Team Meeting Data Use Survey
Designed Using Google Forms and Utilizing Branched Questions
Assabet Valley Collaborative – DDM – Teacher Teams Use of Data 1
Assabet Valley Collaborative – DDM – Teacher Teams Use of Data 2
Assabet Valley Collaborative – DDM – Teacher Teams Use of Data 3
Assabet Valley Collaborative – DDM – Teacher Teams Use of Data 4
Assabet Valley Collaborative – DDM – Teacher Teams Use of Data 5
Assabet Valley Collaborative – DDM – Teacher Teams Use of Data 6
Assabet Valley Collaborative – DDM – Teacher Teams Use of Data 7
Assabet Valley Collaborative – DDM – Teacher Teams Use of Data 8
Date:
End of October
End of January
End of March
End of May
School-Wide Team Data Use Rubric
For each criterion (row), highlight the cell that most closely describes the demonstrated school-wide performance level
Criteria
Range of Data
Use
Items #5, #6
Data Use &
Analysis
Items #4, 7, 8
Emerging Team Data
Use for Student Learning
0 pts
Items 5 & 6: Overall,
teams report consulting a
small or limited set of
data sources
*
4
Performance Levels
Developing Team Data
Solidifying Team Data
Use for Student Learning
*
Use for Student Learning
8 pts pts
12
16 pts
Items 5 & 6: Overall,
Items 5 & 6: Overall,
teams report consulting
teams report consulting
some varied types of data
clearly varied types of
sources
data sources
Item 4: Teams report data
use occurring in less than
25% of all meetings
reported for this period
Item 4: Teams report data
use occurring in 26-50% of
all meetings reported for
this period
Item 4: Teams report data
use occurring in 51-70%
of all meetings reported
for this period
Item 7:Teams report
SHARING and
distributing data for more
than 40% of meetings
Item 7: Teams report
REVIEWING data –
sharing and discussing
data at a general or
introductory level for more
than 40% of meetings
and/or
Teams report less than
40% of the meetings
demonstrating in any
response category
Item 7: Teams report
ANALYZING data –
sharing and analyzing
data by sorting,
disaggregating, or
comparing data
and/or
ANALYZING and
CONCLUDING – includes
drawing clear conclusions
from the analysis of data
for more than 40% of
meetings
*
20
Extending Team Data
Use for Student Learning
25 pts
Items 5 & 6: Overall, teams
report consulting clearly
varied “academic” data,
clearly varied “other” types
of data, and additional data
sources (in “other” space)
Item 4: Teams report data
use occurring in more than
70% of all meetings
reported for this period
Item 7: Teams report
FOLLOWING UP with data
– analyzing data to assess
progress based on
decisions made at prior
meetings for more than
40% of meetings
Item 8: Teams report
Item 8: Teams report
Item 8: Teams report
Item 8: Teams report
analyzing data at the
analyzing data at the small
analyzing data at the
analyzing data at the small
small group or individual
group or individual levels
small group or individual
group or individual levels for
levels for less than 20%
for 20-33% of meetings
levels for 34-50% of
51-100% of meetings
of meetings
meetings
* Columns marked with asterisks indicate intermediate levels for use when evidence within a single row crosses varied performance levels. For example, evidence for Data
Use and Analysis might cross both the Developing and Solidifying performance levels, in which case the administrator would select the intermediate performance level, worth
12 points.
Assabet Valley Collaborative – DDM – Teacher Teams Use of Data 9
Criteria
Data use for
Identifying
Student Needs
Items #9, #10
Emerging Team Data
Use for Student Learning
0 pts
Item 9: Teams report
analyzing data to
determine student needs
or gaps in learning in
0-25% of meetings
Item 10: Majority of open
responses indicate team
learning that does not
mention student needs or
gaps in learning
Data Use for
Determining
Interventions
& Instructional
Adjustments
Items #9, #10,
#11
Item 9: Teams report
analyzing data to
determine appropriate
student support strategies
interventions, or
adjustments to instruction
in 0-25% of all meetings
reported for this period
Item 10: Majority of open
responses indicate team
learning that does not
mention student
interventions or
instructional adjustments
Item 11: Majority of open
responses do not mention
committing to intervention
strategies or instructional
adjustments
*
4
Performance Levels
Developing Team Data
Solidifying Team Data
Use for Student Learning
*
Use for Student Learning
8 pts pts
12
16 pts
Item 9: Teams report
Item 9: Teams report
analyzing data to
analyzing data to
determine student needs
determine student needs
and gaps in learning in
and gaps in learning in
26- 40% of meetings
41- 55% of meetings
Item 10: Majority of open
responses indicate team
learning about student
needs or gaps in learning
but are general, nonspecific, or basic
Item 9: Teams report
analyzing data to
determine appropriate
student support strategies
interventions, or
adjustments to instruction
in 26-40% of all meetings
reported for this period
Item 10: Majority of open
responses indicate team
learning about student
needs or gaps in learning
that are clear and specific
Item 10: Majority of open
responses indicate team
learning about student
interventions or
instructional adjustments,
but are general, nonspecific, or basic
Item 10: Majority of open
responses indicate team
learning about student
interventions or
instructional adjustments
that are clear and specific
Item 11: Majority of open
responses mentioning
committing to generallystated intervention
strategies or instructional
adjustments
Item 9: Teams report
analyzing data to
determine appropriate
student support strategies
interventions, or
adjustments to instruction
in 41-55% of all meetings
reported for this period
Item 11: Majority of open
responses indicate clear
and specific commitments
to intervention strategies
or instructional
adjustments
*
20
Extending Team Data
Use for Student Learning
25 pts
Item 9: Teams report
analyzing data to determine
student needs and gaps in
learning in 56-100% of
meetings
Item 10: Majority of open
responses indicate team
learning about student
needs or gaps in learning
that are clear, specific, and
cite evidence
Item 9: Teams report
analyzing data to determine
appropriate student support
strategies, interventions or
adjustments to instruction in
56-100% of all meetings
reported for this period
Item 10: Majority of open
responses indicate team
learning about student
interventions or instructional
adjustments that are clear,
specific, and cite evidence
Item 11: Majority of open
responses indicate specific,
measurable, achievable,
time-bound commitments to
intervention strategies or
instructional adjustments
TOTAL POINTS DEMONSTRATED
Assabet Valley Collaborative – DDM – Teacher Teams Use of Data 10
Teacher Post-Observation Debrief Form
Question numbers align to question numbers on the Team Data Use Survey Form
Teacher:
Evaluator:
Date and Time of Classroom Observation:
Focus of Observed Lesson:
Grade / Department:
Date and Time of Debrief Discussion:
1. Did you use any particular student data to plan today’s lesson?
2. & 3. Which type(s) of data did you use?
Academic Data (Check all that apply)
� Content-Specific Assessments (ex:
DIBELS, DRA, math fluency, STAR)
� Common Assessments
� Student Work
� MCAS / PARCC
� Unit Assessments
� Mid-term/final exams
� Formative Assessment (e.g., checks for
understanding, ticket to leave, “Do
Now,” daily quizzes)
� Performance Assessment
(demonstration of knowledge and skills)
� Capstone Project
� Student Portfolio
� Other
Other Student Data (Check all that apply)
� Student Support Team / Building-Based
Student Team notes or minutes
� Specialist Reports (ex: School
Psychologist reports)
� Free & Reduced Lunch data
� Teacher Observations (ex: Student
engagement, behavior)
� Guidance / School Adjustment
Counselor Notes
� Nurse Visits
� Absences
� Tardies
� Discipline Logs
� Bathroom Visits
� Detentions / Suspensions Reports
�Other
2. If you did not analyze data in preparation for today’s lesson, which data might have been helpful
to collect and/or review to inform your lesson plans and instructional decisions?
Assabet Valley Collaborative – DDM – Teacher Teams Use of Data 11
3. If you did work with data in preparation for today’s lesson, did you discuss or review these data
with your team or colleagues, or did you review the data individually?
How did you actually work with the data? Please describe (e.g., disaggregate, analysis over time).
4. What were you trying to understand by reviewing these data?
5. What was the purpose of your data use?
To determine students' strengths
To determine students' needs
To determine students' progress
To determine appropriate student support strategies or interventions
To determine adjustments we want to make to our instructional practice
To determine differences or gaps in students' learning
Other?
6. At what level did you focus your data analysis?
Individual student level
Small group level
Class level
Grade or department level
School level
7. What did you learn as a result of your data analysis?
What specific needs, trends, or patterns did you find?
Assabet Valley Collaborative – DDM – Teacher Teams Use of Data 27
How did these inform your lesson design or interventions?
8. Based on your lesson, what data did or will you collect next to determine whether your lesson
addressed the needs you identified?
9. What will you do next?
10. What would help you use data more effectively to inform interventions and instructional
decisions moving forward? How can I support you?
Consider: Does your team have the necessary skills to analyze and interpret student data? Does
everyone have access to necessary student data? Does your team need support linking data
analysis to next steps with instruction?
Assabet Valley Collaborative – DDM – Teacher Teams Use of Data 28