ANALYSIS OF STUDENT LEARNING

Analysis of Student Learning

Pre and Post Assessment
Students were given a pre-assessment to see what they knew before the unit on Utahs
environments was taught, and the same post-assessment was given to see what they learned (see
Appendix 1). Both tests were given in the same environment, and students were given the same
instruction for each test. There are 11 questions in the assessment. 8 of the questions are multiple
choice, 2 are -fill-in-the-blank, and 1 is filling in a map of Utah. All questions were worth 1
point, except for question number 6, worth 3 points, and question number 11, worth 4 points.
From the pre and post assessment given to my students I am able to see that all students
scores improved. For this analysis, I compared the averages of both tests for all students,
genders, and English as a Second Language students (ESL). I also focused on the scores of three
specific students: a high-level, a low-level, and an ESL; these students will be focused on later in
this analysis.
Figure 1.1: Students Pre vs. Post Assessments shows the comparison of scores from the
pre and the post assessments of each student. 18 students were present during the pre-test and 19
students were present during the post-test. As it shows, each student that participated in both

Figure 1.1: Students Pre vs. Post Assessments

18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1*

5*

6*

10

Pre-Assessment

11

12

13

14

Post-Assessment

15

16

17

18

19

20

ANALYSIS OF STUDENT LEARNING

tests improved their scores. This shows me that the lessons I taught throughout the unit were
beneficial and helped students learn.
Figure 1.2: Pre-Assessment Results show the test results of all students who participated.
According to this chart, question 11 was missed the most. For this question, students needed to
color in a map of Utah according to four environments, cold desert, hot desert, wetland, and
forest. Due to the low class percentage of this question, I knew I needed to focus on this topic.
Question 8, the second most missed question, dealt with adaptations of Utah mammals. All other
questions were answered with a 50% or higher average. Question 3 was answered correctly the
most. This question dealt with identifying a desert, wetland, and forest through a description and
picture. Only two students missed this question, one of which did not even try to answer it.

Figure 1.2: Pre-Assessment Results

Total
Correct:

%
Correct:

-4
-4
-4
-4
-4
-4

5
11
5
8
11
7
9
12
11
9
12
15
5
4
7
7
3
9
Average:

31.25%
68.75%
31.25%
50.00%
68.75%
43.75%
56.25%
75.00%
68.75%
56.25%
75.00%
93.75%
31.25%
25.00%
43.75%
43.75%
18.75%
56.25%
52.08%

Question Number:

Student Number:

1*
2
3
4
5*
6*
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Total
Missed:
%
Correct:

1
X

4
X
X

5
X
X
X

X
X
X
-

X
-

X
X
X

X
-

X
X
-

X
X

-2
-3

X
X

X
X
X

-1
-1
-1
-1
-3
-1
-1
-1
-3
-1

8
X
X
X
X
X

-1

X
-

6
-1

9
X

10
X

X
X

X
-

X
X
-

X
X
-

X
-

X
X
X

X
X
X
X

11
-4
-3
-4
-3
-4
-3
-4
-3
-3
-4
-3
-

-21

12

-52

63.12%

84.21%

89.47%

52.63%

68.42%

63.12%

89.47%

36.84%

63.12%

63.12%

31.58%

ANALYSIS OF STUDENT LEARNING

Figure 1.3: Post-Assessment results show the students scores on the post-test after all the
lessons had been taught; the exact same test was given as the pre-assessment. This way, it
ensured what students did and did not understand. The average of the post-assessment was
77.63%, improving by 28.29%. Question 11, which was the most missed question during the preassessment, improved by 34.21%. This was the coloring of Utahs environments on a map; the
question I focused the most on improving over the unit. All students answered questions 2 and 3
correctly. As shown, questions 1, 4, 5, 6, and 9 were missed by 7 students, averaging 63.16% per
question. Each question was attempted to be answered, and there were none left blank. Due to
these results, I am able to say that students learned during the teaching of the unit.

Figure 1.3: Post-Assessment Results

Total
Correct:

%
Correct:

-3
-3

11
16
11
12
16
15
9
13
14
15
14
13
15
6
9
12
12
10
13

68.75%
100.00%
68.75%
75.00%
100.00%
93.75%
56.25%
81.25%
87.50%
93.75%
87.50%
81.25%
93.75%
37.50%
56.25%
75.00%
75.00%
62.50%
81.25%

Average:

77.63%

Question Number:
1

Student Number:

1*
2
3
4
5*
6*
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Total
Missed:
%
Correct:

4
X

5
X

-1

7
X

X
X
-

9
X

10
X

X
X

-1
-1

11

-2

-3

X
X

-1
X

X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X

X
X

X
X
X
-

-2
-1

X
X

X
X

-1

X
X

X
X
-

X
X
X

-1
-1
-1
-1
-

-7

-16

63.16%

100.00%

100.00%

63.16%

73.68%

87.72%

63.16%

73.68%

63.16%

63.16%

78.95%

ANALYSIS OF STUDENT LEARNING

Sub-Groups
According to Figure 2.1: Female and Male Average shows the comparison of pre and
post assessment scores by gender. The male students were always the highest and above the class
average, while the female students were always lowest and below the class average. The range of
averages was only 7% for each test. Focusing on the pre-assessment, the whole class average is
52.08%, the females average is 50.63%, 1.45% lower than the average, and the males average is
57.03%, 4.95% higher than the average. For the post-assessment, the whole class average is
77.63%, the females average is 74.38%, 3.25% lower than the average, and the males average is
81.25%, 3.62% higher than the average.

Figure 2.1: Female and Male Average

90.00%
80.00%

81.25%

77.63%

70.00%

74.38%

60.00%
50.00%
40.00%

52.08%

57.03%
50.63%

30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
Pre-Assessment
Class Average

Post-Assessment
Female Average

Male Average

When comparing the two test averages, the whole class average increased by 25.55%,
females average increased by 23.57%, and the males average increased by 24.22%. This shows
me that the lessons I taught during the unit helped improve student scores. My goal for this unit
was to get 75% or higher; greater than the previous class average.
Figure 2.2: ESL Average shows the comparison of the entire class against the total
number of ESL students. For both pre and post assessments, the ESL students were below class

ANALYSIS OF STUDENT LEARNING

average. For the pre-assessment students were 17.70% below the class average and for the postassessment students were 12.45% below the class average. They increased their average score by
30.80%.

Figure 2.2: ESL Average

90.00%
80.00%
77.63%

70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%

65.18%
52.08%
34.38%

20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
Pre-Assessment
Class Average

Post-Assessment
ELL Average

Throughout these two tests I was there to help students who had questions. I did not give
them answers, but changed the way the question was worded. I made sure to only use the words
that were in the question, as to make sure students were showing me what they know.
Target Students
Student 1 is a low-level student in the fourth grade classroom. He has been referred to
Special Education, and is going through testing right now to see if he qualifies. He has little
behavior issues, but tends to get overwhelmed and needs to take a break. I made sure to
accommodate him throughout this unit by allowing him to help me pass out papers.
According to Figure 3.1: Student 1 Average on the pre-test he scored 31.25% and on the
post-test he scored 68.75%; this was an increase of 37.50% (see Appendix 2). During the posttest, he was only able to answer the simplest questions about labeling environments from
pictures and descriptions, describing wetlands, and placing plants and animals into the right

ANALYSIS OF STUDENT LEARNING

environment (he only received 2 of 3 points from this question). For the post-assessment he was
able to correctly answer more questions. The question that he improved on most was the map,
question 11. For the pre-assessment he missed all environments, and for the post-assessment he
was able to label each environment correctly.

Figure 3.1: Student 1 Average

90.00%
80.00%
77.63%

70.00%

68.75%

60.00%
50.00%
40.00%

52.08%

30.00%

31.25%

20.00%
10.00%
0.00%

Pre-Assessment
Class Average

Post-Assessment
Student 1 Average

Student 5 is a high-level student. For this fourth grade class, high-level means he is on
grade level and not in a gifted and talented program. This student has no behavior issues, and the
class voted to put him in charge when needed. He helps other students when he finishes early,
and is a natural born leader.
According to Figure 3.2: Student 5 Average he scored a 62.50% on his pre-test and he
scored a 100.00% on his post-test, improving his score by 37.50% (see Appendix 2). I was not
surprised by either of these scores. During the pre-test he missed all the environment labeling on
the map. For his post-test he was one of two students to answer all questions correctly. For both
tests, he was one of the first students finished.

ANALYSIS OF STUDENT LEARNING

Figure 3.2: Student 5 Average

120.00%
100.00%
100.00%
80.00%
77.63%
60.00%
40.00%

68.75%
52.08%

20.00%
0.00%
Pre-Assessment
Class Average

Post-Assessment
Student 5 Average

Student 6 is one of the seven ESL students in the classroom. His parents only speak
Spanish at home, and they need an interpreter when they come in for meetings. He does not have
any behavior problems in the classroom, and participates in the class discussions often. However,
he takes longer to grasp a concepts and he makes sure to ask questions if needed until he
understands. He was one of the last students to finish both tests, since he takes his time.
Figure 3.3: Student 6 Average states that for his pre-test he scored a 43.75% and for his
post-test he scored a 93.75%, improving his score by 50.00% (see Appendix 2). For the preassessment, he did not answer the first fill-in-the-blank question and missed 3 of 4 points when

Figure 3.3: Student 6 Average

100.00%
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%

93.75%
77.63%

52.08%
43.75%

Pre-Assessment
Class Average

Post-Assessment
Student 6 Average

ANALYSIS OF STUDENT LEARNING

labeling environments on the map; he was able to label a hot desert correctly. Other questions
missed during this test were questions not relating to deserts. For his post-test, he only missed
one question; one which he answered correctly on the pre-test. This question dealt with the
differences between forests and wetlands.
Assessment Evidence and Validity
Once students took the pre-assessment and I was able to look at the data, I knew what I
needed to focus on. As soon as both tests were given and scores recorded I was able to compare
the data received. This data collected was compared to see if students learned and if this test was
valid. Since the same test was given each time, I would be able to tell if there was discrepancy in
the test or a question. After gathering and reflecting on all my data, I believe this test is a valid
tool when assessing knowledge of Utahs environments in fourth grade.
I knew all students needed to be taught the different environments of Utah and where
they were located, question 11. I was able to obtain this information from the coloring of the map
of Utah during the pre-assessment. I taught this throughout the unit, and reviewed it a few times
with students. I made sure students knew the major cities located in the different environments,
which helped them remember where the environments are located on the map. After students
took the post-assessment, I was able to see that they understood what I taught. On the preassessment 31.58% of students answered this question correctly, and on the post-assessment
78.95% of students answered it correctly. This was an improvement of 47.37%, more than
double. This proved to me question 11 held evidence of learning and also was valid.
From question 6 for the pre-test, I was able to see students needed to be taught the plants
and animals which live in each environment. Students were able to label plants and animals for a
desert, seeing as that is where they live, but they needed extra help with plants and animals from

ANALYSIS OF STUDENT LEARNING

forests and wetlands. Only 63.12% of students answered this question correctly during the pretest. Once the unit had been taught and the post-assessment was given, 87.72% of students were
able to answer this question correctly, an improvement of 24.60%. This showed me students
learned during the unit and the question was valid to a point they were able to improve their
scores.
During the pre-assessment questions 7 and 3 were both missed by 7 students, at an
89.47% average correct. Once the post-test was given, question 7 decreased to 63.16% average
correct and question 3 increased to 100% average correct. I was surprised by the decrease in total
number of students to answer question 7 correctly. It made me wonder why this happened. As I
began to think, I realized we had talked about other birds and only briefly talked about
hummingbirds. I believe students got these birds mixed up, and therefore marked the wrong
answer. Question 3 was about wetlands. I was pleased with every student answering this question
correctly, as wetlands are the hardest for these students to understand.
With this being said, I believe the pre and post assessment are valid and is evidence
students learned during the teaching of the unit. No student score decreased or stayed the same,
they all increased. Since there was no big discrepancy in a certain question, which I could not
explain, I would say this test is valid. It shows what students know through multiple choice
answers and also fill-in-the-blank answers.