Bruce Wellman and Laura Lipton (2004) have developed a widely used method for looking at student data called the “Data-Driven Dialogue” (DDD). The dialogue includes three steps: (1) activating and engaging, (2) exploring and discovering, and (3) organizing and integrating. There have been numerous studies that have found that schools and districts that use are more successful than those that do not. However, there is not a body of research that supports one method over another for actually analyzing data. I believe that the first step of the DDD is a waste of time and distracts from effective data analysis, which should focus on identifying patterns.
In the first step of the cycle (activating and engaging) the participants “surface experiences and expectations”. Wellman and Lipton include guiding questions in their text such as “with what assumptions are we entering?” and “what are some predictions we are making?”. Wellman and Lipton state that “by surfacing predictions and assumptions, groups and group members name the frames of reference that are the lenses through which they view the world.” They argue that by naming these assumptions and predictions participants are able to reframe their decision making. Wellman and Lipton caution against skipping this first step because members will be “lost in a sea of data and opinions.” They argue that when people don’t know what to expect from one another they enter into defensive postures, ready to attack, or deny the patterns that are revealed.
Despite the assertions of Wellman and Lipton, analyzing data for patterns without first “surfacing assumptions and biases” does not result in being “lost in a sea of data.” Good analysis should simply start with a description of what is apparent in the data. An identification of patterns without effort to explain. My experience in this arena is significant. I have worked in research, the private sector, public health, and public schools and in all cases I was working with data and facilitating discussions using data. I have approached the problem by both using the Wellman and Lipton model and without. By far teachers and administrators are much more successful at efficiently identifying patterns in the data if the “activating and engaging” step is ignored.
Next time you have an opportunity to facilitate a data discussion or DDD skip the “activating and engaging step.” Instead, go straight to describing patterns. See if your participants are any more “lost in a sea of data”.