Student Analysis

Science Unit
March 18-March 25

Analysis of Student Learning My Teacher Work Sample was administered and data gathered from 13 fifth graders. These fifth grade students are a part of a combined classroom demographic of both fourth and fifth grade students. For the purposes of keeping the core aligned and age appropriate, the students are separated for various subjects throughout the day. My Teacher Work Sample is a reflection of my work with the fifth graders in my class as we study the heredity content objectives in Utahs Science Common Core. This comprehensive analysis of student progress will be reported as individual, whole grade-level and sub-groups, which are based on contextual factors, that have been documented on the unit plan and lesson plans as well. I began this unit on heredity by having all 13 of the students take a pre-test. The students knew that this was for diagnostic purposes, but were asked to try and do their very best. My purpose in administering this assessment was to have a benchmark of where my students subject matter knowledge was and to see how to best adapt my lessons. The class average on this pre-assessment was 53%, with more than half of my students scoring below the accepted proficiency grade of 70%. My GATE student was the only one student scored 100%. This indicated to me that there was some basic understanding of the unit subject matter and that I would have to make some accommodations for my GATE student so he wouldnt be bored. After six subsequent lessons spread out over the course of two weeks, I then had the same 13 students take the same assessment for summative results. There have been three individual students categorized into a subgroup. These three students are 2L, 7H, and 11M; Low, High and Medium, respectively.

Analysis of Student Learning Their classifications are based on prior academic knowledge and my observation of their performances.

Figure 1

120 100 80 60 Pre-Test 40 20 0 Post-Test

SubGroups
Post-Test Pre-Test

The figure above shows the pre-and post-test scores of all of the students. The students in the subgroup have been added into the class averages, but distinguished by a separate color-key, as noted to the right of the chart. One of the subgroup, 7H, was the only student to receive 100% or a perfect score on the pretest. Two students scored high with 93 % and another two students scored within the B range, with an 87% and 80%. The rest of the scores would not be considered passing grades: three students received 67%, one student received 60%, another student received 53%. My three lowest pre-test scores were 33%, 13% and 7%. The class average for the pre-test was 53%. The red bar graphs or Green (for subgroup) represent the data taken for the post-test. I had one student maintain his 100%

Analysis of Student Learning while two other students joined him with a perfect score. Three other students received 97% meaning they only missed one question on the post-test. Two students scored at 87% and two scored at 80% even. Student 12 made huge improvement and went from a 13% to scoring 73% on the post-test. I had one student whose score is not considered proficient by my schools standards and unfortunately, as the data shows, his score actually dropped from the pre- to the post-test. That student, who represents the low of the class is in my subgroup as 2L. Altogether, the post-test average was 87%. PRE-TEST and POST-TEST Both the pre-test and the post-test were the Fifth Grade Common Assessment that is required by Washington County School District. It is a comprehensive test that includes 15 multiple choice questions, two of which require the use of diagrams. The test covers all of the heredity standards and objectives in the Utah Common Core. Given the source of the assessment I am trusting the validity of its content. The summative test scores are recorded on student report cards for the third trimester. FORMATIVE ASSESSMENTS Each lesson for this unit required that the students turn in work, and present information or ideas with at least one other student and/or their science writing journals. The formative assessments that were used were aligned with the lesson objectives by the resources from which I found them, namely uen.org and teach.utah.edu. Otherwise, the exit tickets that were used for data collection came from questions that were on the pre-test. Informal assessments and data collection

Analysis of Student Learning were also taken into account as I observed and evaluated student participation throughout each lesson.

SUMMARY OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE BASED ON A VARIETY OF ASSESSMENTS

FIGURE 2

Pre-Test Student 7H Student 11M Student 2L Class Average 100% 60% 33% 53%

Standard 5 Objective 1 100% 93% 80% 88%

Standard 5 Objective 2 97% 95% 72% 74%

Post-Test 100% 93% 40% 87%

Average 99% 85% 56% 76%

This data table compares the class averages to those of the subgroup students. The percentage score for Standard 5, Objective 1 included three main formative assessments, two of which were partially done with a partner. Standard 5, Objective 2 was also calculated for an average based on three formative assessments. Both Student 7H and 11M were able to stay above the class average on all collections. Unfortunately, Student 2L was below the class average in each category.

BELOW GRADE LEVEL: STUDENT #2L Student #2L is new to our school this year and has not previously had any sort of intense reading intervention. His reading fluency is at 85wpm with about 95% accuracy. This student is progressing rapidly with his reading and 5

Analysis of Student Learning comprehension, but still needs extra time to read through any sort of text. As such, he was given as much time as needed to complete both the pre and post tests and received assistance from myself as much as possible.
Figure 3 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Student 2L Pre-Test Post-Test

Figure 3 shows the pre-test and post-test scores that Student 2L received. This student received 33% on the pre-test and only seven points higher, with a 40% on the post-test. When I went through and had him read the answers and highlight some of the key words, he knew the correct answers and even used vocabulary to justify his answers to me. This meager 7% increase of test scores, with teacher support, leads me to believe that this student was just guessing the answers and not bothering to read the questions thoroughly. Throughout the lessons, I was able to monitor this student and use strategies to help ensure that he understood the content. Some of these strategies included, Think-Pair-Share, using bullet points to summarize, reading to me out loud, and

Analysis of Student Learning having extra time to work on assignments. I found that this student was engaged and participating in the activities appropriately and genuinely enjoying the subject matter. Student 2L works well with others and, from my observations, takes equal part in responsibility. However, I had consistent problems with this student rushing through his independent assignments. If he feel like he understands the directions or the main idea of what hes supposed to do, then hell get started on a formative assessment or activity in a way that is rushed and may or may not be what the objective intended. I have to reiterate to Student 2L to slow down and take time to read all of the questions and answers (I typically read all of the directions). Overall, I dont think 2L took the test in a manner that reflects his subject knowledge. I feel that his having received 80% and then 72% average on both objectives lessons is in support of that conclusion.

On Grade Level: Student 11M: Student 11M is an on-grade level student, but also a very creative thinker. She likes to find alternative ways to answer questions and always has a what-If.. type scenario, generally topic related, that she would be thrilled to discuss with anyone who would listen. Student 11M is an avid writer and is proud of her work, which she always turns in, even though her spelling, conventions and conceptual understandings are graded at an average placement. Student 11M comes from a low-income family and often asks other students or teachers for something to eat. She receives reduce-priced meals at school and we have snacks on-hand for these

Analysis of Student Learning situations. This student leaves the classroom twice a week for 20 minutes at a time to attend speech therapy sessions, but otherwise, 11M is always enthusiastic to do her best and put her own creative spin on things.

Figure 4
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Student 11M Pre-Test Post-Test

The data in the chart above represents the pre-test and post-test scores from Student 11M. The pre-assessment score of 60% was above the class average and looking at this students post-assessment score of 93% she kept that standard and again was above the average of 87%. Student 11M was able to increase her proficiency score by 33% and only missed one question on the summative assessment, providing evidence that she improved her knowledge and understanding of the unit to an impressive proficiency level. This student is quite vocal and is not afraid to ask questions. Generally, this student will even try and come up with hypothetical situations to contradict what is being taught. I think that once this student saw their personal pre-assessment

Analysis of Student Learning scores, however, they realized there was quite a gap to fill before their satisfactory score was reached. I reassured this student that the pre-assessment score was not going to be recorded, but used for comparison and this seemed to motivate them to try and increase as much as possible. Throughout the lessons, Student 11M was very attentive and very excited for both the hands-on and the discussion aspects of the lessons. Student 11M asked a lot of questions during this unit, mostly about specific animals evolution and personal questions about her family that I could not answer. Instead, I had student 11M start a list of questions that came to mind so that she could have some research topics or interview questions when time permitted. This strategy didnt keep the student from asking me the random or unanswerable questions, but at least I only needed to refer to the list and move on. At the end of each lesson, I took one of the research questions and tried to find at least a tidbit of information that I could to share with her the next day. For example, I printed the evolutionary cycle of whales that walked on land to present day whales that still have skeletal feet structures, but only swim. Over the course of the six lessons, student 11M scored an average of 94% on the formative assessments, enthusiastically informing me that all of her scores were As. The summative or post-test was a total of 15 questions and student 11M missed only one, giving her a 93%. She was a little disappointed in her score, hoping for 100%, but she was satisfied with the improvement increase of 33%.

Analysis of Student Learning High Ability Learner: Student 7H: Student 7H is above grade level in both math and reading. He has been tested and qualified as a High Ability Learner (HAL) and goes to GATE intervention classes twice a day. This student is a very pensive and sensitive person. Student 7H reads books at 12th grade level as well as expository histories about wars and his own family history. Student 7H is always willing to help and loves to tutor or teach other students. Often times his anchor activities involve research of some kind (which this student enjoys) and its enjoyable for both student 7H and the rest of the class to have a mini-presentation. Figure 4
120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Student 7H Pre-Test Post-Test

The bar graph above represents the scores that student 7H received on the pre- assessment and the post-assessment, both at maximum expected proficiency for fifth grade. Student 7H was the only student who received a perfect score of 100% on the pre-assessment. This student went back over his answers on the pre-

10

Analysis of Student Learning assessment which is telling of his disposition in that he tries his best even knowing the score was only for later comparison. I let this student know that I would have some fun extension projects for him to do throughout the unit and he was excited for that, but was also very curious as to what the general class was going to do. Keeping Student 7H engaged at an appropriate stimulus level is the hardest challenge when working with this student. Throughout the unit, I was able to provide extension activities and anchor projects that this student could do that were aligned with the unit and beneficial to the overall objectives of the curriculum. By the end of the unit, there were actually two other students that were able to join in on some of the extension activities. The two main extension activities were to research genetically engineered fruits and vegetables and to research a chemical called Sodium Benzoate. These topics were motivating for student 7H and I was able to contribute a hands-on factor to each, bringing broccaflower, grapples and other cross-bred fruits as well as Sodium Benzoate (PTC) tasting strips for a miniexperiment. Student 7H was able to participate in all of the general lesson plans as well as his own, while maintaining a 98.5% proficiency rate on the formative assessments and again scoring 100% on the post-test.

11

Analysis of Student Learning ASSESSMENT VALIDITY IN MEASURING LEARNING To better understand the validity of the test questions and to see where my instruction can improve for next time, I have created the chart below to see which questions were missed by individual students. Figure 5 Student ID 1 2L 3 4 5 6 7H 8 9 10 11M 12 13 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15
TOTAL CORRECT OUT OF 15

12 5 13 14 14 14 15 14 12 15 14 11 14 Figure 5 shows that the most missed questions were #4 and #5. As shown in the graph, students #1, #2L and #3 all missed those two questions. Question #4 asks the students to predict the eventual outcome of planting several kernels of multicolored Indian corn. Which of the following statements offers the best prediction? The concept of prediction can be hard for some of these students because the answer is not exact or finite. The answers to this question could easily be narrowed down to two options, one answer would have been acceptable if there hadnt have been a better, more specific answer. It seems from the data and the answers chosen by the students who missed this question, that they understood the concept of

12

Analysis of Student Learning variation, but didnt process it deep enough. Ironically (or not) students #1 and #3 were sitting next to each other during the test and perhaps helped each other come up with that answer. The other equally missed question was #5 which also dealt with seeds. With five out of 13 students missing this question, I have concluded that there needs to be more specific, explicit teaching having to do with seeds and plants. There was a parallel made between humans, animals and plants ( including the mini lesson on cross breeding), but my goal for improvement on this unit is to incorporate a specific lesson activity that focuses on plants as their own organism.

SUBGROUP STUDENT LEARNING

Figure 6 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 FEMALE MALE Pre-Assessment Post-Assessment

13

Analysis of Student Learning

14