STEP Standard 6 - Analysis of Student Learning

Post-Test Data: Whole Class - Once you have assessed your students’ learning on the topic, collect and
analyze the post-test data to determine the effectiveness of your instruction and assessment.
Number of Students Number of Students
Pre-Test Post-Test
Highly Proficient
(90%-100%) 15 18

Proficient
(80%-89%) 2 2

Partially
Proficient
1 1
(70%-79%)

Minimally
Proficient
4 1
(69% and below)

Post-Test Analysis: Whole Class

I really feel that many of the students took to the assessments well. They seemed to really be
paying attention and engaged in the lessons throughout the week. I had many of them asking me
more questions about the topics than they usually do. But what child is not interested in animals
and where they live.
The results on the assessment show that these students really seemed to understand what the
lessons were about and took away what they were supposed to by the end of it. I assessed them on
2 specific standards and had them tested on this in their assessments. Most of the class did much
better in the second assessment. One child did much better the second time, because I had to
explain to him how to do a matching activity. The first time, he simply just drew a zig zag down
the whole page connecting all of the pictures to one another. I even explained how to do this
before I gave out the assessment, but he much not have been listening.

It appears that the majority of the class ended themselves into the highly proficient range. And we
originally had 4 students in the minimally proficient range and after the unit and post-assessment,
the scores were down to 1. It was actually these students that jumped up in the ranks to getting
every answer correct the second time around. The child I was talking about that did not seem to
understand how to do the assessment, got 100% when he took it again. So, I feel that the data was
a little skewed the first time because of this.
Post-Assessment Analysis: Subgroup Selection
The subgroup that I am going to select is those with IEP’s. I am selecting them because I feel that
they bring down the class average the most and if this were all graphed, would be the outliers of
the class. One of the students with an IEP, actually did worse on his post-assessment than he did
on his pre-assessment.

Post-Assessment Data: Subgroup (Gender, ELL population, Gifted, students on IEPs or 504s, etc.)

Number of Students Number of Students

Pre-Test Post-Test
Highly Proficient
(90%-100%) 0 0

Proficient
(80%-89%) 0 1

Partially
Proficient
0 0
(70%-79%)

Minimally
Proficient
2 1
(69% and below)

Post-Assessment Analysis: Subgroup

I feel that the students really did learn a lot from the unit. The young girl did a lot better the
second time around. She was very engaged in the lesson, especially the experiments. I feel that
she simply, did not know anything about the topic when she was assessed the first time. She
really seemed to jump in how much she knew by ending herself in the proficient grade at the end.

I feel that although one of my IEP students did not show progress, he did learn a lot. His results at
the end tell me that he just got a few of them right with the first assessment because he was lucky.
When he took the second assessment, he got just about every single one wrong. This easily could
have been because of his lack of wanting to work which often happens. Regardless of this, when
questioned he was actually answering comprehension questions which he normally does not want
to do. He also when asked could tell you what animal lived in a certain habitat if it was one that
we talked about. So, it seems that he does understand, he may be just would need to have a verbal
assessment or to be tested at a different time when he is more focused, such as in the morning,

Post-Assessment Data: Remainder of Class

Number of Students Number of Students

Pre-Test Post-Test
Highly Proficient
(90%-100%) 15 18

Proficient
(80%-89%) 2 1

Partially
Proficient
(70%-79%) 1 1

Minimally
Proficient
(69% and below) 2 0

Post-Assessment Analysis: Subgroup and Remainder of Class

The effectiveness shows that not a single person ended up in the minimally proficient range after
they went through the unit and were given the post-assessment. Many of those that were in the
proficient level got into the highly proficient. Those 2 students in the minimally proficient range
also got into the highly proficient range. The only child that did not seem to change was that one
student in the partially proficient range. My guess is that they did not really care and just slopped
through their work. This is something that this particular child does often, and he got different
answers wrong the second time as he did the first so this is what I suspect.

I feel that the next steps for instruction would be to go into more detail with those that still seem to be
falling behind. The one child in particular that does not seem to care much about his work will be my main
goal here. I would have to stand over him and make sure he is taking his time and not just slopping
through quickly to get to the fun stuff.
I feel that a good way to do this would be to offer motivation for those that do better on their post-
assessment as their pre-assessment. I really feel that this would get him to pay attention and try when he
saw that his peers got an extra 5 minutes to free draw, do a floor puzzle, or read a book with a partner.
My objective would be…Students will be able to name traits that help living things survive in their habitat.
I feel that this objective combines my old objectives and puts the emphasis on students actually knowing
which habitats an animal lives in and the traits that help it survive there. I could design a unit after this that
built on this idea and had students coming up with the animals and habitats, they live in. This could easily
be done in a project where they have to come up with their animal, its habitat, and focus on a trait that
helps it survive there. It would be fun for them to explain why they need this trait and what would happen
if they suddenly lost this trait.