Has our respect for data turned into an overdependence?
November 6, 2025
Fallon Graham Ed.D.
In education, data has taken on an almost sacred role. We praise it as the key to solving the problems of struggling schools and look to it as proof that we are moving in the right direction. Principals, in particular, are trained to be fluent in its language: identifying metrics, writing SMART goals, designing improvement plans, and documenting progress in ways that can be measured. To lead well is often defined as leading with data.
However, reverence can quickly turn into overreliance. When data is treated as the ultimate authority, principals begin to fear leaving anything untracked. Missing a data point feels like negligence, even if the measure itself adds little value. In this environment, tracking becomes less about learning and more about compliance.
I saw this clearly when working with principals to develop a strategic plan. To create the plan, participants were divided into groups by the plan's goal areas. Each group was asked to define success measures that would indicate whether progress has been made and whether goals have been accomplished. One of the groups was led by a principal, and several team members were also principals. When the principal heavy group submitted their success measures, the list was exhaustive, far more than any other group. Some measures overlapped, others were only loosely tied to the goal, and the sheer volume was unmanageable. At first, I thought they were rushing through the process and carelessly picking success measures that had only the slightest connection to their goal. After speaking with the group to find out what happened, I learned it wasn't carelessness; it was caution. The principal group tried to cover every possible angle, fearing they might miss something. Yet in the process, the plan lost focus and risked measuring more than what truly mattered. This illustrates the danger of overreliance on data.
Too often, schools get stuck in cycles of documentation, proving that gaps exist, reporting subgroup performance, filling spreadsheets, without placing more effort into the harder work of asking why and deciding what to do next.
The cost of this culture is real. Principals’ professional judgment, their classroom observations, and their intuition about staff and students are forms of evidence, too. But in a system where data is always the final word, those skills are underappreciated. Leaders start to doubt their instincts and lean on numbers, even when their experience tells them something different or more nuanced.
The question, then, is not whether data should matter. It must. The question is: have we placed so much faith in data that we have overshadowed the other dimensions of leadership that schools need? Have we built a role for principals that is simply too large, forcing them to choose between being human-centered leaders or data managers? If we want principals to thrive, we need to rebalance.
Data should be a tool, not a test of devotion. It should inform, not overwhelm. And it should serve as a starting point for knowledge and action, not a finish line for compliance. Until then, we risk schools that are well-measured but uninspired, efficient but hollow, focused more on proving progress than on truly making it.
Schools operate within a system of mandates that are grounded in strong, research-based practices. Compliance, therefore, is not the enemy; it ensures that schools uphold standards designed to support student learning and equity. Yet, in fulfilling these requirements, leaders cannot become so consumed by compliance that they neglect their professional knowledge, instincts, and judgment.
Principals should streamline data reporting practices to focus on what truly informs instruction and improvement.
Data should serve as a springboard for deep, reflective conversations supported by observational evidence and lived experience.
Leaders must remember that relationships are data, too. The culture and climate of a school offer powerful indicators of success.
When data and human insight are brought into balance, schools move beyond proving progress to truly achieving it.
Data will always have a place in education, but it cannot define it. The true measure of a school lies not only in charts and reports but in the learning, growth, and people that those numbers represent. When principals are empowered to pair evidence with insight, and analysis with action, schools become more than systems of accountability; they transform into communities of purpose.
Reclaiming balance means honoring both the science and the art of leadership, where data informs decisions, but wisdom, relationships, and reflection sustain them.