwinds faced by school leaders on any given day can be arduous and inconvenient and rarely give you a free pass to universal engagement. But, this is where I come back to Steve Munby. Imperfect is fine, those headwinds are easier to push against when you are pushing together and pushing the same direction. Direction is more important than where you are, and people will move at different speeds, and this is fine. The real gold comes when you engage parents in that too, then you will indeed move mountains, but that is for another day…
Bibliography:
Fryer, R.G., Jr (2017)
Handbook of Economic Field Experiments
North-Holland
Volume 2
Chapter 2 – The Production of Human Capital in Developed Countries: Evidence From 196 Randomized Field Experiments
Editor(s): Abhijit Vinayak Banerjee, Esther Duflo
ISBN 9780444640116
Munby, S, (2019)
Imperfect Leadership
Crown Publishing
ISBN 9781785834110
Nicholas, L & West-Burnham, J (2018)
Understanding Leadership: Challenges and Reflections
Crown House Publishing Limited
ISBN 978-178583026-6
Chris Scorer FCCT, MA, BA, PGCE, CELTA
Chris is an Education Consultant working with most of the major school groups around the world, including Nord Anglia Education, Wellington Group, Dulwich, GIIS, International Schools Partnership, FOBISIA, English Schools Foundation and others. Chris is a regular on the speaking circuit, having recently spoken at the FOBISIA Leadership Conference 2023 and Wellington’s Festival of Education (China) 2024 and he has appeared on BBC Radio, and most recently, he has guested on the Global Leaders’ Education Podcast – a worldwide podcast to discuss best practice in the world of education leadership. Chris was awarded a Fellowship of the Chartered College of Teaching for his contribution to the wider debates in education in 2024. He previously worked as a teacher, Head of Department, Academic Head and Pastoral Head. While Chris has worked in the UK, most of his career has been overseas. Chris has an MA in Educational Research from Durham University, where his focus was the efficacy of SEND teacher training. Chris’ work and philosophy always put the individual at the heart of everything he does and says. Chris has recently joined CENTURY Tech as their International Schools Manager for Asia and Oceania.
