4 Reasons for Public School Districts to Invest in Local Research

The relationship between data and research is clear to most people. The vast majority of professions rely on research and the data it produces to guide decisions that can make the difference between success and failure, especially in businesses that are subject to competitive market forces. It is precisely the lack of competition that for many years characterized the operation of public school districts and may have resulted in a general disdain for conducting research and a disinterest in developing sources of data at the local, district level.

With the advent of charter schools approximately 25 years ago, and with a renewed focus on standardized test data as a measure, fairly or unfairly, as to the success of public school districts, education has undergone a fundamental shift in its relationship with data. It is now common for parents and community members to review data published in newspapers, magazines, and online that purport to rank schools and districts on a variety of indicators.

The rationale for this scenario often involves the concept of competition as a motivation for improvement, tacitly implying that educators weren’t trying hard enough because they had little competition. This fundamental absurdity gained momentum when the only data typically available on schools and districts were derived not locally but on a statewide or national scale. America’s embrace of standardized test scores and the carrot and stick model for school improvement that it spawned was a basic premise of NCLB during the George W. Bush presidency and was amplified by RTTT during the Obama presidency. 

1. New federal legislation as a catalyst for change. 
ESSA, the successor to past legislation on the governance of public schools, provides some hope that things are changing for the better, especially in the area of assessment. As implementation details of the new law emerge, educators are anticipating the likelihood of more freedom to assess learning with multiple measures designed at the local level and approved at the state level. As the next few months and years unfold, research and data conducted and collected locally will likely supplant the largely failed attempts at national assessments that grew from an embrace of the standards that have come to be known as the Common Core.

Anticipating this scenario, districts are beginning to respond by enhancing their ability to conduct or commission research on what is happening locally, with the intent to use data that results to make decisions on personnel, programs, and products. When a previously meddlesome federal government gives back authority to decide what should be measured and how, districts must be prepared to respond with a viable plan, ideally featuring new sources of data that embrace personalization and customization.

Any organization would benefit by having at its disposal a research function, especially an organization that is accustomed to the process of monitoring progress and adjusting procedures accordingly, a descriptor that certainly applies to public education. In many ways and for many reasons, one key thing typically absent and sorely needed to enable the enhanced success of public school districts has been the existence of research conducted consistently, productively, and locally. Only the largest districts have traditionally had the resources necessary to staff and maintain a research department, though all districts would benefit from the consistent application of this foundational principle.

At a time in our history when politicians are more apt to “get rid of the Common Core” or “abolish the US Department of Education” than ever before, educators must be ready to make things better immediately by anticipating these possibilities and being equipped to respond with the expertise that politicians typically lack. We are entering a phase of unprecedented opportunity for autonomy and improvement, guided by educators who know what works for the nation’s students, ideally guided by research of their own design.

The next item in this series will examine cost-effective ways for even the smallest districts to conduct or commission its own research. A practical look at how to enable this important concept to become a standard practice holds the promise of helping all districts meet the obligation to improve academic opportunities and achievement for every student every year. 

School district leaders are faced with expectations to improve academic achievement every year, and in most districts that process requires the collection and analysis of data from a variety of sources. Until recently, the preponderance of data came from standardized test results and few other places, predictably leading to an over-reliance on such data to assess school and district effectiveness. Add to this fact a steady stream of unfortunate federal legislation meant to spur academic improvement, and the less than stellar results have led to a reconsideration of how to improve public education. 

When parents are asked whether they are satisfied with their local public schools, the responses are overwhelmingly favorable, especially in suburban schools not plagued by persistent poverty and safety concerns more common in urban centers. Those same suburban parents, however, are apt to describe public schools as largely failing, thanks largely not to their own experiences with public schools but more likely tied to the drumbeat of negative press about public education from political leaders and the popular press.

A fundamental shift is underway in the way public schools are viewed, precipitated, oddly enough, by parental backlash stemming from assessments tied to the Common Core in the past few years. As the folly of using standardized test data to gauge school and district success or, even more strangely, to assess teacher effectiveness has taken root, so too has the need for different kinds of data that is more rooted in what is actually happening in schools at the local level. With this backdrop, it is no surprise that districts are beginning to invest in new sources of data, often coupled with a growing appreciation for the value of local research.

2. Outsourcing research is affordable and is one of the best ways to gather data to improve academic achievement and return on investment in our public schools. 
A simple Internet search on the subject of K-12 research companies reveals just how many entrepreneurs in the education marketplace have recently begun expanding their services from the post-secondary market to the larger and more lucrative K-12 space. Any district leader who understands the confluence of data needs, ESSA implementation, and changes in assessments as catalysts for change has already taken the plunge into convincing a sometimes skeptical board that investing in research at the local level is a remarkably cost-effective way to monitor expenses and make decisions on programs, products, and personnel.

Some research companies charge a flat fee for their services, often with a large cap on the number of projects a district may undertake in a given year, while others bill their district clients only on the studies specifically undertaken. Regardless of the billing policies of the companies involved, district leaders and the boards that employ them are often and pleasantly surprised at how affordable this option can be for their districts. As discretionary dollars become tighter with each school budget cycle, spending every dollar wisely and having research to support decisions to continue, modify, or abandon a particular initiative has never been more important.

The diversity of opinion that a private company can bring to a study of any district’s programs and products simply cannot be matched by having district personnel take their own measure of effectiveness or efficacy. Research companies often provide a review of current literature and a summary of best practices from across the country that local districts also cannot match, due less to an inability to perform this work but rather to the lack of time to do it. Especially in all but the largest urban districts, having a research department or even a few people dedicated solely to a research function is cost-prohibitive.

The prospect of conducting research targeted specifically at what any district is currently doing has long been something districts could not afford to do. The advent of companies dedicated to this task makes this kind of research a thing that districts cannot afford to leave out of their improvement plans.

School districts have for many years been the recipients of data generated by forces beyond their control and outside of their wants, needs, or interests. This data has historically resulted from standardized tests given to groups or grade levels of students. Ever since NCLB was first enacted early in the first term of President George W. Bush, virtually all students in grades 3-11 have been tested every year, a phenomenon unique to the United States and thanks largely to giving policy decisions to lawmakers and politicians rather than honoring the input of educators and parents.

Testing virtually every student from the ages of 9 to 17 was initially packaged as a way to leave no child behind, an aim that during the Obama administration was reconstituted as a way for America to race to the top of the heap in terms of academic achievement. The results were mixed at best, and the advent of improved standards in the form of the Common Core necessitated a new assessment protocol, which produced more data that was largely unrelated to local preferences and values.

Backlash against PARCC and Smarter Balance assessments from parents, educators, and eventually from many of the same politicians who insisted on the need for these new assessments has led us to the present day, where calls for the abolishment of the Common Core are more commonly heard than support for their continued use. If that trend continues, the need for actionable data that is tangibly tied to local interests and values will only increase, leading in turn to the need for research to produce that data.

3. Local districts can outsource research that is targeted at things actually happening in their districts, at an affordable cost. 
This notion may at first glance seem unrealistic, either due to cost considerations or a perceived lack of things to study in a local context. More thoughtful consideration of the prospect, however, has led many district leaders to contact any of the many dozens of research providers in the K-12 marketplace. Contracting with one or more of these private companies often results in the realization that every district has several interesting things happening every year that are worthy of detailed study by people trained to undertake the task, a process that ideally is guided by the superintendent or her/his designee.

A few examples can illustrate the concept of commissioning local research as a means of guiding policy and practice in any public school district. Perhaps a district is considering a change in reading or math series, or a shift from live instruction in world languages at the elementary level to the use of computer-assisted instruction. Virtually any change in the means or methods of delivering content can be improved by considering the body of research that always exists as the result of other districts, either locally, nationally, or internationally, that have already undertaken the task at hand.

The obvious value of considering what has worked and what has failed elsewhere has prompted districts to seek this information, a task made immeasurably easier by enlisting the aid of professionals trained for precisely this work. A lack of personnel and the absence of time to dedicate to the process of studying what has happened in like districts under similar conditions need never prevent districts from having this valuable data created and organized for them. Companies that perform this work are universally accommodating and creative when it comes to negotiating a payment structure that works for both the provider and the client district.

Perhaps a school district is considering a change in school start times to honor recent research which suggests that adolescent learners would universally benefit academically by having a later start time each school day. The volume of research on just this topic, from a variety of medical and educational experts from across the country, would be of immense and immediate value to any school leader or school board that is considering this initiative. The existence of this data is undeniable, much of it inaccessible, however, without the time or means of obtaining it, packaging it, and sharing it with the public. Outsourcing some or all of these steps can make success more likely, rather than using vague references to what the research says about earlier start times in presenting new initiatives to the public for their information and to secure their support.

As sources of assessment data shrink with the implementation of ESSA, districts must be properly positioned to fill the void with better research that is locally derived and targeted at things valued by the local community, another way to provide for measurable improvement in academic achievement for every child, every year.

Public school districts and the people who lead them are accustomed to the scrutiny and oversight inherent in a profession that seeks to improve the lives and prospects of the nation’s young people every year. The process of continuous improvement carries with it the need to use data to guide decision making, and the need for reliable data that relates directly to the needs and interests of students and the local community has caused many districts to expand the collection of data to include sources other than results from state or federally mandated annual assessments.

The existence and recent expansion of companies that exist to serve the research needs of K-12 schools has resulted in new kinds of data that has more of a prospect to guide local decision making than many previous sources of data, justifying the modest expense of contracting with such companies and outsourcing research on current practices or programs. Districts are also using this resource to determine whether to pursue new initiatives or abandon unproductive ones, guided by data gathered and analyzed at the local level.

New federal legislation that includes more freedom for local districts and states to pursue assessment protocols of their own design, and the affordability of outsourcing a research function to companies specializing in this service, has made school improvement more likely under ESSA than it had been during its more draconian predecessors. The tipping point as to whether the return of local control will improve educational opportunity may well hinge on the degree to which districts invest in local research, and whether districts furthermore invest in ways to use that research to connect dollars spent to academic gains made.

4. Local research, conducted independently and analyzed with software designed specifically to connect dollars to achievement, is one of the best ways to ensure a high return on investment in the nation’s schools. 
It came a pleasant and welcome surprise to many educators when one of the central tenets of ESSA, the federal legislation signed into law in December 2015 that replaced Race to the Top and No Child Left Behind, was the intentional increase in local control and autonomy in the assessment of learning. Implementation details have thus far aligned with the original intent of the new law in the area of assessment, and the coming elections will likely have little impact on ESSA in the near term.

At a time when the political world seems uncharacteristically willing to allow educators to have a stronger voice in developing and implementing policy on assessment of learning, it is incumbent upon district leaders and school boards to be prepared to act in the interests of students by having in place the products and personnel necessary to assess student outcomes and quality of products purchased and programs implemented. Included in this effort must be the rigorous and appropriate development, collection, and analysis of data that actually matters.

Every educator who has ever opined about the inadvisability of using high-stakes standardized testing to gauge the effectiveness of teachers or the learning of children must now be prepared to demonstrate that they have always known there was a better way, ideally by replacing old, summative, single assessments with an array of new assessments that match local priorities and that relate directly to local district goals. The implementation of ESSA, unlike its predecessors, allows for and encourages this outcome, making this the ideal time to invest in research and the use of data to drive instruction, all with the foundation of tying academic achievement gains directly to the resources it takes to enable them.

Public education is a multi-trillion dollar endeavor worldwide, and the United States, despite what often appears in the popular press, has always led the world in the quality of a public education system that meets the needs of all learners, regardless of birth circumstances, handicapping conditions, or any other factors that cripple systems of public education in other countries. The next few years hold the promise, more than the last many years, of improving the delivery of a free and appropriate public education to children in this country, all made more likely in districts that invest in local research and the kind of data analysis that ties learning outcomes to dollars spent.