28-03-2025
How Data And Technology Can Transform Learning—When Used Effectively
Three businessman working and discussing business together in a meeting
Data has the power to revolutionize education—but only if it's used to inform, not intimidate. Too often, schools and districts wield data as a punitive cudgel rather than a tool for improvement. The difference in approach can determine whether struggling students graduate or drop out, whether teachers feel supported or scapegoated, and whether schools foster equity or deepen disparities.
When applied thoughtfully, data can pinpoint learning gaps, personalize instruction, and create opportunities for students who might otherwise slip through the cracks.
During my tenure as Director of Guidance at Montclair High School, we introduced a de-tracked 9th-grade English course called World Literature. The school offered free summer school for students who failed, recognizing that many would have been funneled into lower-track classes under a traditional system.
But I noticed a troubling trend: students who failed but didn't attend summer school had alarmingly high dropout rates. Acting on this insight, I worked with the English department chair—an exceptional educator typically assigned to AP classes due to parent demand—to teach a class composed entirely of students who had failed World Literature and did not attend the free summer school.
The results were striking. Engagement levels matched those of honors courses, and students produced thoughtful, well-crafted writing. Many shared, 'This is the first time someone cared about what we had to say.' Out of 14 students, 12 graduated—far exceeding the historical graduation rate of under 50% for similar cohorts.
This case underscores how data, when used to inform decisions rather than justify policies, can drive real change.
Unfortunately, many education systems use data punitively. Standardized test scores, for example, often label schools as 'failing' without accounting for socioeconomic factors.
Research from the Annenberg Institute at Brown University (2022) found that status-based accountability systems—those judging schools solely on raw test scores—disproportionately penalize schools serving low-income students.
A Stanford University study (2019) revealed that schools with high growth metrics (even with lower absolute scores) were more effective at advancing learning than schools with high but stagnant scores. Yet many districts still prioritize simplistic, politically expedient metrics over nuanced analysis.
With over 45 years in education—spanning elite private schools, vocational programs, and blue-collar public schools—I've observed a critical problem: most educators and administrators lack basic data literacy. Many treat data as infallible, ignoring context, sampling biases, and statistical significance.
The consequences are real. My wife, a special education teacher, once led a lesson where her students—children with severe intellectual disabilities—analyzed historical defense spending and deduced that budgets rose before major wars. It was critical thinking at its finest. Yet during an observation, she was reprimanded for not rigidly following the district's compliance-focused rubric.
This rigidity is pervasive. As education data expert Gregory Nadeau notes:
'The K-12 system is aligned to adult interests—parents and teachers—rather than students. Chronic absenteeism predicts dropouts, yet schools reset attendance records yearly. High-dosage tutoring works, yet it's often the first program cut in budget crises.'
To fix these issues, we must:
The stakes are too high for business as usual. When data acts as a guiding light, it unlocks potential. When it's a weapon, it shuts doors.
The choice is ours.
