Data, Numbers and Accountability: The Complexity, Nature and Effects of Data use in Schools

ABSTRACT

This article draws upon research in one school in Queensland, Australia, to explore how the push to data influences teacher work and subsequent student learning. This ‘rise of data’, often oriented towards ‘external’ and performative processes of accountability, exhibits itself in many ways, but is particularly evident in teachers’ engagement with various forms of regionally and centrally sanctioned, and often standardized, measures of attainment, typically expressed in numbers. Drawing upon the sociology of numbers, and Pierre Bourdieu’s concepts of ‘field’, ‘habitus’ and ‘capital’, the research shows how the emphasis upon data collection reveals a ‘field of schooling practices’ characterized by concerns about collecting, analysing and improving numeric data; standardized and centrally sanctioned data as forms of capital of increasing value; and a teaching disposition/habitus characterized by constant monitoring of student performance through virtual and physical data bases. The research reveals how the ‘logics’ of schooling may be in danger of being dominated by more centralized, standardized forms of numeric data for performative accountability purposes, even as more educative logics are evident.

Keywords:

• data use
• sociology of numbers
• Bourdieu
• standardized testing

Notes

¹ While PISA is conducted by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and focuses on a sample of 15-year-old students’ reading, mathematics and science capacity, the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) conducts TIMSS and PIRLS tests of 4th and 8th grade students’ reading, mathematics and science capacity. NAPLAN is conducted in years 3, 5, 7 and 9, and involves all students in these grades in all schools in Australia. The IEA assessments have been undertaken for longer than the OECD tests, but have not received the same degree of attention as the latter. Consequently, there is a significantly stronger focus upon the PISA tests as markers of global educational governance.

² This goal was avidly supported by former Prime Minister Julia Gillard in 2012 as part of a broader ‘education revolution’ endorsed by the federal government. 2012 PIRLS results revealed 21 countries outperforming Australia in primary school reading, 17 countries in mathematics and 18 countries in science (Thomson, 2012).

³ These data were collected using the ‘PM Benchmark’ levelled reading series, graded from nought to 30.

⁴ The ‘running record’ data are standardized measures of students’ reading performance and are typically collected using the PM Benchmark books.

⁵ A shorthand reference to PM Benchmarks.

⁶ A reference to answering multiple choice questions by ‘colouring in’ a response on the answer sheet of standardized tests (particularly NAPLAN and PAT tests).

⁷ A reference to school and regional administrators.

⁸ The 3-year levels, up to the end of 2014 at which formal NAPLAN tests are undertaken in primary schools in Australia. (Year 7 was moved to secondary schools in Queensland in 2015.)

⁹ A reference to poor performances in NAPLAN in 2008 in the school, region and Queensland as a whole.

¹⁰ The test is held over three days in May each year.

¹¹ School and regional administrators.

¹² The Australian school year begins in late January, and finishes in mid-December. NAPLAN tests are typically undertaken in mid-May.

¹³ A reference to tests undertaken at the beginning and end of each 5-week unit of work as a way to show evidence of student growth/learning.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Australian Research Council [grant number DE120100086].