Facing the Facts About Your Data

Jacobs Elementary began implementing data steps 1-3 and accomplished a 14% increase (41% to 55%) in the number of math proficient students in just 1 year. Naturally, they felt good about the results that they were able to achieve in a short amount of time. 

The following year, the state changed the state math assessment. This change occurred over 2 years. In year 1, new standards embedded items, and in year 2, a full new test with all standard embedded items. 

Standard embedded items on the new assessment were rigorous. It required more thinking and a deeper understanding of the math standards from the student. This test went from one correct answer to answers where there was more than one way to solve the problem. Some of the questions were more about the strategy and how they arrived at the solution vs. the answer to the problem.

After the changes in the state math assessment, they dropped from 55% to 43%. It was a drop, but they were not worried about it. In fact, they felt good that they were still above the 41% baseline from a year ago. Instead of implementing adjustments, they blamed the new questions and decided that 43% was good enough with all the new changes.

The positive data they initially had held them back from improving their system. They did not face the fact that the data dropped significantly. They kept doing what they had always done and didn't change their approach.

Then in the next year, the overall Math performance as a school plummeted from 43% to 18%. This time, they had no choice but to own the data and face the facts of their current reality. 

Many schools that I have helped achieve consistent results by facing the facts in their data. I am always saying that data is an integral tool in developing and implementing the right strategies. Unless you can accept what the results are, you won’t be able to move forward.

Initially, this may require some growing pains since perceptions might be different from the truth.  These instances are being revealed by data and can sometimes be hard to accept. However, once a safe data culture is established, where everyone welcomes the data results, real growth and achievement can occur. 

But how can we establish that data culture if our current data shows that our student achievement results do not look good? If you’re a school leader in this situation, it can be hard to motivate teachers with negative results. Encouraging others to accept a reality that is not in their favor is a daunting task. 

Your task as the leader is to lead your teachers and staff with this data in such a way as to not demotivate them. One of the biggest mistakes leaders make is to hold on to false hope that the school is making an impact. Then when the test results arrive, they are crushed by solid evidence that they are on the contrary. This is one of the single most demotivating actions you can take.

Leadership is about creating a climate where the truth is heard, and the brutal facts are confronted. Staff may not like what they see in the data, but when a positive data culture exists, they also know they can prevail and can change the results. This gives tremendous opportunity to grow and do something about the data to see better results. 

A school data culture that encourages questions, conversations, and future planning will be much more successful than a culture where teachers tiptoe around an emotional leader. The focus is on the data and what we can do about it for students vs. how we feel. 

The reality is that if your students are not achieving results, your teachers already know something is wrong. The problem comes when teachers feel powerless to change it. They may have an idea but cannot identify the problem or see the root cause. If this happens, they will be in a position where they know something is wrong but can’t do anything to change it. 

Most of the time, this will lead to them blaming the test or students for poor performance. Simply because the problem is not properly identified due to lack of data ownership. However, if they have the data and are taught how to identify the root cause in a safe environment, they will be able to have a more accurate approach to solving the problem. When there is no data ownership from the staff, then there is a need to blame something or someone else.

“All good-to-great companies began the process of finding a path to greatness by confronting the brutal facts and their current reality.” 

Jim Collins, Good to Great

In Good to Great by Jim Collins (Book reference: Harper Collins Publisher, Inc., 2001, first edition) shares that creating a climate where the truth is heard involves four basic practices:

1. Lead with questions, not answers. 
2. Engage in dialogue and debate, not coercion.
3. Conduct autopsies, without blame.
4. Build “red flag” mechanisms. 

What does this mean for you in a school?

First and foremost, realize that “All data are good data! Why? Because now you know!” Repeat this often. Everyone should feel safe when discussing the data, especially when it is not as good as they would like. 

School leaders are meant to guide the teachers and staff, but it doesn’t mean that all of the answers should come from the leader. There is also a time in which teachers and staff members should share their opinions. This will help to develop a better data-driven strategy.

One way to assist this process is to focus on questions surrounding well-organized, easy-to-interpret data (your data profile). Using your data profile, focus your questions that can help everyone understand the data. These questions are something that can be used to start the conversations that will lead to true solutions. This is the question that I would suggest you use to start strategy/data meetings.

Are we getting the results we want?

This can help identify what’s working and what’s not. In terms of digging deeper, one thing I’ve always suggested is to ask a lot of “why” questions. The more specific your questions are, the better details you can gather.

• Why is this step in our strategy not working?
• Why are the actual results different from the expected ones?

If your results are low, there are times when your staff won’t believe they can make a difference. In this case, it might be helpful to analyze the data of another school or grade level where success is observed. It is especially helpful when the data set is from students with similar demographics.

I have seen this multiple times in a school data meeting. When a grade-level team is achieving results, the other teachers want to know and ask, “What did you do?”. Focusing dialogue on positive data can help transition to the more challenging data when it creates and fosters an attitude of, “I can do this.” 

When the focus is on the data and why things are occurring, the fear of hidden agendas vanishes, and the data facts show up. Data facts are just statements in the data. No ill feelings, no judgements, just statements about our current reality. When teachers can own the data, school leaders can enter a real dialogue and uncover deeper causes for their results. 

Identify Issues without Blaming

When reviewing data, it is important to never assign blame. Do not place the blame on teachers, students, parents, the community or even the test. The truth cannot be heard in a culture focused on blame. Instead, it is important to look for understanding. This can be done by asking questions about what we see. 

For example: Data fact: 76% of our 4th grade students failed the Math test.

• Who are the failing students? 
• Who are the students who passed?

For each of the above groups, ask:

• What strategies/standards did they pass on the Math test? 
• What strategies/standards did they miss on the Math test? 

Follow up with:

• Why do you think 76% failed the math test? What standards were missing for them?
• Why do you think 24% succeeded on the math test? What standards were in place for them?

The focus is on the standards and what we need to teach vs. blaming teachers or students for the results.

Jacobs Elementary began to face the facts in their data. It took them 2 years to create a safe data culture where truth could be heard and discussed. During this time, they saw that their results weren’t improving. However, because they stuck with the data, they were able to get to the root cause of the problem. They admitted that they did not know how to teach the new math standards and asked for help.

The principal provided training and materials to support the staff. They began to implement teaching solutions to address the complexity of the standards and help students process the Math Strategies. They increased their classroom rigor and regularly reviewed the student assessment results.

After data ownership took hold, math proficiency doubled from 14% to 28%. They also moved students out of the minimally proficient level (bottom level) to partially proficient (level just below proficiency). Even though not all students achieved proficiency, they received an adjusted proficiency score of 45%.  This was one of the highest amounts of growth in the district in Math.

They did not want to stop there and started looking at their data by 4 levels of students addressing student needs at each level. They are well on their way to continued results each year. It all began with Facing the Facts in their data!

*School name is fictionalized. School staff and the results are real.

If you are interested in more information on how to create data ownership with negative results you can have a FREE consultation call with me.  Fill in the Contact Form Link: https://debradurma.com/contact-us Type in “Yes” for “Are you Interested in STAR Leadership Data Solutions?” You will receive a follow-up email with the next step to schedule a phone call to discuss your needs and questions.