I have recently written about the district’s steps toward data transparency – why they are necessary and where they need refinement. Previously, I focused on what data was needed and how to organize it for maximum value.

Here, I want to emphasize how converting data into actionable, measurable information is essential for effective decision-making and accountability within the district. Actionable information guides current decisions and establishes a baseline for evaluating past choices and refining future strategies.

• Data consists of raw, unorganized, and unprocessed facts (numbers, symbols, or observations) that lack context on their own.
• Information is the refined, structured output derived from that data once it is processed and analyzed, making it useful for decision-making.

Put simply: information is data plus context. Data alone is not actionable. It can produce visually appealing charts, but information gives us the clarity to determine what comes next.

To recycle an example I have used before: graphing 3rd-grade math scores satisfies the goal of transparency, but it does not suggest a clear next step. If we compare those results against student participation in pre-K programs – a simple layer of analysis – we suddenly have information that helps us decide which pre-K programs to expand or promote.

But while information guides decision-making, it is only half the equation. To use a geographic metaphor, information tells us where we are, but we cannot plot a route without a defined destination. That destination is the objective – the second half of the equation.

One proven way to frame objectives is the SMART framework: making them Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. Focusing on measurable targets enables accurate progress tracking, which in turn builds public trust. Without a measurable benchmark, there is no meaningful objective.

Consider the objectives within Goal 1 of the district’s current strategic plan (To create a learning environment and experiences where all Montclair Public Schools’ students will graduate as confident, skillsbased learners to fully participate in society.): not one of the three listed objectives contains a measurable metric. Does “continually refined” mean weekly updates, annual reviews, or something else? How do we evaluate whether curricula develop “a deep, conceptual understanding” or “cultivate critical thinkers”? How do we measure school culture to verify whether it is “inclusive” or truly “ensuring equitable access to resources and curricula”?

The consequence of this ambiguity is clearly demonstrated on the district’s progress dashboard (download) which lists objectives only as either “in progress” or “not started.” An objective marked “in progress” could be 1% complete or 99% complete – there is no way to know. This is not a flaw in the dashboard itself, but a structural reality: without a numeric metric, one cannot calculate a percentage or define completion. Under the objective “Provide continually refined,” work can never actually be completed; there is always another refinement.

As important as Mrs. Turner’s efforts toward data transparency are, transparency is only one piece of the puzzle. It is necessary, but not sufficient. To achieve meaningful progress and true accountability, the district must revisit these objectives – and perhaps the underlying goals – and replace them with measurable, SMART-based targets. This approach reassures stakeholders that progress is tangible and trackable.