Chair: Elizabeth R. Albro (Institute of Education Sciences);Discussant: James W. Pellegrino (University of Illinois at Chicago)

1. Supporting Teachers’ Efforts to Use Assessment to Guide Instruction; Carol M. Connor (Florida State University), Frederick J. Morrison (University of Michigan)
2. Formative and Summative Assessments of Reading Comprehension: Implications for Reading in Electronic Contexts; Rick Wagner (Florida State University), Kanu Priya (Florida State University), Carol Rashotte (Florida State University)

1. Abstract: This symposium reports an experiment designed to compare mail- and web-based surveys directly. Teachers certified by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards participated in a survey of their perceptions of their professional community. The sample was randomly divided into two groups—one group received the initial contacts and questionnaire via mail, and the other group received the initial contacts via an e-mail directing them to a web-based questionnaire. In both cases, the survey implementation procedures reflect Dillman’s (2000) Tailored Design Method. Four papers compare the two media for survey implementation: The first paper compares the unit-level response, refusal, and non-deliverable rates. The second paper compares item-level non-responses. The third paper compares the characteristics of the obtained samples who chose to respond by each medium. The fourth paper compares the content of scale-level and item-level responses.
2. Response Rates for Mail- and Web-Based Surveys; Pat Converse (Florida Institute of Technology), Frederick Oswald (Michigan State University), Edward W. Wolfe (Virginia Tech)
3. Item-Level Nonresponse Rates for Mail- and Web-Based Surveys; Edward W. Wolfe (Virginia Tech), Frederick Oswald (Michigan State University)
4. Obtained Sample Characteristics for Mail- and Web-Based Surveys; Xiaoting Huang (University of California-Berkeley), Edward W. Wolfe (Virginia Tech), Frederick Oswald (Michigan State University), Pat Converse (Florida Institute of Technology)
5. Content of Scale-Level and Item-Level Responses for Mail- and Web-Based Surveys; Linda A. Chard (Michigan State University), Edward W. Wolfe (Virginia Tech), Frederick Oswald (Michigan State University), Pat Converse (Florida Institute of Technology), Xiaoting Huang (University of California-Berkeley)

1. Rapid Implementation of a Districtwide Data Initiative: Implementation and Sustainability; Jeff Wayman (The University of Texas), Katherine Conoly (Corpus Christi Independent School District)
2. District Evidence Use: An Analysis of Instructional Decision Making; Cynthia E. Coburn (University of California-Berkeley), Judith L. Toure (University of Pittsburgh), Mika Yamashita (University of Pittsburgh)
3. Sam Stringfield Discussant

1. A Theoretical Framework for Data-Driven Decision Making; Margaret A. Honey (Center for Children & Technology), Ellen B. Mandinach (Education Development Center, Inc.)
2. The Impact of Data-Driven Decision-Making Tools on Educational Practice: A Systems Analysis of Six School Districts; Ellen B. Mandinach (Education Development Center, Inc.), Margaret A. Honey (Center for Children & Technology), Cricket Heinze (Education Development Center, Inc.), Luz Rivas (Education Development Center, Inc.), Daniel Light (Education Development Center/Center for Children and Technology)
3. The Use of Digital Tools to Analyze Data and Make Informed Instructional Decisions; Sherry King (Achieve), Cornelia Brunner (Education Development Center/Center for Children and Technology)
4. What's Next: Instrumenting the Classroom to Create a Data-Rich, High-Performance Learning Environment; Valerie M. Crawford (SRI International), Mark Schlager (SRI International), William R. Penuel (SRI International)
5. Learning From Teaching Practitioners Using Statistical Databases, Tools, and Resources on the History of High-Stakes Testing; Jere Confrey (Washington University in St. Louis)
6. Teachers' Use of Data: Affordances and Constraints of Organizations and Policies; Viki M. Young (SRI International)

1. Instructional Architect - Mimi Recker
2. Wiki as a Professional Development Tool - Brian J. Foley (California State University-Northridge), Tae Chang (California State University-Northridge)
   1. Abstract: This paper examines how wiki technology can be used to support teacher professional development. Wiki is a type of interactive web site that allows users to contribute content and editing to the site. This technology can be used in a number of ways, but in each case the contributions of the participants are the key source for information on the site. Wiki technology can provide a space for the social construction of knowledge of a community. California State University, Northridge is using wiki technology in its teacher preparation in two ways: as a forum to create teacher generated online resources and as an online collaboration tool. The potential of this technology and the experience at CSUN will be discussed.