Assessment Application & Analysis Report

4/16/2013 ELED 3420 Kristi Charlton

Table of Contents Contextual Factors Assessment #1 Assessment #2 Assessment #3 Self-Reflection Page 2 Page 9 Page 25 Page 41 Page 58

Assessment Application & Analysis Report Revised School: Sunset Elementary Grade: 3rd Teacher: Ms. King Principal: Nathan Esplin Staff Developer: Tiffany Porter School Secretaries: Jane Gubler, Susan Ellison, & Marianne Jackson Sunset Elementary Demographics: At Sunset Elementary in the Washington County School District there are 561 students, 267 boys and 251 girls. This number includes all students from preschool through 5th grade. Of these students, 68 are English Language Learners (ELL) students and 30 are Gifted and Talented (GATE) or accelerated students. The ethnicity of the school is as follows: 1% Asian, 2% African American, 77% Caucasian, 14% Hispanic, 3% Native American, and 3% Pacific Islander. On average 65% of the school, approximately 365 students, receive free or reduced lunch. As a result of these numbers, Sunset Elementary is currently considered a Title 1 school.

Gender
270 260 250 240 Boys Girls Gender

Figure 1There are 267 boys and 251 girls enrolled at Sunset Elementary. Source: Ms. GublerSchool Secretary

3% 3%

Ethnicity

1% 2%

14%

Asian African American Caucasian Hispanic Native American 77% Pacific Islander

Figure 2Out of 561 students 1% is Asian, 2% are African American, 77% are Caucasian, 14% are Hispanic, 3% are Native American, and 3% are Pacific Islander. Source: Ms. GublerSchool Secretary

ELL & GATE Students

ELL Students GATE Students Non-ELL or Gate Students

12% 5%

83%

Figure 3Out of 561 students 68 students or 12% are ELLs, 30 or 5% are GATE students, and 463 or 83% are Non-ELL or Gate students. Source: Ms. GublerSchool Secretary
3

Ms. Kings Classroom Demographics: In Ms. Kings third-grade class at Sunset Elementary in the Washington County School District there are 22 students, nine girls and thirteen boys. Of these students, four have learning Individualized Education Plans (IEPs), one sees a speech specialist, one sees the school counselor for social issues, one suffers from ADHD, two are Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) students, and six are English Language Learners (ELL) students. Of the ELL students four are Hispanic, one is Argentinian, and one is Native American. The students First Language (L1) was not available. The Socioeconomic Status (SES) ranges from lower to upper middle class, with the majority of the students falling into the low to middle class range. This estimation is based on the free or reduced lunch information that I received from the schools secretary. According to Ms. Gubler, 65% of the schools total student body receives free or reduced lunch. Armed with this information its safe to say approximately 14 out of 22 students in Ms. Kings class are among the 65% receiving free or reduced lunch. The reading levels of the students in Ms. Kings class are as follows: two students are at a level 4 (above grade level), nine are at a level 3(at grade level), 5 are teetering at a 2-3 (at or just below grade level), two are at a level 2 (approaching grade level), and three are at a level 1 (below grade level). The math levels of the students are: one at level 4 (above grade level), ten at a level 3 (at grade level), seven at a level 2 (approaching grade level), and three at a level 1 (below grade level).

15 10 5 0 Boys

Gender
Gender Girls

Figure 4There are 13 boys and 9 girls in Ms. Kings third grade class at Sunset Elementary. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher
4

Reading Levels
Level 4 Level 3 Level 2/3 Number of students Level 2 Level 1 0 2 4 6 8 10

Figure 5Out of 22 students 2 students are at a level 4 (above grade level), 9 are at a level 3 (at grade level), 5 are at a level 2/3 (teetering at or just below grade level), 2 are at a level 2 (approaching grade level), and 3 are at a level 1 (below grade level). Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Math Levels
Level 4 Level 3 Number of students Level 2 Level 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Figure 6Out of 22 students, 3 students are at a level 1 (below grade level), 7 are at a level 2 (approaching grade level), 11 are at a level 3 (at grade level), and 1 is at a level 4 (above grade level). Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher
5

Ethnicity
5% 18% 5% Caucasion Hispanic Argentinian 72% Native American

Figure 7Out of 22 students 16 are Caucasian, 4 are Hispanic, 1 is Argentinian, and 1 is Native American. The students L1 (First Language) was not available Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Special Needs-IEP's
18% Students with IEP's Students without IEP's 82%

Figure 8Out of 22 students 4 students have learning IEPs and receive special education services. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Classroom Rules: When students need something they raise their hand and indicate what they need by the number of fingers they display. 1 fingerI need a pencil. 2 fingersI need to use the restroom. 3 fingersI need a drink. 4 fingersI need a Kleenex. 5 fingersI have a question. Posted Class Rule: I Experience Success When I 1. Look 2. Listen 3. Use Common Sense 4. Use the Golden Rule 5. WORK HARD Classroom Policies/Procedures: Every morning students unpack their things, turn in their take home library books, and get ready for bell work. If students need an eraser or a pencil they raise their hand and purchase one from Ms. King with horseshoes (class money). Every activity in Ms. Kings class is differentiated. Students work cooperatively in small groups or with partners all day long.

Transitions are minimal. Students spend the first part of the school year practicing procedures so that group work, partner activities, and transitions run smoothly and efficiently.

Students are expected to return their take home library books every day. If they forget their take home library books their name is written on the board and they are not allowed to go out to recess.

Ms. King is extremely organized and follows a very strict schedule. Students know where they are to be and what is expected of them at all times.

If students complete an activity early they are to visit the What to do when I am finished folder located at the back of the classroom.

Assessment Analysis #1 Revised Type of Assessment: The first assessment that was administered was a math pre-test. This assessment was given to determine what the students already knew about the topic, subtracting 2 & 3 digit numbers, before any specific instruction was given. The second assessment that was administered was a post-test. This assessment was given after direct instruction was given on subtracting 2 & 3 digit numbers. The results of the first assessment were then used to determine what information and math concepts needed to be focused on and taught during classroom instruction time to properly prepare students for the post-test. Purpose of Assessment: The purpose of the pre and post-test for this math topic was to determine if students could accurately subtract 2 & 3 digit numbers. Before the pre-test was given no direct instruction was provided. However, before the post-test was administered students were taught to borrow and carry when subtracting 2 & 3 digit numbers by Ms. King. They were also taught when it was necessary to borrow and when it was not and how to estimate the cost of something. Also, to help students prepare for their post-test, Ms. King provided the students with several story problems to help them prepare for the subtraction story problems they would encounter on their post-test. Armed with this new information students were then asked to use their knowledge of subtraction to help them subtract 2 & 3 digit numbers properly, answer story problems, and read charts to answer a variety of different subtraction questions on their post-test. Administration of Assessment: The pre-test was administered by Ms. King. I was not present when the first assessment was administered. However, typically when students are given tests in Ms. Kings class they take

them at their desks, the class is quiet, and students place divider folders between them and their neighbors so students cant cheat. Ms. King also administered the post-test, but I was present when students entered their answers for the test. Students were given the exam on paper. They were given time to complete the test and then they used the clickers to enter their answers. The classroom was quiet during the administration of the test and students worked on the tests at their desks with dividers between them and their neighbors. The three students I chose to look at for this assessment are Austin, Marttinno, and Jaydon. Austin is a GATE or accelerated student. He is extremely smart and needs to be challenged more than he is. Hes above grade level in reading and at grade level for math. Marttinno is an ELL student from Argentina. Hes easily distracted and unmotivated to learn. Hes frequently disrupted and has to leave the class a lot. Hes currently at grade level for both reading and math, and has a WIDA level of 5. Jaydon is an average student. He does not receive any special services for reading or math and he enjoys learning. He teeters at or below grade level in reading and is approaching grade level for math. Analyze & Synthesize:
Question1: Louie bought a bicycle for $148 and a helmet for $98. What would be good estimates for the cost of each? *Estimation Answer: C. $150 and $100 Question 6: Francisco has $635. If he spends $117 on a guitar, how much will he have left? Question 2: By how much was the television reduced? Was $346 Now $272 *Subtraction Answer: C. $74 Question 7: Helen had 241 pennies in her collection. She used 99 of them to buy a new pen. How many pennies does she have left? *Subtraction Answer: C. 142 Question 3: What is the new price of the bicycle? Was $579 Save $86 Question 4: What is the difference in cost between the items shown? Skates-$189 Skates-$127 *Subtraction Answer: A. $62 Question 9: (Use the Chart) Which two children have the greatest difference in the number of stamps in their collections? *Reading Data & Subtraction Answer: B. Penny and T.J. Question 5: How much less does the small TV cost? Big TV-$821 Small TV-$483

*Subtraction Answer: B. $493 Question 8: (Use the chart) How many more stamps does Penny have than Hugh? Hugh-568 Penny-659 *Reading Data & Subtraction Answer: B. 91

*Subtraction Answer: B. $518

*Subtraction Answer: A. $338 Question 10: (Use the Chart) T.J. wants to have 1,000 stamps in his collection. How many more does he need to collect? T.J.-435 *Reading Data & Subtraction Answer: A. 565

10

Pre-Test Whole Class:

Pre-Test Averages
100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Boys Girls GATE Students ELL Students Group Averages Whole Class Average

Figure 1.1The class average was 47% on the pre-test. The boys scored an average of 46%, the girls scored an average of 47%, the GATE students scored an average of 60%, and the ELL students scored an average of 42%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

12 11 11 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 4 4 3 6 5 5 Number of Students Answering Correctly Number of students answering Incorrectly 9 10 10

Figure 1.215 out of 22 students took the pre-test. The above graph illustrates the number of correct answers as well as the number of incorrect answers given for each question on the pre-test. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher
11

Pre-test Individual Scores

7% Students who scored above 80% 33% 60% Students who scored between 60-80% Students who scored below 60%

Figure 1.3Out of 15 students who took the pre-test 1 student or 7% of the class scored above 80%, 5 students or 33% of the class scored between 60-80%, and 9 students or 60% of the class scored below 60%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher Only 15 students out of 22 took the pre-test. The four IEP students work with an aide during math time and their test scores were not included in the class average. When I asked Ms. King why their test scores werent included, no clear answer was given. Out of the 15 students who took the test, eight were boys and seven were girls. The girls scored 1% better than the boys on the pretest and they matched the class average. The boys on the other hand scored slightly lower than the class average. The two GATE students who took the test scored an average of 60% while five out of the six ELL students took the test and they scored an average of 42%. Individual averages are as follows: one student scored better than 80% on the test, five students scored between 60-80%, and nine students scored below 60%. Out of the ten questions on the test, question #1 received the most correct answers with 11 students being able to correctly identify the answer, while questions #8 and #9 received the second most correct answers with 10 students being able to correctly identify the answer on both questions. On the other hand,

12

question #10 was missed the most by the students. Only three out of 15 students could correctly identify the answer. Students also struggled with questions #2 and #3. According to the analysis, most students did not understand question #10. They also struggled with questions #2 and #3. Using this information I would make sure I went back and retaught the concepts associated with these problems. I would also include visuals and more explicit instructions to help increase my ELL average because it was the lowest. Also, considering that more than half of the class struggled on the pre-test, I believe an in-depth overview of all concepts associated with 2 and 3 digit subtraction is needed. When looking at whether or not the classroom environment may have contributed to the lower test scores or not, I do not have an answer because I was not present when the pre-test was given. However, because the testing environment is always the same I dont believe it was a major factor in the outcome of the test. Pre-Test Jaydon, Marttinno, & Austin:

Pre-Test Averages
100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Jaydon Marttinno Austin Individual Average Whole Class Average ELL Average GATE Average

Figure 1.4The whole class average on the pre-test was 47%, the ELL average was 42%, and the GATE average was 60%. Jaydon scored an average of 20% on the pre-test, Marttinno scored an average of 50%, and Austin scored an average of 20%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher
13

Jaydon's Pre-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The TEst 4 3 2 1 0 3 3 2 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 3 2 3 2 2 1 2 1

Jaydon's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 1.5Jaydons pre-test answers compared to the correct pre-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Marttinno's Pre-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 3 1 2 1 1 3 2 1 3 2 2 1 3 1 Marttinno's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 1.6Martinnos pre-test answers compared to the correct pre-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Austin's Pre-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 3 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 2 1 3 3 2 3 2 2 1

Austin's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 1.7Austins pre-test answers compared to the correct pre-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher
14

For my in-depth analyze I chose to focus on the test scores of Jaydon, Marttinno, and Austin. I chose these three students because I wanted to analyze an above grade level or GATE student, an ELL student, and an average student who does not receive any kind of accommodations or modifications. On the pre-test Jaydon scored an average of 20% and answered two of the ten questions correctly, Marttinno scored an average of 50% and answered five of the 10 questions correctly, and Austin scored an average of 20% and answered two of the ten questions correctly. Question #1 received the most correct answers by the class. Jaydon, Marttinno, and Austin were among the 11 students in the class who could correctly identify the answer to question #1. Question #10 was missed the most by the class. Jaydon, Marttinno, and Austin were among the 12 students who incorrectly answered question #10. The class also struggled to correctly answer question #2 and #3. Martinno, and Austin were among the students who struggled to answer questions #2 and #3, while Jaydon only struggled with question #2. According to the analysis, Jaydon, Marttinno, and Austin struggled with the same questions that the majority of the rest of the class also struggled with. Armed with this information, I would make sure all three of them received explicit instruction along with the rest of the class to help them understand the concepts associated with the questions that they missed. Given Marttinnos tenacity to be disruptive and off task I would make sure he was kept actively engaged during the review of key concepts related to 2 & 3 digit subtraction to ensure that hes test scores improve. For Jaydon, I would provide him with as much math intervention as possible, especially considering his low test average and his frequent struggles to stay at grade level for Math. For Austin, I would provide him with extra scaffolding where needed, but given his GATE status, if taught the math concepts correctly he will have no problem catching on and understanding the key concepts associated with 2 & 3 digit subtraction.

15

Post-Test Whole Class:

Post-Test Averages
100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Boys Girls GATE Students ELL Students Group Averages Whole Class Average

Figure 1.8The class average was 72% on the post-test. The boys scored an average of 76%, the girls scored an average of 67%, the GATE students scored an average of 95%, and the ELL students scored an average of 58%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher
16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 2 9 8 9 8 9 8 5 3 1 1 16 14 12 9 8 16

15

15

Number of Students Answering Correctly Number of students answering Incorrectly

Figure 1.917 out of 22 students took the post-test. The above graph illustrates the number of correct answers as well as the number of incorrect answers given for each question on the posttest. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher
16

Post-Test Individual Scores

12% 47% 41% Students who scored above 80% Students who scored between 60-80% Students who scored below 60%

Figure 1.10Out of 17 students who took the post-test 8 students or 47% of the class scored above 80%, 7 students or 41% of the class scored between 60-80%, and 2 students or 12% of the class scored below 60%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher Pre-Test & Post-Test Comparisons:

Pre-Test & Post-Test Averages Compared

100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Boys Girls GATE Students ELL Students Pre-Test Group Average Pre-Test Class Average Post-Test Group Average Post-Test Class Average

Figure 1.11The Pre-Test Averages and Post-Test Averages compared side by side for Boys, Girls, GATE students, and ELLstudents. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

17

16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

15 11 11 9 8 4 2 4 11 9 8 4

15 12 9 6 2 10 9 8 5 8 7 5

16 14

16 12 Number of Students Answering Correctly on the Post-Test Number of students Answering Incorrectly on the Post-Test Number of Students Answering Correctly on the Pre-Test Number of Students Answering Incorrectly on the Pre-Test

9 6

10

10

9 8

5 3

5 3 1

Figure 1.12The above graph illustrates the number of correct answers as well as the number of incorrect answers given for each question on the pre-test and the post-test. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher Only 17 students out of 22 took the post-test. The four IEP students work with an aide during math time and their test scores were not included in the class average. When I asked Ms. King why their test scores werent included, no clear answer was given. Out of the 17 students who took the test, ten were boys and seven were girls. The boys exceed the class average by 4% and the girls by 9%. The girls scored below the class average by 5%, and the ELL students scored below the class average by 14%. The biggest growth was among the two GATE students who scored well above the class average at 95%. As far as answering the questions correctly, all but 1 student correctly answered questions #7 and # 9 and all but 2 students correctly answered questions #1 and #4. Students struggled with question 2 the most. Only eight students were able to identify the correct answer. Questions #10, #3, and #5 were the next hardest questions for students. On all three of these questions only nine of the students in the class could correctly identify the right answer. On average nearly half the class was able to score an 80% or better on the post-test and 88% of the class was able to score above 60%.
18

According to the analysis, students did much better on the post-test then they did on the pre-test. On the post-test the class average was 72% while the class average on the pre-test was only 47%. The boys increased their percentage from the pre-test to the post-test by 30%, the girls by 20%, the GATE students by 35%, and the ELL students by 11%. Given this information its easy to see that the ELL students did not achieve as well as the other students in the class, this maybe a result of not enough direct instruction or the limited use of visual material by Ms. King. From my observation, there is typically not a lot of differentiation provided to the students during math. Another observation made from the analysis is on average students still performed poorly on questions #10, #3, and #5 on the post-test. They also performed poorly on question #2 as well. On average less than half the students in Ms. Kings class could identify the correct answer for question #2. As a result of this analysis it seems somewhere during class instruction key concepts associated with 2 & 3 digit subtraction were not properly taught. The reason I say this is if students had been properly taught, their achievement would have indicated it and they wouldve achieved much higher on questions #2, #3, #5, and #10 then they did. With that being said, students who performed well on questions #1, #9, and #8 on the pre-test also performed well on these questions on the post-test. They also performed well on questions #4 and #7on the post-test. This seems to indicate that even with very little classroom instruction students still would have been able to correctly answer these questions because they had the background knowledge to do so. I was present when the post-test was administered, and as usual, the room was quiet and students took the tests from their desks with dividers separating them from their neighbors. I dont believe the environment impacted the students ability to take the test during the post-test or the pre-test.

19

Post Test Jaydon, Marttinno, & Austin:

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The TEst

Jaydon's Post-Test Response

4 3 2 1 0 3 3 2 3 2 1 1 3 2 2 2 1 Jaydon's Answers Correct Answers 3

Figure 1.13Jaydons post-test answers compared to the correct post-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Marttinno's Post-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 3 2 3 2 1 2 1 1 3 2 2 2 1 Marttinno's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 1.14Martinnos post-test answers compared to the correct post-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Austin's Post-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 2 3 2 1 1 2 3 2 2 1 Austin's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 1.15Austins post-test answers compared to the correct post-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher
20

Jaydon's Pre-Test & Post-Test Responses Compared

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The TEst 4 3 2 1 0 3 3 2 1 3 2 3 2 1 1 2 1 3 2 3 2 2 1 3 2 1 Jaydon's Answers on PostTest Correct Answers Jaydon's Answers on PreTest

Figure 1.16Jaydons pre-test and post-test answers compared to the correct test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Marttinno's Pre-Test & Post-Test Responses Compared

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 3 2 1 3 2 1 2 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 3 2 1 Marttinno's Answers on Post-Test Correct Answers Marttinno's Answers on PreTest

Figure 1.17Marttinnos pre-test and post-test answers compared to the correct test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Austin's Pre-Test & Post-Test Responses Compared

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 2 3 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 2 1 3 3 2 3 2 2 1 Austin's Answers on PostTest Correct Answers Austin's Answers on Pre-Test

Figure 1.18Austins pre-test and post-test answers compared to the correct test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

21

Post-Test Averages
100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Jaydon Marttinno Austin Individual Average Whole Class Average ELL Average GATE Average

Figure 1.19The whole class average on the post-test was 72%, the ELL average was 58%, and the GATE average was 95%. Jaydon scored an average of 70% on the post-test, Marttinno scored an average of 60%, and Austin scored an average of 90%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher For my analysis of the post-test I again analyzed Jaydons, Marttinnos, and Austins test performance. Compared to the pre-test Jaydon and Austin made great gains. Jaydon scored 70% on the post-test while Austin scored 90%. Jaydon increased his percentage by 50% and Austin by 70%. Marttinnos performance was not as large. On the post-test Marttinno scored 60% while on the pre-test he scored 50%. Between the two tests he only increased his percentage by 10%. Jaydons average of 70% placed him 25% below the GATE average and 2% below the class average. However, he did score higher than the ELL average by 12%. Austins average of 90% placed him 18% higher than the class average, 32% higher than the ELL average, and just below the GATE average by 5%. Marttinnos average of 60% placed him 12% below the class average, 35% below the GATE average, and slightly above the ELL average by 2%. Austin only missed question #1 on the post-test, which was interesting given it was one of two questions he answered correctly on the pre-test. Jaydon missed questions #2, #3, and #10. These were the same three questions that the majority of the students in Ms. Kings class also missed. Marttinno
22

missed questions #2, #3, #8, and #10. Again they were the same questions that the majority of the other students in Ms. Kings class also missed. According to the analysis Jaydon and Marttinno struggled with the same questions that the majority of the other students in Ms. Kings class also missed. This suggests that they were not properly taught the key concepts associated with 2 & 3 digit subtract for these problems like the rest of the class. Despite this Jaydons and Marttinnos tests scores improved from the pretest to the post-test. However, Jaydons test scores improved a lot more than Marttinnos. Through careful observation as well as examination of the data it appears that Marttinnos ELL status and his tenancy to be off task may have contributed to his low gains between the pre-test and the post-test. To make sure Marttinno makes better gains on the next test, he needs to be kept engaged at all times and he needs to be given as many opportunities to interact with the class instruction as possible. He also needs to be given more visuals and more explicit instructions. And class distractions should be kept at a minimum. Jaydon on the other hand made substantial gains between the pre-test and the post test. From the pre-test to the post-test Jaydons average test score increased by 50%. This seems to show that even though the key concepts associated with questions #2, #3, and #10 were not properly taught, other key concepts were, and as a result, Jaydon was able to make great gains in his achievement. Because of his gains in achievement the only thing I can think of that would help Jaydon increase his achievement even more would be to make sure he comprehends and is properly taught all key concepts associated with 2 & 3 digit subtraction before being tested again. As for Austin, he achieved the greatest gains between the pre-test and the post-test. On the pre-test Austins test average was 20% whereas on the post-test his test average was 90%. Austin is a GATE student and as a GATE student if key concepts are properly taught to him he will generally remember them and be able to apply them when he

23

needs to. What I feel Austin needs more than anything is to be challenged. To keep him achieving at the rate that he is he needs to be challenged as much as possible. As for the class environment I dont feel it was a factor in the testing ability of Jaydon or Austin. However, given Marttinnos disruptiveness and inability to stay on task any number of things in the class may have been a distraction for him. As a result, class noise, class movement, and any other distractions should be kept at a minimum to help him perform at his best.

24

Assessment Analysis #2 Type of Assessment: The first assessment that was administered was a math pre-test. This assessment was given to determine what the students already knew about the topic, measurement, length, and perimeter, before any direct instruction was given. The second assessment that was administered was a post-test. This assessment was administered after direct instruction was given on measurement and finding perimeter. The results of the first assessment were then used to determine what information and math concepts needed to be focused on and taught during classroom instruction time to properly prepare students for the post-test. Purpose of Assessment: The purpose of the pre and post-test for this math topic was to determine if students could correctly use measurements and find perimeter. Before the pre-test was given no direct instruction was provided. However, before the post-test was administered students were taught to find the perimeter of an object, were taught how to determine the best unit of measure for an object, and were shown how both read and use a ruler by Ms. King. Addition to teaching the students these basic math concepts, Ms. King also provided the students with enrichment activity to help them increase their understanding of measurement. For this enrichment activity the students were given frogs that they could make jump and a rule. The made their frogs jump and then measured how far they jumped with their rules. They had to record the measurement in both centimeters and inches. Armed with this new information students were then asked to use their knowledge of rulers, perimeter, and the best unit of measurement to answer a variety of different measurement questions on their post-test.

25

Administration of Assessment: The pre-test and the post-test were administered by Ms. King. However, I was present when both assessments were administered. For these two assessments the students were at their desks, the class was quiet, and students placed divider folders between them and their neighbors so students could not cheat. After both assessments were given the students used the clickers to submit their answers. The three students I chose to look at for this assessment are Austin, Marttinno, and Jaydon. Austin is a GATE or accelerated student. He is extremely smart and needs to be challenged more than he is. Hes above grade level in reading and at grade level for math. Marttinno is an ELL student from Argentina. Hes easily distracted and unmotivated to learn. Hes frequently disrupted and has to leave the class a lot. Hes currently at grade level for both reading and math, and has a WIDA level of 5. Jaydon is an average student. He does not receive any special services for reading or math and he enjoys learning. He teeters at or below grade level in reading and is approaching grade level for math. Analyze & Synthesize:
Question 1: What is the best unit of measure? The school bus is 7 ___ long. *Measurement/ Problem Solving Answer: B. Meters Question 6: Which is greater than 1 yard? Question 2: The toy truck is ____ long. Question3: Find the perimeter of Ellies garden. *Measurement/ Perimeter Answer: C. 28 feet Question 8: How long is a row of these 6 tables placed side by side? Question 4: What is the perimeter of the swimming pool? *Measurement/ Perimeter Answer: B. 44 meters Question 9: What is the best unit of measure? The basketball player is 78____ tall. *Measurement/ Problem Solving Answer: B. inches Question 5: Which shape has a perimeter of 42 inches? *Measurement/ Perimeter Answer: C. The hexagon Question 10: Which shape has the greatest perimeter? *Measurement/ Perimeter Answer: A. The square

*Measurement Answer: A. 10 centimeters Question 7: Which is closest to 3 meters?

*Measurement Answer: A. 4 feet

*Measurement Answer: B. 290 centimeters

*Measurement Answer: C. 24 feet

26

Pre-Test Whole Class:

Pre-Test Averages
100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Boys Girls GATE Students ELL Students IEP Students Whole Class Average Group Averages

Figure 2.1The class average was 68% on the pre-test. The boys scored an average of 60%, the girls cored an average of 69%, the GATE students scored an average of 80%, the ELL students scored an average of 56%, and the IEP students scored an average of 50%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher
20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 20 17 15 17 15 13 11 10 8 6 4 1 4 6 4 8 6 13 Number of Students Answering Correctly Number of Students Answering Incorrectly 17 15

Figure2.221 out of 22 students took the re-test. The above graph illustrates the number of correct answers as well as the number of incorrect answers given for each question on the pretest. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

27

Pre-test Individual Scores

Students who scored above 80% 28% 48% 24% Students who scored between 60-80% Students who scored below 60%

Figure 2.3Out of 21 students who took the pre-test 10 students or 48% of the class scored above 80%, 5 students or 24% of the class scored between 60-80%, and 6 students or 28% of the class scored below 60%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher Only 21 students out of 22 students took the pre-test. Out of the 21 students who took the test, twelve were boys and nine were girls. The girls scored 9% better than the boys on the pretest and 1% higher than the class average. The boys on the other hand scored 8% lower than the class average. The two GATE students who took the test scored an average of 80% while five out of the six ELL students took the test and they scored an average of 56%. The four IEP students scores were entered and recorded for this assessment and they scored an average of 50%. Individual averages are as follows: ten students scored better than 80% on the test, five students scored between 60-80%, and six students scored below 60%. Out of the ten questions on the test, question #3 received the most correct answers with 20 students being able to correctly identify the answer, while questions #2, #4, and #8 received the second most correct answers with 17 students being able to correctly identify the answer on all three questions. On the other hand, question #1 was missed the most by the students. Only six out of the 21 students could correctly identify the answer. Students also struggled with questions #6, #7, and #9.

28

According to the analysis, most students did not understand question #1. They also struggled with questions #6, #7, and #9. Using this information I would make sure I went back and retaught the concepts associated with these problems, particularly measurement equivalents. I would also include visuals, hands-on activities, and more explicit instructions to help increase my ELL and IEP averages, especially since their scores were considerably lower than the class average. Also, considering that the concepts that the students missed the most on the pre-test were determining the best unit of measurement and measurement equivalents, I believe a more in-depth overview of these two concepts associated is needed. When looking at whether or not the classroom environment may have contributed to the lower test scores or not, I dont believe it was. The testing environment for the pre-test was the same as it always is. The class was quiet and students took the test at their desks with dividers between them and their neighbors for privacy. In my opinion, I dont believe the classroom environment was a major factor in the outcome of the test. Pre-Test Jaydon, Marttinno, & Austin:

Pre-Test Averages
100.00% 50.00% 0.00% Jaydon Marttinno Austin Individual Average Whole Class Average ELL Average GATE Average

Figure 2.4The whole class average on the pre-test was 68%, the ELL average was 56%, the GATE average was 80%, and the IEP average was 50%. Jaydon scored an average of 70% on the pre-test, Marttinno was absent for the pre-test and scored an average of 0%, and Austin scored an average of 70%. Source: Ms.KingClassroom Teacher
29

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The TEst

Jaydon's Pre-Test Response

4 3 2 1 0 3 2 1 3 2 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 1 Jaydon's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 2.5Jaydons pre-test answers compared to the correct pre-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Marttinno's Pre-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 2 1 2 1 3 2 3 2 1 Marttinno's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 2.6Marttinno was absent on the day of the pre-test. The above graph illustrates that there was no response given for question 1-10 for Marttinno. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Austin's Pre-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 3 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 2 1 3 3 2 3 2 2 1 Austin's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 2.7Austins pre-test answers compared to the correct pre-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher
30

For my in-depth analyze I chose to focus on the test scores of Jaydon, Marttinno, and Austin. I chose these three students because I wanted to analyze an above grade level or GATE student, and ELL student, and an average student who does not receive any kind of accommodations or modifications. On the pre-test Jaydon scored an average of 70% and answered seven of the ten questions correctly, Marttinno was absent on the day of the tested so his average appears as 0%, and Austin scored an average of 70% and answered seven out of the ten questions correctly. Question #4 received the most correct answers by the class. Jaydon and Austin were among the 20 students in the class who could correctly identify the answer to question #4. Question #1 was missed the most by the class. Austin was among the 15 students who incorrectly answered question #1. The class also struggled to correctly answer questions #6, #7, and #9. Jaydon was among those who struggled with question #6 and Austin was among those who struggled with question #9, while Jaydon and Austin were both among those students who struggled with question #7. According to the analysis, Jaydon and Austin struggled with some of the same questions that the majority of the rest of the class also struggled with. Equipped with this information, I would make sure Jaydon and Austin received explicit instruction along with the rest of the class to help them understand the concepts associated with the questions they missed. I would also make sure Marttinno received explicit instruction because he was absent on the day of the test. Also, given Marttinnos tenacity to be disruptive and off task I would make sure he was kept actively engaged during the review of key concepts related to measurement, length, and perimeter to ensure that hes able to score well on the post-test. For Jaydon, I would provide him with extra instruction to help him understand measurement equivalents like 3 feet equals 1 yard because thats what he struggled with the most on his pre-test. It appears he understands

31

perimeter, but I would briefly review the concept of perimeter with him to make sure he understands it because one of the questions he missed was on perimeter. For Austin, I would provide him with extra scaffolding where needed. Austin is extremely smart, and given his GATE status, if hes taught the math concepts correctly hell have no problem catching on and understanding the key concepts associated with measurement, length, and perimeter. Post-Test Whole Class:

Post-Test Averages
100.00% 50.00% 0.00% Boys Girls GATE Students ELL Students IEP Students Group Averages Whole Class Average

Figure 2.8The class average was 79% on the post-test. The boys scored an average of 81%, the girls scored an average of 77%, the GATE students scored an average of 85%, the ELL students scored an average of 68%, and the IEP students scored an average of 63%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher
22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 21 22 22 16 13 9 6 3 1 0 1 5 4 17 18 11 4 18 Number of Students Answering Correctly Number of students answering Incorrectly

19

Figure 2.9All 22 students took the post-test. The above graph illustrates the number of correct answers as well as the number of incorrect answers given for each question on the post-test. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher
32

Post-Test Individual Scores

14% 23% 63% Students who scored above 80% Students who scored between 6080% Students who scored below 60%

Figure 2.10Out of 22 students who took the post-test 14 students or 63% of the class scored above 80%, 5 students or 23% of the class scored between 60-80%, and 3 students or 14% of the class scored below 60%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher Pre-Test & Post-Test Comparisons:

Pre-Test & Post-Test Averages Compared

100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Boys Girls GATE Students ELL Students IEP Students Pre-Test Group Average Pre-Test Class Average Post-Test Group Average Post-Test Class Average

Figure 2.11The Pre-Test Averages and Post-Test Averages compared side by side for Boys, Girls, GATE students, ELL students, and IEP students. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

33

22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

19 17 15 13 9 6 4 3

21 20

22 17

21 15 16 13 11 10 6 8 6 17 18 17 13 11 8 5 4 6 4 18 15

Number of Students Answering Correctly on the Post-Test Number of students Answering Incorrectly on the Post-Test Number of Students Answering Correctly on the Pre-Test Number of Students Answering Incorrectly on the Pre-Test

4 1 0 1

Figure 2.12The above graph illustrates the number of correct answers as well as the number of incorrect answers given for each question on the pre-test and the post-test. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher All 22 students took the post-test. Out of the 22 students who took the test, thirteen were boys and nine were girls. The boys exceed the class average by 2% and the girls by 4%. The girls scored below the class average by 2%, the ELL students scored below the class average by 11%, and the IEP students scored below the class average by 16%. The biggest growth was among the boys. On average the boys increased their test results on the post-test by 21%. The four IEP students increased their test results by 13% and the ELL students increased their test results by 12%, while the girls only increased slightly by 8%. As far as answering the questions correctly, zero students missed question #4 and all put one student correctly answered questions #3 and #5. Students struggled with question #9 the most. Only half of the students were able to identify the correct answer. Questions #1, #6, and #7 were the next hardest questions for students. On question #1 only thirteen students in the class could correctly identify the correct answer, while on question #6 sixteen students answered correctly and on question #5 seventeen

34

students answered correctly. On average more than half the class, 66%, was able to score an 80% or better on the post-test and 86% of the class was able to score above 60%. According to the analysis, students did better on the post-test then they did on the pretest. On the post-test the class average was 79% while the class average on the pre-test was only 68%. The boys increased their percentage from the pre-test to the post-test by 21%, the girls by 8%, the GATE students by 5%, the ELL students by 12%, and the IEP students by 13%. Given this information its easy to see that the GATE students and the girls did not increase their test results as well as the other students. The GATE students only increase by 5%. Typically they dont have a problem catching on and understanding key math concepts when they are taught properly. As a result, their poor test scores may be a result of not enough direct instruction or limited amounts of key concepts being taught. As a whole, the entire class did not do well. In fact, they scored below 80% on both the pre-test and the post-test. Another observation made from the analysis is on average students still performed poorly on questions, #1, #6, #7, and #9 on the post-test. Question #9 was actually missed by three more tests on the post-test then on the pre-test. As a result of this analysis it seems somewhere during class instruction key concepts associated with best unit of measurement were not properly taught. The reason I say this is if students had been properly taught how to determine the best unit of measurement when measuring objects, their achievement would have indicated it and they wouldve achieved much higher on questions #1, #6, #7, and #9 then they did. With that being said, students who performed well on question #3 on the pre-test also performed well on this question on the posttest. They also performed well on questions #4, #5, and #2 on the post-test. This seems to indicate that students understood perimeter and would have been able to correctly answer these questions with very little classroom instruction. I was present when the post-test was

35

administered, an as usual, the room was quiet and students took the tests from their desks with dividers separating them from their neighbors. I dont believe the environment impacted the students ability to take the test during the post-test or the pre-test. Post Test Jaydon, Marttinno, & Austin:

Jaydon's Post-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The TEst 4 3 2 1 0 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 3 2 1 1 Jaydon's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 2.13Jaydons post-test answers compared to the correct post-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Marttinno's Post-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 3 2 3 3 2 1 Marttinno's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 2.14Marttinnos post-test answers compared the correct post-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

36

Austin's Post-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 2 1 2 1 3 3 2 1 3 2 1 1 Austin's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 2.15Austins post-test answers compared to the correct post-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Jaydon's Pre-Test & Post-Test Responses Compared

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The TEst 4 3 2 1 0 3 2 1 3 2 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 1 1 Jaydon's Answers on PostTest Correct Answers Jaydon's Answers on PreTest

Figure 2.16Jaydons pre-test and post-test answers compared to the correct test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Marttinno's Pre-Test & Post-Test Responses Compared

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 3 2 3 3 2 1 Marttinno's Answers on Post-Test Correct Answers Marttinno's Answers on PreTest

Figure 2.17Marttinnos pre-test and post-test answers compared to the correct test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

37

Austin's Pre-Test & Post-Test Responses Compared

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 3 2 1 3 2 1 1 Austin's Answers on PostTest Correct Answers Austin's Answers on Pre-Test

Figure 2.18Austins pre-test and post-test answers compared to the correct test answers Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Post-Test Averages
100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Jaydon Marttinno Austin Individual Average Whole Class Average ELL Average GATE Average IEP Average

Figure 2.19The whole class average on the post test was 79%, the ELL average was 68%, the GATE average was 85%, and the IEP average was 63%. Jaydon scored an average of 90%, Marttinno scored an average of 70%, and Austin scored an average of 90%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher For my analysis of the post-test I again analyzed Jaydons, Marttinnos, and Austins test performance. Compared to the pre-test Jaydon was the only one that made great gains. Jaydon scored 90% on the post-test. As a result, he increased his percentage by 20%. Austin on the other hand, did not improve his test score between the pre-test and the post-test. He scored a 70% on both tests. As for Marttinno he scored 70% on the post-test which was much better than the 0 he received for being absent during the administration of pre-test. Jaydons average of 90% placed
38

him 5% higher than the GATE average, 11% higher than the class average, 22% higher than the ELL average, and 27% higher than the IEP average. Marttinnos average of 70% placed him 9% below the class average and 15% below the GATE average. However, he did score 2% higher than the ELL average and 7% higher than the IEP average. Austins average of 70% placed him 9% below the class average and 15% below the GATE average. Austin missed questions #6, #7, and #9 on the post-test, which was interesting because he also missed questions #7 and #9 on the pre-test. Jaydon only missed question #9, which he answered correctly on the pre-test. Marttinno missed questions #1, #7, and #9. Again they were the same questions that the majority of the other students in Ms. Kings class also missed. According to the analysis Jaydon, Marttinno, and Austin all struggled with the same question that the majority of the other students in Ms. Kings class also missed. This suggests that they were not properly taught the key concepts associated with determining the best unit of measurement. Austin and Marttinno also missed question #7. Again this question dealt with units of measurement, particularly measurement equivalents. Three other students in Ms. Kings class also struggled with this question. Overall, Jaydon was the only one that improved from the pretest to the post-test. Austin remained the same while Marttinnos improved was unknown because he did not take the pre-test. Through careful observation it appears Marttinnos ELL status and tenancy to be off task may have contributed to his low gains on the post-test. To help Marttinno test better, he needs to be in a testing environment where there is little to no distractions. He needs to be encouraged and given extrinsic motivators. He also needs to be given more visuals and more explicit instructions during class time. Austin did not do well on this assessment. Austin is a GATE student and generally when he is taught something he is able to remember it and apply it. However, hes test results for this post-test did not illustrate that.

39

What this says to me is Austin was not properly taught the material. As a result, I feel like Austin needs a math intervention for this topic. He obviously has a misconception when it comes to units of measurement and that misconception needs to be addressed before moving on. Because hes a GATE student, if hes provide explicit individualized instruction he will catch on, which will help him as he progress on in the Growing with Math program. Jaydon on the other hand did extremely well on the post-test. Because of his performance on the post-test, I think visiting with him and making sure he understands the concept behind the question that he missed should be enough for this assessment. I would also encourage him to keep up the hard work and amazing performance for future assessments. As for the class environment I dont feel it was a factor in the testing ability of Jaydon or Austin. However, given Marttinnos disruptiveness and inability to stay on task any number of things in the class may have been a distraction for him. To help Marttinno, class noise, class movement, and any other distractions should be kept at a minimum.

40

Assessment Analysis #3 Type of Assessment: The first assessment that was administered was a math pre-test. This assessment was given to determine what the students already knew about the topic, interpreting data, before any specific instruction was given. The second assessment that was administered was a post-test. This assessment was given after direct instruction was given on reading and interpreting data from graphs, charts, maps, and pictures. The results of the first assessment were then used to determine what information and math concepts needed to be focused on and taught during classroom instruction time to properly prepare students for the post-test. Purpose of Assessment: The purpose of the pre and post-test for this math topic was to determine if students could accurately interpret data. Before the pre-test was given no direct instruction was provided. However, before the post-test was administered students were taught to properly read graphs, charts, maps, and pictures. Ms. King helped the students prepare for the post-test by having them use the Smart Board to create and interpret graphs. Armed with this new information students were then asked to use their knowledge of data interpretation to help them read and interpret a variety of different graphs, charts, maps, and pictures found on their post-test. Administration of Assessment: The pre-test was administered by Ms. King. I was not present when the first assessment was administered. However, typically when students are given tests in Ms. Kings class they take them at their desks, the class is quiet, and students place divider folders between them and their neighbors so students cant cheat. Ms. King administered the post-test, but I was present when the students finished their tests and then corrected them. Generally, the students take the exam on

41

paper and then they enter their responses using the clickers. But on the day of the post-test the clickers were not working. As a result, the students were asked to take out a red pen and correct their own tests. When they were finished they wrote the number of incorrect answers at the top of their tests and handed them in. During both the administration and the correcting of the test all of the students, except the IEP students, worked quietly at the desks with dividers between them and their neighbors. As for the IEP students, they worked with an aide during the administration of the post-test. The three students I chose to look at for this assessment are Austin, Marttinno, and Jaydon. Austin is a GATE or accelerated student. He is extremely smart and needs to be challenged more than he is. Hes above grade level in reading and at grade level for math. Marttinno is an ELL student from Argentina. Hes easily distracted and unmotivated to learn. Hes frequently disrupted and has to leave the class a lot. Hes currently at grade level for both reading and math, and has a WIDA level of 5. Jaydon is an average student. He does not receive any special services for reading or math and he enjoys learning. He teeters at or below grade level in reading and is approaching grade level for math. Analyze & Synthesize:
Question 1: Use the graph. How many children voted for Veggie Pizza? *Interpreting Data/ Graph Answer: A. 10 Question 6: Use the picture. Which color is most likely to be drawn? Question 2: Use the graph. How many more voted for Cheese than for Meat Pizza? *Interpreting Data/ Graph Answer: B. 7 Question 7: Use the picture. Which two colors are equally likely to be drawn? Question 3: Use the graph. How many children voted in all? Question 4: Which tally chart best shows results from this spinner? Question 5: Use the picture. Which color would be impossible to draw out of the bag? *Interpreting Data/ Picture Answer: C. Orange Question 10: Use the map. Which of these is farthest from the hotel?

*Interpreting Data/ Graph Answer: C. 31 Question 8: Use the map. Which of these buildings is the farthest east?

*Interpreting Data/ Picture Answer: B. Red

*Interpreting Data/ Picture Answer: A. Blue and Green

*Interpreting Data/ Map Answer: A. Bakery

*Interpreting Data/ Tally Chart Answer: C. Red-7 Blue14 Question 9: Use the map. If you start at your house and travel 2 blocks south and then go 1 block west, where will you be? *Interpreting Data/ Map Answer: B. Pizza Shop

*Interpreting Data/ Map Answer: A. Bakery

42

Pre-Test Whole Class:

Pre-Test Averages
100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Boys Girls GATE Students ELL Students IEP Students Group Averages Whole Class Average

Figure 3.1The class average was 78% on the pre-test. The boys scored an average of 79%, the girls scored an average of 79%, the GATE students scored an average of 100%, the ELL students scored an average of 68%, and the IEP students scored an average of 63%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher
20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 19 16 14 13 14 17 15 13 Number of Students Answering Correctly 5 0 Number of Students Answering Incorrectly 15 20

6 4 1

6 3

7 5

Figure 3.220 out of 22 students took the pre-test. The above graph illustrates the number of correct answers as well as the number of incorrect answers given for each question on the pre-test. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher
43

Pre-test Individual Scores

10% 25% 65% Students who scored above 80% Students who scored between 60-80% Students who scored below 60%

Figure 3.3Out of 20 students who took the pre-test 13 students or 65% of the class scored above 80%, 5 students or 25% of the class scored between 60-80%, and 2 students or 10% of the class scored below 60%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher Only 20 students out of 22 took the pre-test. Out of the 20 students who took the test, twelve were boys and eight were girls. The class average for the pre-test was 78%. The girls scored the same as the boys on the pre-test and they both scored 1% higher than the class average. The two GATE students who took the pre-test scored an average of 100% while the six ELL students scored an average of 68%. The four IEP students scores were entered and recorded for this assessment and they scored an average of 63%. Individual averages are as follows: thirteen students scored better than 80% on the test, five students scored between 6080%, and two students scored below 60%. Out of the ten questions on the test, question #10 received the most correct answers with all 20 students being able to correctly identify the answer, while questions #1 and #6 received the second most correct answers with 19 and 17 students being able to correctly identify the answer on these two questions. On the other hand, questions #4 and #8 were missed the most by the students. Only thirteen out of the 21 students could correctly identify the answer. Students also struggled with questions #3 and #5.
44

According to the analysis, the students did considerably well on the pre-test. As a class, they scored just below 80%. But despite the success of the whole class average many students still struggled. The questions that the students struggled with the most were questions #4 and #8. They also struggled with questions #3 and #5. Using this information I would make sure I went back and retaught the concepts associated with these problems. Particularly understanding how to read and interpret maps as well as charts. I would also include more visuals and more explicit instructions to help increase my IEP and ELL averages because their scores were the lowest. Also, because the concepts being taught have to do with reading and interpreting data I would provide students with as many hands-on graphing opportunities as I could. With practice and repetition their background knowledge of reading and interpreting graphs will increase and theyll be in a much better position to interpret graphs, charts, and pictures on the post-test than they were on the pre-test. As for the two GATE students, because they both scored 100% on the pre-test, I would not make them take the post-test because its obvious they already understand how to read and interpret graphs. As a result, I would provide them with a variety of higher level enrichment activities to help deepen and strengthen their already established background knowledge. The last thing I would do, because of the high test results from this test, is teach the concepts of measurement in a small group setting rather than a whole group setting. When looking at whether or not the classroom environment may have contributed to the some of the lower test scores, I dont believe it was a major factor in the outcome of the test.

45

Pre-Test Jaydon, Marttinno, & Austin:

Pre-Test Averages
100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Jaydon Marttinno Austin Individual Average Whole Class Average ELL Average GATE Average IEP Average

Figure 3.4The whole class average on the pre-test was 82%, the ELL average was 68%, the GATE average was 100%, and the IEP average was 63%. Jaydon scored an average of 80%, Marttinno scored an average of 90%, and Austin scored an average of 100%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Jaydon's Pre-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The TEst 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 1 3 3 3 2 1 1 3 2 1 Jaydon's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 3.5Jaydons pre-test answers compared to the correct pre-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

46

Marttinno's Pre-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 2 1 3 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 1 Marttinno's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 3.6Marttinnos pre-test answers compared to the correct pre-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Austin's Pre-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 3 2 1 1 2 3 2 2 1 Austin's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 3.7Austins pre-test answers compared to the correct pre-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher For my in-depth analyze I chose to focus on the test scores of Jaydon, Marttinno, and Austin. I chose these three students because I wanted to analyze an above grade level or GATE student, an ELL student, and an average student who does not receive any kind of accommodations or modifications. On the pre-test Jaydon scored an average of 80% and answered eight of the ten questions correctly, Marttinno scored an average of 80% and answered eight of the ten questions correctly, and Austin scored an average of 100% and answered all of the questions correctly. Question #1 received the most correct answers by the class. Jaydon,

47

Marttinno, and Austin were among the 19 students in the class who could correctly identify the answer to question #1. Questions #4 and #8 were missed the most by the class. Marttinno was among the seven students who incorrectly answered question #4 and Jaydon was among the seven students who incorrectly answered question #8. The class also struggled to correctly answer questions #3 and #5. Jaydon was among the six students who struggled to answer question #5. The next most commonly missed question by the students was question #7. Marttinno was among the five students who struggled to answer question #7. According to the analysis, Jaydon, Marttinno, and Austin did not struggle with the same question that the majority of the rest of the class struggled with. However, Jaydon and Marttinno did struggle with the next two most commonly missed questions. Marttinno missed question#4 and Jaydon missed question #8. Marttinno also missed question #7, while Jaydon missed question #5. Armed with this information, I would make sure Jaydon understood the concepts behind questions #5 and #8 while at the same time making sure Marttinno understood the concepts behind questions #4 and #7 before having them took the post-test. With that being said, because they scored 80% on their pre-test I would not spend a whole lot of time reviewing the concepts they already knew. Instead, I would focus on the concepts they had misconceptions about then I would enhance their already established background knowledge with a variety of meaningful activities. As for Austin, because he scored 100% on the pre-test, I would not make him take the post-test. Instead, I would provide him with a variety of higher level enrichment activities to deepen and strengthen his already established background knowledge. I would also challenge by giving him the option of doing a project in place of the post-test.

48

Post-Test Whole Class:

Post-Test Averages
100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Boys Girls GATE Students ELL Students IEP Students Group Averages Whole Class Average

Figure 3.8The class average was 82% on the post-test. The boys scored an average of 76%, the girls scored an average of 85%, the GATE students scored an average of 100%, the ELL students scored an average of 76%, and the IEP students scored an average of 57%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

20 18 16 16 18

20 15

20

20

11 10 5 3 1 5 3 1 1 1 6

Number of Students Answering Correctly Number of students answering Incorrectly

Figure 3.921 out of 22 students took the post-test. The above graph illustrates the number of correct answers as well as the number of incorrect answers given for each question on the post-test. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

49

Post-Test Individual Scores

10% 14% Students who scored above 80% Students who scored between 60-80% Students who scored below 60% 76%

Figure 3.10Out of 21 students who took the post-test 16 students or 76% of the class scored above 80%, 3 students or 41% of the class scored between 60-80%, and 2 students or 10% of the class scored below 60%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher Post-Test and Pre-Test Comparison:

Pre-Test & Post-Test Averages Compared

100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Boys Girls GATE Students ELL Students IEP Students Pre-Test Group Average Pre-Test Class Average Post-Test Group Average Post-Test Class Average

Figure 3.11The pre-test averages and post-averages compared side by side for Boys, Girls, GATE students, ELL students, and IEP students. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

50

22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

20 19 16

20 18 16 14 13 7 5 14 18 17 15

20 15 13 11 10 7 5 1

20

Number of Students Answering Correctly on the Post-Test Number of students Answering Incorrectly on the Post-Test Number of Students Answering Correctly on the Pre-Test Number of Students Answering Incorrectly on the Pre-Test

5 4 1

6 3

6 3 3 1

6 5

1 0

Figure 3.12The above graph illustrates the number of correct answers as well as the number of incorrect answers given for each on the pre-test and the post-test. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher Out of 22 students 21 took the post-test. Out of the 21 students who took the test, thirteen were boys and eight were girls. The boys scored 2% below the class average and they scored 5% below the girls. The girls scored 3% above the class average, the ELL students scored below the class average by 6%, and the IEP students scored 25% below the class average. There was a slight growth among the boys and the girls averages, but the ELL and the IEP students averages were lower on the post-test than the pre-test. As far as answering the questions correctly, all but one student correctly answered questions #1, #6, #8, and #10. Students struggled with question #9 the most. Only eleven students were able to identify the correct answer. Questions #7, #2, and #5 were the next hardest questions for students. On question #7 only fifteen students answered correctly and on questions #2 and #5 only sixteen students answered correctly. As a whole, three fourths of the class was able to score an 80% or better on the post-test and 90% of the class was able to score above 60%.

51

According to the analysis, students did slightly better on the post-test then they did on the pre-test. On the post-test the class average was 82% while the class average on the pre-test was 78%. The boys only increased their percentage from the pre-test to the post-test by 1% and the girls by 6%. The GATE students scores remained the same while the ELL and IEP averages decreased from the pre-test to the post-test. The ELL students decreased their percentage by 2% and the IEP students decreased their percentage by6%. Given this information its easy to see that the ELL and IEP students struggled with this assessment. Their poor test results maybe a result of not enough direct instruction or the limited use of visual or hands-on material by Ms. King. From my observations, theres generally not a lot of differentiation provided to the students during math. The only differentiation that is observable is the IEP students working with an aide. But even with this support they still performed poorly. Another observation made from the analysis is the questions students had problems with on the pre-test were not the same questions they had problems with on the post-test. On the pre-test students struggled with questions#3, #4, #5, and #8 while on the post-test students struggled with questions #2, #4, #7, and #9. Despite this difference, students still missed questions on the pre-test and the post-test that addressed the same math concepts. As a result of this analysis it appears that somewhere during class instruction key concepts associated with reading and interpreting data were not properly taught. The reason I say this is if students had been properly taught how to interpret data then their achievement on the post-test would have indicated it. As for the low performance on the post-test by the ELL and IEP students, it appears that their misconceptions on interpreting data were not properly addressed and corrected before the assessment. As a result, their scores were lower on the post-test than the pre-test. I was present when the post-test was administered, and as usual, the room was quiet and students took the tests from their desks with dividers

52

separating them from their neighbors. I dont believe the environment impacted the students ability to take the test during the post-test or the pre-test. Post Test Jaydon, Marttinno, & Austin:

Jaydon's Post-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The TEst 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 1 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 Jaydon's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 3.13Jaydons post-test answers compared to the correct post-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Marttinno's Post-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test
4 3 2 1 0 1 2 1 3 3 3 2 1 1 2 1 Marttinno's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 3.14Marttinnos post-test answers compared to the correct post-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

53

Austin's Post-Test Response

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 2 1 3 3 2 1 1 2 1 Austin's Answers Correct Answers

Figure 3.15Austins post-test answers compared to the correct post-test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Jaydon's Pre-Test & Post-Test Responses Compared

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The TEst 4 3 2 1 0 3 1 2 1 3 3 2 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 1 Jaydon's Answers on PostTest Correct Answers Jaydon's Answers on PreTest

Figure 3.16Jaydons pre-test and post-test answers compared to the correct test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Marttinno's Pre-Test & Post-Test Responses Compared

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 2 1 1 3 3 2 1 1 2 1 Marttinno's Answers on Post-Test Correct Answers Marttinno's Answers on PreTest

Figure 3.17Marttinnos pre-test and post-test answers compared to the correct test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

54

Austin's Pre-Test & Post-Test Responses Compared

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D On The Test 4 3 2 1 0 3 2 1 3 3 2 1 1 2 1 Austin's Answers on PostTest Correct Answers Austin's Answers on Pre-Test

Figure 3.18Austins pre-test & post-test answers compared to the correct test answers. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher

Post-Test Averages
100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% Jaydon Marttinno Austin Individual Average Whole Class Average ELL Average GATE Average IEP Average

Figure 3.19The whole class average on the post-test was 82%, the ELL average was 76%, the GATE average was 100%, and the IEP average was 57%. Jaydon scored an average of 70% on the post-test, Marttinno scored an average of 90%, and Austin scored an average of 90%. Source: Ms. KingClassroom Teacher For my analysis of the post-test I again analyzed Jaydons, Marttinnos, and Austins test performance. Compared to the pre-test Austins performance remained the same at 100% while Marttinnos performance increased by 10%. On the post-test Marttinno scored 90% and on the pre-test he scored 80%. Jaydons performance was not as good. On the post-test Jaydon scored 70% while on the pre-test he scored 80%. Between the two tests he decreased his percentage by 10%. His performance on the post-test placed him 12% below the class average and 6% lower
55

than the ELL average. However, he did score higher than the IEP average by 13%. Austins average of 100% placed him 18% higher than the class average, 24% higher than the ELL average, and 43% higher than the IEP average. Marttinnos average of 90% placed him 8% higher than the class average, 14% higher than the ELL average, 33% higher than the IEP average, and just below the GATE average by 10%. Austin didnt miss any questions on both the pre-test and the post-test. Jaydon missed questions #2, #7, and #9 on the post-test, but questions #5 and #8 on the pre-test. However, the questions that he missed on the post-test were the same questions that the majority of the students in Ms. Kings class also missed. Marttinno missed question #4 on the post-test and he missed both question #4 and question #7 on the pre-test. Again question #4 was one of the questions that the majority of the other students in Ms. Kings class also missed. According to the analysis Jaydon and Marttinno struggled with the same questions that other students also struggled with. This suggests that they were not properly taught the key concepts associated interpreting data for these problems like the rest of the class. Despite this Marttinnos tests scores improved slightly from the pre-test to the post-test while Jaydons decreased. Through careful observation as well as examination of the data, it appears that even though Marttinno is generally off task and distracted in class his background knowledge of the content being taught helped him improve between the pre-test and the post-test. With that being said, to make sure Marttinno continues to make improvement on the next test, he needs to be kept actively engaged and he needs to be given as many opportunities to interact with the class instruction as possible. By keeping him busy he has less time to get distracted and off task. Jaydon on the other hand decreased his performance between the pre-test and the post-test. From the pre-test to the post-test Jaydons average test score decreased by 10%. This seems to

56

illustrate that key concepts associated with interpreting data were not taught, and as a result, any misconceptions that Jaydon had were not corrected. Because of the decrease in his achievement the one thing I thing I think Jaydon needs is a math intervention. In my opinion, the intervention is needed to find out what Jaydon understands and what he does not so any misconceptions he may have can be corrected before the next test. As for Austin, hes achievement did not change. On the pre-test he scored 100% and on the post-test he scored 100%. Austin is a GATE student and as a GATE student he catches on quickly. Armed with this information, what I feel Austin needs more than anything is to be challenged. Austin needs to be given a large variety of higher level enrichment activities so he can build on and enhance his already established background knowledge. As for the class environment I dont feel it was a factor in the testing ability of Jaydon, Marttinno, or Austin because the class noise and the class distractions during the assessment were the same as they usually are.

57

Self-Reflection: My experience with analyzing and synthesizing assessments was extremely educational. At first I could not see the value in analyzing assessments as deeply as we were supposed to until I actually did it. By analyzing the data and synthesizing it I learned a great deal about the students in Ms. Kings class. I also learned that the ELL students and the IEP students in her class need more direct instruction because theyre consistently scoring below 80%. Another thing I learned from my analysis is the value of giving students a pre-test. Because of the pretest that Ms. King administered I was able to determine what the students knew and how well they knew it before beginning instruction. I also learned that without analyzing and synthesizing assessments meaningful instruction and differentiation would be extremely difficult to implement. Without a doubt, when done correctly an analysis will provide the information you need to help guide your instruction. It will help find out what your students know and what they need and it will help you uncover any misconceptions and how to correct them before continuing on with instruction. With that being said, analyzing and synthesizing assessments is not easy. It takes time and a keen sense of detail to be successful. Its not something that can be done in just a few minutes but rather hours. Its intense, extremely detailed, and full of useful information. I learned a great deal from this analysis. As a result, I fully intend to use the process of analyzing and synthesizing assessments in my future classroom. I now know and understand that by using the process of analyzing and synthesizing assessments I will be a much better teacher and my students will reach their full potential because I understand what their strengths and weakness are. The analysis process is priceless. Its what makes a great teacher great and his or her students even greater.

58