When first reading the introductions in Translating Data to Information to Improve Teaching and Learning (Bernhardt, 2007) I was a little skeptical when I saw that the praising forward was written by the head of TerraData, which works directly with the author and stands to indirectly benefit from the sale of the book (Bernhardt, 2007, xiii).
In her book, Bernhardt (2007) has given a well described map for the three major types of management systems that are most common in K-12 schools (Bernhardt, 2007). To begin, Bernhardt’s (2007) description of a Student Information System is detailed as to the many aspects and option SIS’s can offer a school community. Personally speaking, our school started to use a SIS two years ago and was unable to afford the other options such as reports cards and other information management options. In contrast, we continue to send our lunch count down by paper every day.
After reading the article from Wyman (2005) and Kadel (2010, the details of a curriculum/instruction/assessment management tool was the most intriguing to read about (Wyman, 2005)(Kadel,2010)(Bernhardt, 2007). Bernhardt’s (2007) precise picture of the capabilities of this type of system triggered thoughts of efficiency for myself and other staff, especially time saved at the beginning of the year when student placement assessments are the heaviest (Bernhardt, 2007). According to figure 2.3 (Bernhardt, 2007) , professional learning can be an option in some curriculum/instruction/assessment management tools. I am wondering to what extent this is delivered and in what areas.
I use a very low-tech version of this type of system with my reading series. Students are given a paper based assessment at the beginning of the year, identifying specific strengths and weaknesses in literacy skills. My only dislike of this assessment is that is formatted in multiple “guess” or choice. I then give them tests throughout the year, keeping a paper trail in a binder. Using a curriculum/instruction/assessment management system would save me the endless hours and copies that I go through every two weeks. It would also save me the time at the beginning of the year; just one of the benefits that Kadel (2010) points to in his article Data-Driven Decision Making; Not Just a Buzz Word (Kadel, 2010) In addition, and perhaps most importantly, it would give me more solid information to present to parents when conferencing about their child’s development. A curriculum/instruction/assessment tool sounds ideal, but while I was reading I could not help think of the cost and the argument I need to start building for grants to put a system like this into place and have it financially maintained for the next ten years.
As I learned in the study from Wayman (2005), and again from Bernhardt (2007) the three options, or tiers, of management systems are currently unable to be housed at one place (Wayman, 2005)(Bernhardt, 2007). Both authors speak of the needs of school to have all their information in one place. However, from the perspective of safety and security, I would think not having the information integrated is a good idea. This way, if one management system is lost, not all information needs to be rebuilt. In figurative terms, not all the eggs are in one information basket.
Continuing with Wayman’s (2005) standpoint that information needs to be successfully translatable by teachers, Bernhardt (2007) shows the option of the dashboard visual by one management system (Wayman, 2005)(Bernhardt, 2007, 16). Though the visual makes the information easier to read by teachers, it does not necessarily make it easier to decode and apply into the classroom environment. This brings both authors back to the point that proper professional development needs to be implemented when one of these management tools are put into place (Wayman, 2005).
Bernhardt (2007) brings the chapter to a close quite perfectly when she gives an overview of the steps that need to be taken to by a district to reflect, decide and then implement all three systems (Bernhardt, 2007). Bernhardt (2007) intelligently, but subtly, extinguishes the reader’s enthusiasm to put all three systems into place at once and reminds the reader to be responsible by including various members of the learning community when choosing a system that is best (Bernhadt, 2007).
As Bernhardt has suggested for smaller, less economic steady schools we service our SIS through a larger district in the area and use what we can afford. From what I understand, we are currently looking at the possibility of a curriculum/instruction/assessment management system that works cooperatively with Study Island to monitor student progress and sharing this with a neighboring school.
Overall, I thought this chapter was a concise introduction for the novice. Bernhardt’s (2007) in depth outline of these three types of management systems encouraged a lot of personal reflections of what our school currently does and how we could be using these systems to improve teaching as well as decreasing the time staff spends their time throughout making “hunch”decisions (Bernhardt, 2007, 3). Bernhardt’s (2007) tables of information about each system compliments the visual examples from Kendal’s (2010) overview (Bernhardt, 2007)(Kadel, 2010). Kadel (2010) and Bernhardt (2007) both look at the benefit of efficiency, a part of technology integration that I have always presented when introducing each new technology into our school (Kadel, 2010)(Bernhardt, 2007). Enjoying the content in this chapter and wanting to read more was another affirmation that I am in the correct program and chose the right class.
Resources:
Bernhardt, V. L. (2007). Translating data into information to improve teaching and learning . Larchmont, NY: Eye On Education. Retrieved online http://bit.ly/kB73Sr
Kadel, R. (May 2010).“Data Driven Decision Making- Not Just a Buzz Word” Learning & Leading with Technology, Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov:80/PDFS/EJ886390.pdf
Wayman, Jeffrey. "Involving Teachers in Data-Driven Decision Making: Using Computer Data
Systems to Support Teacher Inquiry and Reflection." Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR) 10.3 (2005): 295-308. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/YRRsD
