Jennifer Wickersham

Assignment: Multiple Measures by Victoria Bernhardt

ED8010

The complex task of identifying data to support continuous school improvement and

supporting student achievement involves analysis of multiple data points. What is the source of

these data points? Historically speaking, state and federal entities have required that multiple

sources of data are considered in school improvement. However, the multiple sources most

educators consider are all assessment based, such as state and local testing. Bernhardt suggests

that 50% of predicted student outcomes stem from factors other than assessments.

Bernhardt defines multiple measures in four areas: demographics, perceptions, student

learning, and school processes. Individually each area of measure paints a useful broad picture

of a school’s impact on student achievement. Overlapping areas of measure allows schools to

target specific trends, evaluate practices, and prioritize need.

Demographic data provides important background information about students.

Information such as age, gender, race, grade level, attendance patterns, and socioeconomic status

is necessary to understand. Demographic data is largely out of the control of the school staff.

Yet, when disaggregated, this data can assist in describing the make-up of the school within the

larger system.

Perceptions provide information about what stakeholders think about the environment.

This data can be gained formally and informally. Examples of data collection tools are surveys,

interviews, observations, and inventories. This data is important to inform members of the school

to know what to do to improve, and provide options that may not have been considered.

1
 Student learning refers to the assessment data that is heavily relied upon in a traditional

school improvement process. While schools may use multiple assessments to measure student

achievement, the assessment data is often interpreted independently and simply reports results.

Often times, schools react to the results rather than use the information in conjunction with other

measures.

School processes measure what schools are doing to impact school improvement results.

Teaching strategies, programs, and practices are examples of school processes. Bernhardt

explains that this is the most difficult for teachers to define. Without specific focus and

documentation, school improvement is left without data to support why schools “do what they

do.”

Independent of each other, the four measures provide a broad interpretation and isolated

analysis. When the four measures are overlapping and interrelated, the measures become more

targeted and specific. This enables schools to ultimately predict best practices to meet the needs

of all learners within the system. The following example follows the process from isolation of

measures to intersection.

A school may use state test scores over one school year to report result, such as “How did

Goodall Middle School score on the state test?” Goodall staff may use the data from several

years of the same test to identify trends. This is using one measure, student learning.

Overlapping student test results (student learning) with demographic data narrows the focus. In

this case it may be asking the question, “Do students who have been with the district since

kindergarten score higher on eighth grade state testing?”, or “Does student attendance have a

correlation to proficiency levels on state tests?” The narrowed focus allows for more specific

questions to be asked, and inform school improvement decisions. Naturally, as more measures

2
are overlapped, the more specific the focus. Goodall Middle School may want to determine if

students with a low socioeconomic status perceive that they have few connections with adults in

the school, and if their M-STEP proficiency reflect this perception. The interconnected nature of

this question does more than paint a picture of the school, it dives deep into what is driving

student achievement, or lack thereof. This type of data analysis is vital to truly predict what

students need. Bernhardt emphasizes the importance of overlapping and connecting all four

measures over time in order to predict if the school improvement strategies, actions, and

instructional practices will benefit ALL students.

In my personal experiences, I believe that school improvement has always placed an

emphasis on multiple measures of student learning. However, time and time again, our work

stops here. We looking at results, and try to change the results with the students that we have.

We are trained and encouraged to overlap at least two measures, such as demographics and

students learning, but more often than not, the focus lies on the first single measure.

When working with building Title 1 coordinators as part of my internship project, I

realize that looking at just results tells us very little. It demonstrates a fact. Trend data shows a

snapshot of results over time. But this does not even begin to answer “why” and “how”

questions. Due to the isolated nature of this data analysis, it is impossible to do anything but

speculate answers to those questions. The key is to dive deep into data by asking the right

questions. How we come to developing those questions is reliant upon interconnecting data

points from demographics, perceptions, student learning, and school processes. I plan to work

closely with the school improvement coordinators and their teams to begin the process of

overlapping measures in a purposeful and informative way.

3
 Bernhardt’s “Multiple Measures of Data” graphic presents many opportunities to go

beyond stating facts and making assumptions. The graphic aides in the correlation of multiple

factors that lead to our decisions as educators. The overall target in best practices is to meet the

needs of ALL learners. Without approaching data differently, asking probing questions that are

intentional and focused, we will not be able to reach that target. It is my plan to use this graphic

as part of professional development with building Title 1 coordinators and staff. I am inspired to

take the opportunity to have more conversations about data that are more meaningful,

purposeful, and connected in my district’s Title 1 school improvement journey.