Austin Simpson

Assessment Data and Analysis

Grading System:
The grading system for the data analysis was simply based on a multiple-choice
test. The test was twenty questions long and there was only one correct answer for each
question.
Charts analyzed and explained:
Pre-Test
Name
Aaron N.
Aiden D.
Alex D.
Alyssa
M.
Caitlyn
A.
Chris P.
Corey R.
Darian
L.
Hailey
O.
Izzy P.
Jakee R.
Julian B.
Keegan
W.
Levi J.
Mae D.
Nathan
W.
Sam H.
Summer
G.

Post-Test
Grade
(%)
90
75
45
95
75
50
85
70
85
75
50
40
75
70
70
60
60
45
67.5

Name
Aaron N.
Aiden D.
Alex D.
Alyssa
M.
Caitlyn
A.
Chris P.
Corey R.
Darian
L.
Hailey
O.
Izzy P.
Jakee R.
Julian B.
Keegan
W.
Levi J.
Mae D.
Nathan
W.
Sam H.
Summer
G.

Grade
(%)
100
85
45
100
75
70
95
80
90
95
65
55
95
80
80
65
75
50
77.77777
778

Above we can see the class average on the pre-test was 67.5% and that average
rose a little over 10% to 77.78% on the post-test. The majority of the class raised their
score by at least 5% (only two students, 11% of the class, did not improve from the pretest to the post-test); there were no students whose score decreased between the pre-test
and the post-test. Individually, the largest score increases were seen in Chris P., Izzy P.,
and Keegan W., who all raised their scores by 20% between the pre- and post-assessment.
Alex D., and Caitlyn A., whose scores remained the same between the pre- and postassessment, demonstrated the lowest increases.

Males
Name

Females
PostPre-Test Test

Aaron N.

90

100

Aiden D.
Alex D.
Chris P.

75
45
50

85
45
70

Corey R.
Izzy P.
Jakee R.

85
75
50

95
95
65

Julian B.
Levi J.
Nathan
W.

40
70

55
80

60
64

65
77.5

PostName
Pre-Test Test
Alyssa
M.
95
100
Caitlyn
A.
75
75
Darian L.
70
80
Hailey O.
85
90
Keegan
W.
75
95
Mae D.
70
80
Sam H.
60
75
Summer
G.
45
50
71.875
80.625

The breakdown of male and female students proved to be an interesting

comparison. Male students scored lower on both the pre- and the post-tests; however,
they demonstrated the largest increase in content understanding by increasing their scores
by 13.5%, while the female demographic demonstrated an 8.75% increase in scores.
Gender
Male
Female

Tuesda Wednes
Monday Averag
Monday y
day
Friday
2
e
6
8
12
6
2
6.8
3
5
5
4
2
3.8

Ultimately, these assessments demonstrate that, while learning did occur in the
classroom, the group work could have been better split up to include a better balance of
males and females in a group. The graph above shows how many questions per day each
gender asked. The males, on average, asked 3 more content-related questions than
females throughout the course of the one-week mini-unit. It should also be noted that
there were no groups that included both male and female students and that students chose
their groups. So, more deliberately chosen groups would an even split of males and
females would have benefitted the learning environment.
This assessment plan allowed valuable insight into the classroom dynamic and
how students behave and work with each other. Group members have a heavy impact on
both the input and the output of their learning ability, and therefore should be chosen for
them in most cases. The weakness was its length. While it fit into the overall writing unit
well, this mini-unit on parallelism offered a limited scope on student relationships and,
because of absences, the data may not accurately portray the classes learning ability as a
whole or on the individual level.