This poster presentation examines data use, challenges, and leadership practices in school self-evaluation (SSE) in Estonian schools. As educational systems shift toward informed improvement based on objective, reliable, and valid data, Estonia provides a unique example due to its high levels of autonomy for schools and principals. SSE in Estonia functions as a mechanism for assessing goal attainment and guiding schools' direction. SSE is ‘something that schools do to themselves, by themselves and for themselves’ (Brown et al., 2020), positioning it as a case of data-driven decision-making aimed at enhancing teaching and learning.

To create a robust, data-informed environment, many educational systems have introduced initiatives to promote data use (Vanhoof et al., 2012). However, effective data utilization in SSE depends on more than just data availability. Research has shown that both internal and external factors impact data use. For instance, Datnow et al. (2013) and Schildkamp & Poortman (2015) identified collaboration among teachers and professional learning opportunities as significant in shaping data practices. Influential factors also include data literacy and the organizational characteristics and leadership practices within a school (Schildkamp, 2019). Figure 1 in this study conceptualizes SSE as a data use process shaped by various factors and supported by targeted leadership practices. we refer to the data use process described by Schildkamp and Poortman (2015) and the data use theory of action. In the context of school self-evaluation, it means the following six phases – setting the goal, data collection, information, knowledge creation, defining the improvement actions and evaluation of outcomes. Based on the previous research on process of data use (Hawlitschek et al., 2024; Schildkamp & Poortman, 2015) and self-evaluation (Van Der Bij et al., 2016) several factors can influence either enablers or barriers and be categorised into four groups - data, organisational, user, and context characteristics (Schildkamp et al., 2017; Schildkamp & Poortman, 2015). We focus on five domains of leadership practices derived from the work of Schildkamp et al. (2019).

 The poster addresses three research questions: 

1)    How is the data use process implemented in school self-evaluation?

2)    What factors are the enablers and barriers in data use for school self-evaluation?

3)    What leadership practices are reported in data use for school self-evaluation?

School self-evaluation is used as a basis for school improvement planning. Therefore, the SSE is one case of data-based decision-making where improvements are planned and made for teaching and learning enhancement in schools. Our approach to data use is aligned with the shift towards continuous improvement defined by Mandinach and Schildkamp (2021) and SSE as a data use emphasizes the data-based decision-making within a particular educational context. We conceptualise SSE as a data use process influenced by varied factors and facilitated by specific leadership practices.

We used two methods of data collection in the form of individual semi-structured interviews with the school principals and focus groups with the members of the school leadership team from 12 schools in Estonia. The interviews were structured around school improvement mechanisms - school improvement planning, school curriculum development and school self-evaluation. It allowed us to highlight the data used in school self-evaluation from varied perspectives. Upon transcription of the interviews, the selected material was analysed using qualitative content analysis (Schreier, 2014). During coding by 2 researchers the coding frame was evaluated based on the conceptual framework

Findings indicate a fragmented data use process, shaped by factors such as data quality, user attitudes, and organizational structures. Effective data use requires clear goals and collaborative routines, yet schools often struggle with data collection. Informal data sources, like interviews, are frequently prioritized over formal achievement data, which complicates planning and outcome evaluation (Mandinach & Schildkamp, 2021). Leadership is key to effective SSE, with practices like individualized support and fostering collaboration seen as beneficial. However, these practices are often underutilized. Other challenges include limited stakeholder engagement and unclear or excessive SSE goals (Aderet-German & Ben-Peretz, 2020). External support, especially from universities, enhances data literacy. Additionally, the study found that schools lack structured organizational routines for data use, hindering long-term improvement. The results suggest that SSE requires balancing accountability and improvement objectives. They highlight the need for further research that includes perspectives from teachers, parents, and students to strengthen collaborative data use and SSE effectiveness. While Estonia’s context differs from that of countries with stronger accountability frameworks (e.g., the U.S., Ireland, and the U.K.) or those with high autonomy (such as the Netherlands), the purposes for data—accountability, school improvement, and instructional enhancement—remain similar across these systems (Schildkamp & Poortman, 2015; Skerritt et al., 2023).

References Aderet-German, T., & Ben-Peretz, M. (2020). Using data on school strengths and weaknesses for school improvement. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.100831 Brown, M., McNamara, G., O’Brien, S., Skerritt, C., & O’Hara, J. (2020). Policy and practice: Including parents and students in school self-evaluation. Irish Educational Studies, 39(4), 511–534. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2020.1814839 Hawlitschek, P., Henschel, S., Richter, D., & Stanat, P. (2024). The relationship between teachers’ and principals’ use of results from nationwide achievement tests: The mediating role of teacher attitudes and data use culture. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 80, 101317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2023.101317 Mandinach, E. B., & Schildkamp, K. (2021). Misconceptions about data-based decision making in education: An exploration of the literature. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100842 Schildkamp, K. (2019). Data-based decision-making for school improvement: Research insights and gaps. Educational Research, 61(3), 257–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2019.1625716 Schildkamp, K., Karbautzki, L., & Vanhoof, J. (2014). Exploring data use practices around Europe: Identifying enablers and barriers. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 42, 15–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.10.007 Schildkamp, K., & Poortman, C. (2015). Factors Influencing the Functioning of Data Teams. Teachers College Record, 117(4), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811511700403 Schreier, M. (2014). Qualitative Content Analysis. Qualitative data analysis, 2. Skerritt, C., O’Hara, J., Brown, M., McNamara, G., & O’Brien, S. (2023). Enacting school self-evaluation: The policy actors in Irish schools. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 32(3), 694–716. https://doi.org/10.1080/09620214.2021.1886594 van den Boom-Muilenburg, S. N., Poortman, C. L., Schildkamp, K., de Vries, S., & van Veen, K. (2023). Sustaining data use professional learning communities in schools: The role of leadership practices. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 78, 101273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2023.101273 Van Der Bij, T., Geijsel, F. P., & Ten Dam, G. T. M. (2016). Improving the quality of education through self-evaluation in Dutch secondary schools. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 49, 42–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.04.001 Vanhoof, J., Verhaeghe, G., Van Petegem, P., & Valcke, M. (2012). Flemish primary teachers use of school performance feedback and the impact of school characteristics. Educational Research & Evaluation, 54, 431–449.