The Pseudoscience of Data in Education

1.17.11 By Neema Avashia

In medicine, when doctors collect data, they use it to make decisions. You see that patient X has a certain white blood cell count, or a certain oxygen level, or particular points of concern on an ultrasound, and you make decisions accordingly. Most of the time, those decisions are field-tested, with clear evidence that they yield results. Unless the data is particularly confounding, or unless the patient presents a condition that is extremely rare, there is a set series of actions that doctors take based on the data they collect. And generally, those decisions result in patients getting better.

The same cannot be said for the way we use data in education right now. I work at a school where we have implemented a data collection system that gives teachers predictive data on MCAS performance frequently. Kids keep taking tests to gather more and more data. Teachers keep staring at the data and floundering around trying to figure out different ways to teach the things that kids obviously are not grasping. PD consists of staring at data and making intervention plans, but there is no skill-building for teachers that happens in between. Not once have I heard anyone say, “You know what—there’s a really effective way of teaching students how to identify main ideas. Let’s learn that strategy, implement it, and then assess again.”

The only science that I see play out in school is the science of guilt. “Do better.” “Work harder.” Yet as my favorite BTR professor Ann Stern would say, there is a tremendous difference between simply working harder, and actually working smarter. Where is the professional development that supports teachers in working smarter? Do we really believe that teachers riddled with guilt over not doing enough to move kids, yet not equipped with better strategies, are going to effectively help kids grow? I hear first year teachers at my school say, “I taught it the best way I knew how the first time I taught it. Now what am I supposed to do?” Guilt doesn’t motivate, it paralyzes. And loads of data unaccompanied by any professional development, by any support for people who are working incredibly hard, and are disheartened every time they continue to see poor results, isn’t going to lead to improved teacher or student performance. It leads to a culture of over-testing kids, and then blaming teachers for the results.

We are teaching in an age of data without development, and data without clear decision-making. And If we think that simply collecting and staring at data in multiple meetings is going to yield better results, we are truly tripping.