Lauren

Caturano

Form 2
Comprehensive Unit Format, Part B Design of Assessment:
Pre and Post Assessment


Context & Overview:
This unit plan includes ten; thirty to forty minute lesson plans for kindergarten that extent the course of about
two weeks. The unit was taught at Smith Elementary School in Burlington, NC. The unit is a Math unit that focuses on
measurement and data. There is a diagnostic assessment included in this unit, which was given the week before the unit
was taught, as well as a summative after the conclusion of the tenth lesson. The summative assessment was the same
task as the diagnostic plus an additional piece. Because the diagnostic assessment and part one of the summative
assessment were both the same task it can be used to measure student growth over the course of the unit. The
diagnostic assessment was an oral assessment and I recorded the answers of each student individually. This assessment
was comprised of 8 questions. The assessments were scored based on how many questions they answered correctly (one
point per question). The summative assessment included the same 8 questions plus an additional piece that included
manipulatives for the students to use. For the additional summative piece students were applying what they learned
throughout the whole unit to specific tasks. The summative assessment was graded the same as the diagnostic
assessment with a possible total points of 8.

Essential Understanding (big idea of unit):
The essential understanding that defines the conceptual relationship of this unit is using non-standard
measurement tools to measure every day objects. I want students to understand that measurement is used in their every
day lives and is used in a variety of ways. For example, measurement can be used to determined length, width or weight
of an object. Moreover, I want students to understand that measurement is something that is not just used in America,
but rather throughout the world as well. Students will understand that an object can be measured using a variety of tools
and that the measurement will change depending on what non-standard measurement tool is being used.

My students will be able to apply what they learn in this unit to future math lessons and also to problem solving
in the read world. Every day students are faced with problems that may not have a simple solution and they will have to
think critically in order to succeed. I think that it is essential for each student to understand that measurement is crucial
for his or her future in and out of the classroom. Weather they are building something, cooking, or weighing an object
they are going to have to have a fundamental understanding of what measurement is and how to measure. The answer
will not always be obvious and students will not always have the necessary tools to solve a problem or measure
something. This will require students to think out of the box and use tools that they might not otherwise use. I hope that
through this unit students learn that measuring objects can be done in a variety of ways and is used in many different
situations.

st
Moreover this unit incorporated elements of 21 content. This includes students problem solving, collaborating
and working together to give each other feedback. In every lesson I incorporated problem solving and students working
together and sharing their ideas. For example, in one of my lessons I asked students what measurement means t o them.
I then had them share with a partner and collaborate with one another for a given time. Then, students shared what their
partners said and other groups agreed and disagreed with the statements that were said. Through this, students were
problem solving first individually and then with each other. Moreover, they were giving each other feedback and
st
explaining why they agreed or disagreed with their peers. These are 21 century skills that are imperative for students to
be successful in the future.


Lastly, the diagnostic and summative assessments align with the essential understanding of this unit and gave me
insight into how students were doing in understanding the big idea. The diagnostic assessment helped to determine
students basic knowledge of measurement and uncover any misconceptions that they might have had. After
administering the diagnostic it became apparent that many students had very little knowledge of what measurement is
and why or how objects are measured. As we progressed through the unit, students began to understand what


measurement is and the procedural steps on measuring an object. By the end of the unit my students were able to use
manipulatives to measure something and tell me what measurement is and why it is important. The summative
assessment allowed me to see students growth in their understanding of measurement and apply this to a specific
measuring task. Their growth from their diagnostic to their summative assessment let me see that my students had
grasped the big idea of this unit.

Assessment of Learning and Instructional Effectiveness:

Model 1: Pre and Post Assessments are the Same Task
Besides the Post Assessment, I am also using an additional summative assessment to provide
additional information to evaluate student mastery

Assessment System:
For my diagnostic and my summative assessments, I chose to use the same task model with an additional
summative task. That means that the assessment that I gave for my diagnostic was the same assessment given in part
one of the summative assessment. The diagnostic assessment was comprised of four different sections. These sections
were counting, sorting, measurement, and weight. There was one question about counting, two questions about sorting,
two questions about general measurement, and three questions about weight. Each question was worth one point for a
possible eight total points. In order to administer this assessment I had to pull students individually to the back of the
room and orally read the questions to each student. I recorded each students answer on a worksheet. For the
summative assessment, I used the same questions from my diagnostic assessment. This was still worth a total of eight
points. In addition to this I also had another summative task for each child. The summative task was a hands on activity
where they were applying everything that was done in the unit. For this additional task students were using non-standard
measurement tools to measure the height of a spoon. They then had to think about weight and conclude if the spoon
would be heavier or lighter than a feather. Lastly, students were asked to sort buttons and count the number of buttons
in each group.

Student Mastery
This assessment will allow me to measure students mastery of the units learning outcomes because I will be
able to compare students scores and knowledge before starting the unit and their scores after the unit. If my students
are able to increase their scores on their summative from their original scores on their diagnostic then I will know that
they learned the information I was provided them with during the unit. My assessments were aligned with the standards
that this unit based on, as well as the learning targets that I created throughout the lessons. Moreover, all assessment
items were aligned with what we were learning during the unit. This will show if students truly learned from my teaching
and if they mastered the concepts that were covered in the lessons. Below is a table of specifications, which provides
evidence that my assessments were aligned with the standards and the learning targets in my lessons. The table also
demonstrates the cognitive process for each assessment.

*Table of Specifications: see attached

Justification of Item Types:
I choose do administer my assessments orally. I decided to do this because my students are in kindergarten and
cannot write and explain their thinking to the questions I wanted to ask them. I wanted students to explain measurement
and data in their own words and to do so I had to conduct an oral assessment. The questions I asked them were open
ended and allowed students to elaborate in their own way in order to illustrate their knowledge. For the diagnostic
assessment the questions were general questions about measurement and not specific because I knew that students had
not been previously introduced to this material. Due to this, I decided that an additional summative task was needed in
order to truly showcase their growth and knowledge of measurement. The additional summative task was created with
the purpose of students being able to use manipulatives that we have been using throughout the unit. Throughout the
activities in my lessons I provided guidelines on where to start and end measuring and the procedural steps involved in
measuring. For the additional summative task I did not provide any guidelines or structure on how to measure the object


at hand. Through this, I was able to truly see which students mastered measurement and which students still had
misconceptions.

Instructional Effectiveness:
My assessments will also demonstrate my instructional effectiveness and allow me to determine how effective
my instruction was. By comparing the original diagnostic scores with the final summative scores, I will be able to see if
students knowledge increased by the end of the unit. If this is true, then I can conclude that students learned from my
instruction. If students have higher scores on their summative compared to their diagnostic I will know that students
benefited from my teaching instruction through my lessons. The diagnostic assessments revealed that many of my
students did not have any previous knowledge about measurement or how to measure an object. This showed me that I
had to start this unit with very basic information and build our way up to critical thinking and engaging tasks. Since each
assessment was aligned with the overall big idea of the unit and the learning outcomes, the increased scores on the
summative assessment verified that students learned from my instruction. It also confirmed that my instruction was
effective in delivering the content in a meaningful way to my students in a way that allowed them to grow.

* See attached handouts

Analyzing the Results:
Since my diagnostic and summative assessments were the same task, I scored each one based on the same guidelines. I
determined these guidelines and point values for each question before administering the tests in order to increase the
reliability of the assessment. While scoring the assessment I wanted to make sure that students gave me the correct
answer and gave me a solid explanation to support their answer. I explicitly asked students to explain their thinking to
ensure that students were not just guessing and receiving full points for an answer that they guessed on and did not fully
know and understand. Each question was worth one point and because the questions were open ended there were
multiple responses that students could have said to receive full credit. Prior to administering the assessments I had a
rubric of correct answers that I would accept for full credit. On the additional summative task, there were 7 possible
points that a student could receive. The first question had three components and the student could receive partial credit.
To determine if students improved throughout unit I compared the results of the diagnostic and the summative without
the additional task. The additional summative was an added grade that enhanced my understanding if the student
mastered the material.

Reliability:
For both of my assessments I tried by best to use the same types of items in order to increase consistency and
the reliability of the assessments. However, because I had a variety of learning outcomes to teach throughout the unit, I
had categories of questions based on the learning outcomes. For example, on my diagnostic assessment I had questions
that fell under counting, general measurement, weight and sorting. I think that it was difficult for students to u nderstand
how these categories related to each other before the unit was taught. I think that the categories and questions felt
isolated before they learned the material. After the unit I think that students understood the interconnectivity that the
different categories shared, which made it easier for them to answer the questions.

Before I administrated my assessments I also set clear grading criteria guidelines. Each student received
one point for every question that they answered correctly. I had key words/phrases that I was looking for but because it
was an oral assessment students said it in their own unique ways. If they gave an answer that corresponded to my pre-
determined response than they received full credit. I was looking for students to articulate the correct answer in a way
that made sense to them and showed me that they learned from my instruction. Setting clear guidelines and thinking
about the kinds of responses I was looking for prior to administering the test helped the scoring on the assessments to be
more reliable.

In order to increase reliability of my assessments, I also made sure that my diagnostic and summative
assessments were in the same quiet environment in the classroom. For both assessments I pulled students one by one to
the back of the room at the same table and explained to them what we would be doing. I explained to each student that I
wanted to learn about them and to see what they have learned from my unit. I made sure that students understood the
directions and the understood each question that I asked. Moreover, I made sure that the room was quiet when I was
asking them questions and that they were not distracted while completing the assessment.


Validity:
I also had to make sure that my assessments had validity. This means that I had to make sure that students
scores on each assessment would give me a valid and accurate understanding of their mastery of the content and learning
targets. To ensure this I made sure that each student understood the question and what I was asking. I read the question
once and would wait for them to respond. If they were unsure of how to answer I would restate the question in a
different way in order for them to better understand what I was asking. The object of my assessment was to assess their
knowledge of measurement and to determine if that mastered the content that I taught. It was not about reading or
listening comprehension skills. This is why I made sure that each student understood the question before answering.

I also increased the validity of my assessments by ensuring by making sure that the questions and task I was
asking of them aligned with the learning outcomes that we had been working on throughout the unit. I wanted my
students to demonstrate the knowledge and skill that they learned from my lessons and not ask them to answer
something that was not taught. If I had asked them questions that were not addressed in my unit, then my assessments
would have lacked validity.

Lastly, when creating the diagnostic and summative assessment I thought about the wording of my questions
and made sure that they were clear and easily understood. Since it was an oral assessment I also thought about multiple
ways that I could ask the same question in case a student did not understand the first way that it was phrased. When I
was grading the assessments I made sure to have the guidelines in front of me and I referenced them while grading each
question. All of these actions helped to make my assessments as valid as possible.

Bias:

I tried to avid bias when grading the assessments by doing a number of things. Firstly, after each student
completed the assessment I folded the paper over their name and graded it at a later time in order to avoid bias and to
grade solely on the responses that I had in front of me. Grading the responses was difficult at times because the questions
were open ended and students answered the questions in their own way. Despite this, I made sure to reference the
criteria that I had previously set in order to avoid bias.

Accommodations:

During my diagnostic and summative assessments I did have accommodations for any specific child. There is one
child in my classroom with a hearing disability and has an IEP. She spends most of the way with the specialist and was not
present for my unit. Due to this I was able to focus on the rest of the class and their needs. Since my students are in
kindergarten a majority of them cannot write or read more than simple sight words. For this reason I decided that an
individual oral assessment was necessary for both the diagnostic and summative. Due to this, I was able to work one on
one with each student, which avoided me having to make accommodations like I would have done if it were a whole
group assessment. If this were a whole group assessment I would have definitely had to make specific accommodations.
Lastly, I did include elements of the universal design within my assessments. In my diagnostic assessment I had hands on
manipulatives for students to use to count the number of objects in a group, a pictures, associated with a question, and
then oral questions. For my additional summative task I had more hands on manipulatives for the students to use, which
appealed to many students as well.

Analysis of Student Learning Data:

Student Name
Diagnostic Score (out of 8)
Summative Score (out of 8) Additional Summative Task
(out of 7)
Kelly
3
7
6
Laura
4
8
7
Chloe
3
6
6
Hayden
5
8
7
Robert
6
6
7
Saul
2
5
5
Malia
3
7
5
Kyle
5
6
6
Bryan
2
7
6


Daylin
Olivia
Leah
Noah
Leslie
Chiara
Amir
Kayla
Jaylen

3
4
2
7
2
6
2
1
4

5
8
5
7
4
7
N/A (moved out of district)
6
7

7
7
5
7
6
7
N/A
6
6

Diagnostic:

Mean: 3.5 (43.75%)
Median: 3

Mode: 2

Summative:
Mean: 6.4 (80%)
Median: 7
Mode: 7

Additional Summative:
Mean: 6.2 (88%)
Median: 6
Mode: 6, 7

Data Analysis
Looking at my data it is evident that before my unit students did not understand what measurement was and
what it is composed of. The average score on the diagnostic assessment was a 3.5 out of 8, which is equivalent to 43.75%.
Looking at this data I realized that there was a range of prior knowledge among my students. Many students knew very
little about measurement while a few students had some knowledge about the fundamentals of measurement. Giving an
oral assessment really helped me better understand what my students already knew. Having conversations with each
student allowed students to explain their thinking which allowed me to further understand what they did and did not
know. From the diagnostic I learned that my students did not know what measurement is and how or why we measure
objects. I realized that I needed to address this before I could teach about using non-standard tools to measure objects.
Looking at the summative data, it is evident that my students learned and retained the information that I taught
throughout the unit. The average score for the class increased greatly to an 80%. Although this does not show student
mastery of the material, it shows me that there was significant student growth. The total amount of points of the
summative was 8. From the 17 students that took the summative assessment, 3 of them got every question correct and 6
students missed one question. In my diagnostic assessment only 1 student received a 7/8 and no student received an 8.
Due to this I would conclude that the students learned the material and better understand measurement. I had one
student who scored a 4 on the summative assessment. If I were to continue teaching this unit in the classroom I would
work with this student individually to try and review the concepts that was previously learned and assessed. Moreover,
this student is an English Language Learner, so I would also change the wording of the questions to see if this would help
her answer them correctly. While, I would not consider this student to have mastered the material her score did improve
from a 2 on the diagnostic to a 4 on the summative, which shows that she learned some of the material. There was also
one student who received a 7 on both the diagnostic and the summative assessment. The question that the student
missed on the summative he got right on the diagnostic. The question he got wrong on the summative asked him to
count the number of objects in a group. I have seen this student repeatedly count objects correctly every day that I am in
the classroom. Due to this, if I were to continue this unit I would ask Noah to re-do this task and see if he can answer it
correctly. Despite Noah, each of my students scores increased from the diagnostic assessment to the summative
assessment. This shows me that my instruction was effective and my students learned from my lessons.
I also included an additional summative assessment task. This task was a hand on task where students applied
what they learned throughout the unit to specific tasks. Firstly, I wanted to see if students knew how to use the non-
standard tools to measure objects. From my formative assessments throughout the unit and working with students I
knew that this was the first time students had used tools to measure objects. In the beginning of my unit students
struggled with using the tools appropriately to reach an accurate measurement. As the unit progressed students became
better at this skill and were measuring more accurately. Throughout this process I was constantly providing instruction
and guidelines on the proper procedures on how to measure. For example, I would constantly remind students to start
measuring as object at the very bottom and stop measuring at the top of the object. I would remind them to not leave


spaces while measuring because that would change the measurement of the object as well. For the additional summative
task I wanted students to measure a spoon with non-standard measurement tools without any guidance or help from me.
I wanted to see if students could measure on their own and tell me the measurements. After this task, there was a
follow-up question about the weight of the spoon and a sorting activity involving buttons. From the results I can conclude
that students learned how to measure objects and that they can do this task on their own. The average score on the
summative test was a 88% and 7 students received a 7/7. This task was also administered individually and orally.
Because of this I got to watch each student complete the task and make sure that they were measuring properly. Each
student that did this task did so correctly and measured the spoon accurately.
Overall I was very happy with the results of the assessments and they show me that as a teacher I am being
effective and reaching my students. I was also impressed with the level of hard work that my students put in during the
overall unit and was very proud of all of the information that they learned.

*See attached document for student work samples.