Module 7: Te Whakamahi Pūrongo (Data Driven Leadership): This module focuses on using data effectively to inform decision-making, assess progress, and drive continuous improvement.
“He aha te take? He aha te pūtake?”
“What is the cause? What is the root cause?”
Module Objectives:
- Understand the importance of data-driven decision-making in education.
- Identify and collect relevant data to inform school improvement initiatives.
- Analyse and interpret data effectively to identify trends, patterns, and areas for improvement.
- Use data to inform and evaluate school programmes and initiatives.
- Communicate data effectively to stakeholders, including teachers, students, parents, and the wider community.
- Develop a data-driven improvement plan for a specific area of school focus.
Data are crucial for improving student achievement. By revealing gaps in student learning and instructional practices, they guide teachers and leaders in identifying areas for improvement and tailoring instruction to meet individual student needs.
However, data alone do not provide solutions. They serve as a valuable tool for understanding student learning and informing decision-making. Interpreting data is paramount; it involves uncovering the ‘story behind the numbers’ by identifying patterns and relationships. This process requires ongoing analysis, reflection, and the collection of further evidence to refine understanding and inform continuous improvement.
Types of Data:
- Demographic data: Information about students, staff, and the school community.
- Student achievement data: Standardised tests, classroom assessments, and student work samples.
- Perceptions data: Information gathered through surveys, questionnaires, observations, and student voice.
- School processes data: Information about programs, classroom practices, and assessment strategies.
When gathering data, focus on relevant information that serves a specific purpose. Avoid collecting excessive data, which can be time-consuming and difficult to analyse.
While student achievement data provides valuable information about outcomes, it doesn’t explain the underlying causes. To understand these, utilise formative assessment data, classroom observations, student voice, and other relevant sources.
Analysing Data:
Start by posing a specific question about your data, focusing on differences, gaps, or the impact of teaching practices. Look for unexpected findings and identify patterns, trends, and categories.
Avoid jumping to conclusions; explore the data deeply, considering multiple perspectives and questioning your assumptions.
Evaluate data quality using the 4 Cs: Completeness, Consistency, Comparison, and Concealed information.
Create a concise data overview and share it with colleagues to gain diverse perspectives.
Generate inferences and potential explanations, remembering that correlation does not equal causation.
Develop a range of data stories to identify areas for further investigation.
Recognise that data may not tell the whole story and that further data collection may be necessary to confirm findings.
Resources:
https://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1317&context=research_conference
Task: Developing a Data-Driven Improvement Plan
- Select a specific area of school focus (e.g., literacy, numeracy, student well-being).
- Identify relevant data sources and collect the necessary data.
- Analyse the data and identify key trends, patterns, and areas for improvement.
- Develop a data-driven improvement plan that outlines specific goals, strategies, and action steps.
- Post your data-driven improvement plan on the online forum for peer feedback and discussion.
Assessment:
- Completion of all readings.
- Participation in the online forum discussion.
- Development and submission of a data-driven improvement plan.
- Demonstration of the ability to analyse and interpret data effectively.
6 Responses
Task: Developing a Data-Driven Improvement Plan
Data-Driven Improvement Plan: Pasifika Student Achievement in Writing
Focus: Improving writing achievement of Pasifika students (Years 3–6)
Vision
To raise the writing achievement of Pasifika learners through culturally sustaining pedagogy, high expectations, meaningful relationships, and effective literacy practices.
1. Goal Setting
Goal 1:
By the end of 2026, at least 80% of Pasifika students in Years 3–6 will be achieving at or above the expected curriculum level in writing, as measured by OTJs using a range of evidence (e.g. writing samples, teacher conferencing, benchmarking against scope and sequence of New Curriculum).
Goal 2:
Improve student engagement and self-efficacy in writing, with at least 90% of Pasifika students reporting increased confidence and motivation as measured by mid-year and end-of-year student voice surveys.
2. Data Analysis & Baseline Evidence
Data Source: Mid term School-wide Report on Student Achievement 2025
Writing Data
Analysis
64% of Y3-6 students achieved at or above Mid Year 2025 in Writing, while 86% of Y1 and Y2 children achieved AT or Above expectation. This may be an indication that the Structured Literacy programme is starting to have an impact on our results at Y1-2. Of note, 79% of children who started with us as 5 year olds achieved AT or higher in Writing Mid Year 2025 (372 out of 473 children). There are a number of high needs students in our Pacific cohort. Of the 10 students not achieving expectation there are 3 Tier 3 students. However, this
Analysis of Maori and Pasifika Student Achievement in Writing
76% of Māori students achieved At or Above in Writing at Mid 2025
65% of Pasifika students achieved At or Above at Mid 2025. 35% of Pasifika students of our Yr3-6 cohort are below or well below in their achievement in writing.There are a number of high needs students in our Pacific cohort. Of the 10 students not achieving expectation there are 3 Tier 3 students. ( Evaluate data for 4Cs). However, these results have formed a pattern identified in previous reports on school wide student achievement.
3. Key Strategies and Actions
Strategy 1: Culturally Sustaining Practice
Action Steps:
Integrate Pasifika contexts, identities, and languages into writing tasks (e.g. storytelling, cultural celebrations, oral histories).
Use Tapasā to guide teacher inquiry and professional reflection.
Involve Pasifika parents, families, and community members in classroom learning and writing celebrations.Strategy 2: Targeted Teaching and Scaffolding
Action Steps:
Use formative assessment tools (e.g. School wide Assessment data (HERO), exemplars, Code (spelling) pretests) to track progress and guide next steps.
Group students for targeted workshops in writing and the code (spelling), with explicit teaching of language structures and vocabulary and revision of concepts taught.
Embed oral language scaffolds (talk moves, sentence starters, shared writing) before independent writing.Strategy 3: Build Student Motivation
Action Steps:
Co-construct writing goals and success criteria with students.
Use digital portfolios and student-led conferences to share progress.
Select relevant writing topics linked to identity and interests.Strategy 4: Professional Learning and Development (PLD)
Action Steps:
Engage in PLD focused on effective writing instruction (Current MOE initiative on the science of learning), culturally responsive pedagogy, and data inquiry.
Facilitate teacher learning groups to analyse writing samples and moderate OTJs.
Use coaching and observation cycles to support implementation.Strategy 5: Whānau Engagement
Action Steps:
Host Pasifika writing evenings where families co-create stories with their children.
Share simple home-writing strategies (e.g. writing in diaries, letters to family) in accessible languages/formats.
Use HERO community feed to celebrate writing success regularly with parents.
4. Monitoring & Evaluation
When? What? Who? How?
Termly. Writing Data Analysis. Literacy Lead and Teachers. OTJs, samples, writing assessment (HERO progressions)
Each Term. Student voice check-in. Teachers. Survey, Interviews.
Twice Yearly. Parent feedback. Leadership Team. Survey from parents.
Ongoing. Teacher Inquiry. Teachers. Teaching as inquiry cycle.
End of Year. Evaluate overall impact. SLT. Compare baseline and endline data
5. Resourcing & Support
Budget for Pasifika-focused PLD
Release time for teacher inquiry and collaboration
After reading Ideas Into Action for School and System Leaders Using Data Transforming Potential into Practice Updated Winter_2013-14.pdf.
I resonated with this in my role as TIC for Wellbeing. A thoughtful and important perspective they brought forward—especially when it comes to student well-being, where numbers often only tell part of the story.To move from data collection to meaningful insight and then to action, I believe you can approach it aligned with the ideas from the reading.
As part of the analysis we need to define the purpose of the wellbeing survey? Ask: What are we trying to understand or improve about student well-being?
The next step is to gather and organize the data.
Then look for patterns and signals. This includes asking deeper questions like:
What’s surprising in this data?
Where are the biggest gaps between what we expected and what’s reported?
Create a Data-Informed Narrative
As Hamilton et al. suggest, “data by themselves are not evidence.” Turn facts into stories.School wide Climate and Practices:Our School Survey:
Strengths:
Behaviours like hitting or bullying are NOT OK at school 94%
Our school wants us to get on with students from different cultures 93%
Our school ‘Values’ are important to everyone 92%
Teachers get on well with students from different cultures and backgrounds 92%
Focus Area:
Teachers are interested in my culture and family background 68%
At school everyone knows what to do if someone is being hurt or bullied 78%
Students have a say in what happens at school 75%
What the data showed in moving forward:
-Utilise Bounce back programme
-Continue to seek student voice during these sessions in addition to special mufti fund raising day activities.
-Work towards social behaviour improvements by using school wide language and consequences
for actions.
-Communicating these with Parents through letters written during time out.
-Build knowledge and acceptance of difference through Language weeks and school wide cultural
events
Summary for All Students from Yr0- 6 in Mathematics
80% of all students achieved ‘At’ or ‘Above’ in Mathematics Mid Year 2025.
86% of children who started at the school as 5-year-olds achieved ‘At’ or higher in Maths Mid Year 2025 (408 out of 475).
Analysis of Specific Groups
Well Below Group:
There are 4 Tier 3 students in this group, which equates to 27% of the ‘Well Below’ group.
Below Group:
16% (20 students) in this group were new to the school in 2025.
Teachers predict that 20 children from the current ‘Below’ group will be achieving ‘At’ by the end of the year (based on 11 responses).
Summary for Māori and Pasifika Students:
72% of Māori students achieved ‘At’ or ‘Above’ at Mid Year 2025.
63.33% of Pasifika students achieved ‘At’ or ‘Above’ at Mid Year 2025.
Next Steps
Deep Dive into ‘Well Below’ and ‘Below’ Groups:
Individual Student Review: Conduct individual student reviews for all 15 students in the ‘Well Below’ group and the 122 students in the ‘Below’ group.
Tier 3 Student Support: Focus on the 4 Tier 3 students in the ‘Well Below’ group to ensure they are receiving targeted, intensive support. Are our current interventions making a difference?
New Student Integration: Look closely at the specific needs of the 20 new students in the ‘Below’ group. Are there common factors contributing to their lower achievement? Consider additional transitional support.
Teacher’s OTJ”s : Follow up on the 20 students teachers believe will reach ‘At’ by year-end. Monitor their progress closely and provide necessary resources to support this growth. Track the accuracy of these predictions for future planning.
Addressing inconsistency in Māori and Pasifika Achievement:
Pasifika ‘Well Below’ Group: Immediately focus on the 5 Pasifika students in the ‘Well Below’ category, as they represent 13.33% of their group, which is a significant proportion. Understand the root causes for their low achievement.
Targeted Interventions: Continue with the implementation of culturally responsive interventions for Māori and Pasifika students who are ‘Below’ or ‘Well Below’
Sustaining ‘At’ and ‘Above’ Achievement:
Best Practices Sharing: Identify and share best teaching practices from classrooms where students are achieving ‘At’ or ‘Above’ expectations.
Advanced Learning Opportunities: Ensure sufficient enrichment and extension opportunities for students achieving ‘Above’ and ‘Well Above’, especially for the 56% of males and 62% of females achieving ‘At’, and the students achieving ‘Above’ and ‘Well Above’.
Early Childhood Starters: Analyse the factors contributing to the success of the 86% of children who started as 5-year-olds achieving ‘At’ or higher. Can these insights be applied to other cohorts?
End-of-Year Projections / OTJ: We should ask teachers to clearly predict/ Make an OTJ how well all students will be doing by the end of the year. This is especially important for students who are currently ‘Well Below’ or ‘Below’ expectations. We also need teachers to explain why they think these students will reach that level.
Regular Monitoring: Establish a schedule for regular monitoring of student progress, particularly for those identified as ‘Well Below’ and ‘Below’, to ensure interventions are effective and adjustments can be made promptly.
Curriculum Area: Literacy (Reading) Year 3 – 6
Reading Achievement Analysis: Mid-Year 2025
Data Sources: School Mid-Year data 2025
Key Trends:
Overall pleasing results, 74% at or above their instructional reading ages .
The structured literacy approach is impacting positively on our children as they are moving through school.
Those who started school with us at 5 years old show results of AT or above their reading age.
Goal:
To raise the instructional reading age, fluency, and accuracy of our Target Group learners who are below towards working within expectations and those who are significantly below to below expectations.
Reduce the achievement gap for our non-English speaking learners.
Share data regularly within Teams and across the whole school
Create a Target Group for each team and discuss regularly at meetings.
Key Actions:
Share data analysis
Team meeting agenda item – discuss the successes and challenges, look for any trends, monitor, and reevaluate what has been done so far for target students, especially those not moving.
Not letting any assumptions inform our judgment on childrens ability
Support our non english speakers
Provide a range of opportunities for vocab development, peer support, comprehension.
Provide PD for teachers.
Key Trends and Patterns:
CPDS Mid Report – Positive Impact of Early Years Instruction:
The most significant trend is the strong performance of Year 1 and 2 students, with 86% achieving At or Above in reading. This, coupled with 88% of all students who started at age 5 achieving At or Above, strongly suggests that the Structured Literacy program and explicit instruction in Year 0-2 are having a positive impact. This foundational learning appears to be setting students up for success.
Data-Driven Improvement Plan:
To improve all Year 0/ 1 students’ literacy outcomes through explicit, systematic, and data-informed instruction grounded in the principles of Structured Literacy.
Data Analysis & Grouping
Group students by need:
Emerging (Tier 3): Significant foundational gaps
Developing (Tier 2): Needs targeted support in specific areas
Proficient (Tier 1): At or above
Use data walls, spreadsheets, or HERO dashboards to track progress for all Year 0/ 1 students.
Targeted Instruction & Intervention Plan
Phonological Awareness: Oral language games, Elkonin boxes, sound isolation tasks: Daily (10–15 mins)
Phonics & Decoding: Synthetic phonics (e.g., Little Learners Love Literacy, Jolly Phonics): Daily (30 mins)
Word Recognition: Repeated reading of decodable texts, HFW practice: 3x per week
Fluency & Comprehension: Guided reading using decodable or leveled texts: 3–4x per week
Spelling/Writing: Dictation, sentence-level writing, modeled/shared/independent writing:
DailyWeekly Instructional Schedule Example
Monday:
Phoneme blending, decoding, guided writing
Whole-group phonics + small-group reading
Tuesday
Phoneme segmentation, fluency, writing
Dictation, sentence building, reading aloud
Wednesday
Word building, comprehension
Decodable book reading + vocabulary practice
Thursday
Sound manipulation, high-frequency words
Multisensory literacy stations
Friday
Review, assessment, enrichment
Mini-assessments + games + writing celebration
Differentiation & Tiered Supports
Support Type and Instructional Response:
Tier 1: Core Instruction: Whole-class structured literacy lessons
Tier 2: Targeted Intervention: Small group support based on assessment data
Tier 3: Intensive Intervention; 1:1 or small group with specialist or support teacher
Monitoring & Feedback
– Use short cycle assessments to modify groupings.
– Meet fortnightly with the literacy lead or support team to adjust planning as needed.
– Share data with parents each term with practical home activities if needed to support these learners at home.
Success Criteria:
At least 93% of students meet or exceed after 6 months and 1 year-level benchmarks in Literacy.
– Phonemic awareness
– Decoding and encoding CVC words
– Reading fluency with decodable texts
– Writing simple sentences with basic punctuation
– Clear evidence of growth in student confidence and literacy engagement
Reading Achievement Analysis: Mid-Year 2025
Our mid-year reading results for 2025 show good progress, especially with our younger students. However, the data also points to a few specific areas where we need to focus our efforts.
Key Trends and Patterns
Positive Impact of Early Years Instruction: The most significant trend is the strong performance of Year 1 and 2 students, with 86% achieving At or Above in reading. This, coupled with 88% of all students who started at age 5 achieving At or Above, strongly suggests that the Structured Literacy program and explicit instruction in Year 0-2 are having a positive impact. This foundational learning appears to be setting students up for success.
Improvement in Year 3-6: While lower than the early years, the 74% of Year 3-6 students achieving At or Above still represents a solid majority. The report notes this as a potential indication of the Structured Literacy program’s impact, which will be crucial to monitor as the current Year 2 cohort progresses.
Impact of New Enrollments and ESOL Students:
A clear pattern emerges regarding students categorized as “Well Below” and “Below.” A substantial portion of these groups are either new to the school this year or are ESOL funded students (including those recently discontinued from ESOL funding). This indicates that transition and language acquisition challenges are significant factors influencing reading achievement for these cohorts.
“Well Below” Group: 59% of students in this category are either new, ESOL funded, or Tier 3 students, indicating a complex set of needs.
“Below” Group: 39% of students in this category are new or ESOL funded, further emphasising these contributing factors.
Areas for Improvement
Support for New Students: The data clearly shows that students new to the school often struggle with reading.
Targeted ESOL Support: While ESOL students naturally face language barriers, the number appearing in the “Well Below” and “Below” categories suggests a need to re-evaluate or intensify current support.
Transition from Year 2 to Year 3: While the early years’ success is encouraging, the drop in achievement from 86% (Y1-2) to 74% (Y3-6) suggests a potential dip or challenge as students move into the middle primary years. Tracking the current Year 2 cohort will be essential to understand if the early success are sustained.
Tier 3 Interventions: The presence of Tier 3 students in the “Well Below” group highlights the ongoing need for intensive, individualised support for students with the most significant reading difficulties.
Data-Driven Improvement Plan
Goal 1: Sustain and Enhance Early Years Reading Success
Objective: Maintain or increase the percentage of Year 1 and 2 students achieving At or Above in reading to 90% by Mid-Year 2026.
Strategies:
Continue and Refine Structured Literacy: Fully embed and continuously review the Structured Literacy program in Year 0-2, ensuring commitment of implementation and ongoing professional development for teachers.
Early Identification and Intervention: Strengthen early screening processes for all incoming students to identify potential reading difficulties as early as possible. Implement immediate, small-group interventions for students identified as at risk.
Action Steps:
Term 3 2025: Conduct a review of current Structured Literacy program implementation in Year 0-2, identifying strengths and areas for refinement.
Term 4 2025: Provide targeted professional development for Year 0-2 teachers on specific aspects of Structured Literacy based on the review.
Ongoing (2025-2026): Implement universal screening for all new 5-year-olds within their first two weeks of enrolment to assess foundational literacy skills.
Ongoing (2025-2026): Establish consistent small-group intervention schedules for identified at-risk Year 0-2 students, led by trained and experienced staff.
Goal 2: Improve Reading Outcomes for New and ESOL Students
Objective: Reduce the percentage of new students and ESOL funded students in the “Well Below” and “Below” reading categories by 20% by Mid-Year 2026.
Strategies:.
Differentiated ESOL Support: Strengthen and differentiate ESOL support to address varying levels of language proficiency and reading needs.
Action Steps:
Term 3 2025: Develop a “New Student Welcome and Support Pathway” that includes immediate reading baseline assessment and allocation to appropriate support (e.g., buddy system, targeted reading groups).
Term 4 2025: Review current ESOL provision and identify opportunities for more individualized or intensified support for students with significant reading needs.
Term 1 2026: Implement a system for regular progress monitoring of new and ESOL students’ reading achievement.
Ongoing (2025-2026): Provide professional development for all teachers on strategies for supporting language and reading comprehension for ESOL students within the mainstream classroom.
Goal 3: Ensure Sustained Reading Progress into Middle Primary Years
Objective: Increase the percentage of Year 3-6 students achieving At or Above in reading to 80% by Mid-Year 2026, specifically tracking the progress of the current Year 2 cohort.
Strategies:
Bridge the Gap in Structured Literacy: Ensure the principles and practices of Structured Literacy are effectively transitioning and being built upon in Year 3 and beyond. Embed The CODE into the programme to support and follow up from Structured Literacy programme.
Targeted Interventions for Identified Gaps: Provide specific interventions for students in Year 3-6 who are not yet achieving At or Above, focusing on identified areas of weakness. re
Action Steps:
Term 3 2025: Map the progression of Structured Literacy principles and practices from Year 2 into Year 3 and identify any potential gaps or areas where consistent application may be lacking.
Term 4 2025: Provide professional development for Year 3-6 teachers on integrating and extending Structured Literacy components within their reading instruction.
Mid-Year 2026: Conduct a specific analysis of the current Year 2 cohort’s reading achievement as they transition to Year 3, comparing their progress to previous cohorts.
Ongoing (2025-2026): Implement small-group and individualised interventions for Year 3-6 students identified as “Well Below” or “Below,” using diagnostic assessment to pinpoint specific skill slippage.
This plan is to make sure all our students become great readers. The intention is to build on the strong start our Junior students are getting, and also give extra support to new students and those learning English. The goal is for every child, in every year level, to read well.