Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 3

Kelsey Hatley

Dr. Frederiksen
EDUC 450
15 November 2015
Data Analysis
A. Students were expected to write an argument essay after having read two
articles providing conflicting views on an issue. The prompt was: Can
Congress ban people from threatening to burn the Quran? After reading,
No Rights Are Absolute, Especially Amid Legitimate Safety Issues by
Jessica Gabel and Dont Let Government Determine What Is Offensive
Speech by Ronald D. Rotunda, write an essay that addresses the question
and supports your position with evidence from the text. Be sure to
acknowledge competing views.
a. Students were assessed on the following categories Focus,
Controlling Idea, Reading/Research, Development, Organization,
Conventions (including citations), and Content Understanding. All of
these align with the CCSS for 12th grade. Students were assessed on
a 1-4 scale. 1 being Not Yet, 2 as Approaches Expectations, 3
being Meets expectations, and 4 is Advanced. Students were
required to get at least a 3 for all categories in order to be
considered proficient.
b. I agree that students need to score 3s on all categories in order to be
considered proficient. More specifically, a well-written argument
essay will have a controlling thesis that is present throughout the
essay, evidence from both texts that is cited and explained
(developed), an acknowledgement and refutation of the
counterargument, it will be organized in a way that makes sense to
the reader and includes clear transitions, and has a strong
introduction and conclusion. The essay will also have few to no errors
that are distracting to the reader.
c. The assessment did give students a good opportunity to show what
they know. The assessment was normed among several language arts
teachers in the schools and district. It is also based on the curriculum
that the students would have been very familiar with throughout
their years in high school.
B. Diagnosing Students Strengths and Needs
a. High (Objectives met): Cayden Alban, 232, and Lucas Wood.
b. Expected (Obj. Partially met): Mark Romero, Kaitlyn Kable, Noah R.,
Brittany Burns, Natalie Cole, 206, Kelly Owens, Jordynn Greggs,
Kevin Lutz, Adrian Chavez, Breena D., Marcus Silvertooth, Gunner
Mengel, Natalie S., and Ashli Ochs.
c. Low (obj. not met): Kenzie Herrington, Codey Lesperance, Preston
Moore, Colbey Rose, Taylor Bittner, Parker S. Tyler Brian, Theyra
Shern, Luna Parsons, Brett W., Rave Herbert, Wyatt Orr, Ryan Hart,
Cody Walker, 209, and Dalton B.
C. Examples and how they met expectations:
a. Objectives met:
i. Lucas Wood: He accurately addressed the prompt and had a
strong thesis maintained throughout the piece. He also

demonstrated his knowledge of argument by introducing the

counterclaim and refuting it.
ii. Cayden Alban: He had a credible claim that he maintained
throughout the essay. He also organized his argument well and
it showed the reasoning and logic of the argument.
b. Objectives partially met:
i. Marcus Silvertooth: He directly addressed the prompt and
maintained a clear focus throughout the essay.
ii. Jordynn: She used evidence from both of the articles to support
her claim and her explanation of the counterclaim.
c. Objectives not met:
i. Colbey: He established his claim early on in the essay and
maintained his focus throughout.
ii. Kenzie Herrington: She did use evidence from both articles in
order to develop her ideas.
D. Misconceptions, wrong information, and not expected:
a. Objectives met:
i. Lucas Wood: He did not cite his evidence and give credit to the
right author.
ii. Cayden Alban: He attempted to make references to the reading
materials, but did not explain his evidence very well.
b. Objectives partially met:
i. Marcus Silvertooth: He tried to include evidence from the
readings, but did not do so very well and did not always explain
his thinking.
ii. Jordynn Greggs: Her demonstration of the content did not meet
expectations because she did not include and refute a
counterclaim to her argument.
c. Objectives not met:
i. Colbey Rose: He attempted to organize his ideas, but the
structure was weak and often unclear.
ii. Kenzie Herrington: She attempted to establish a claim, but it
was not as decisive as the assignment required. Also, the claim
was not clear throughout her argument.
E. What instructions strategies will each of the students identified benefit
from (three for each)?
a. Objectives met:
i. These students would benefit from a lesson on citing evidence.
I would work with these students to explain citation and why it
is important. I would also give them resources (like Owl
Purdue) and a handout about the basics of citation.
b. Objectives partially met:
i. I would teach development to these students. We would go over
examples of well-written arguments (mentor texts) and look at
how the authors are explaining their evidence.
ii. I would also do an activity about counterarguments. I would
have them practice arguing for the other side and then refuting
it and showing them how much stronger that would make their
c. Objectives not met:

i. I would go over writing strong thesis statements. I would have

a handout that would explain what a well-written thesis
statement should do (establish a So what?, be specific, and be
decisive) and then I would have them practice writing thesis
statements that meet expectations.