KPM3, Task 2: Evaluating Learning and Instruction Assessing Student Learning Scenario<\/p>\n
Assessing Student Learning Scenario<\/p>\n
Class Description<\/p>\n
The instructional environment of this fifth-grade classroom consists of 20 students ranging from 10 to 11 years old, with 11 males and 9 females. There are three English learners (one emerging, one expanding, and one bridging) as well as three students receiving special education services. Overall, the class is fairly diverse, consisting of seven students who are Caucasian, six students who are African American, five students who are Hispanic, and two students who are two or more races. The class is high-energy with good attendance. Due to the high energy, directions need to be repeated multiple times, students can sometimes misuse materials, and a small portion of instruction is spent on wait time due to students talking. The classroom is well organized and equipped with one-to-one laptops for students, an interactive whiteboard, and individual student accounts for educational learning tools such as Google Classroom and Kami (a PDF and document annotation application). Students are accustomed to working in cooperative groups, with partners, and independently with little redirection required.<\/p>\n
Individual Student Descriptions<\/p>\n
Student 2 is a 10-year-old female English learner identified as bridging. She can independently use a variety of academic language skills and is able to participate in classroom discussions and activities. Some background knowledge support is necessary for unfamiliar topics and areas of study. Current accommodations include sentence stems, additional wait time, and the use of a bilingual dictionary.<\/p>\n
Student 4 is an 11-year-old male diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) who exhibits inattention and is easily distracted. Tests and exams in areas of lower proficiency tend to increase anxiety and student shutdowns. Current accommodations include additional time for assignments, a quiet spot for assessments, repeated directions, breaks when needed, extended wait time, and cueing as a prompt for staying on task.<\/p>\n
Student 8 is a 10-year-old female English learner identified as expanding. She needs background support and scaffolding for academic vocabulary as well as visuals. Once vocabulary is acquired, she is typically successful. Current accommodations include additional wait time and sentence frames for oral questions, use of a bilingual dictionary, and use of a language learning program for 30 minutes, three times a week.<\/p>\n
Student 12 is a 10-year-old male diagnosed with ADHD. The student has a general lack of focus, even in areas of interest. He is working on waiting his turn, staying in his seat 75% of the day, and having appropriate interactions with others. Current accommodations include a weekly behavior chart with a reward system, frequent breaks, multiple seating options, modified assignments, extended wait time, and cueing as a prompt for staying on task.<\/p>\n
Student 13 is an 11-year-old female with partial vision loss. She struggles to see the board even with preferential seating and loses her place often while reading. The student often complains of headaches as a lack of motivation when completing classwork. Current accommodations include seating at the front of the room, directions from the whiteboard typed and placed on the student\u2019s desk, dark paper taped to the student\u2019s desk to reduce glare, and Kurzweil assistive technology. <\/p>\n
Student 17 is an 11-year-old female English learner identified as emerging. She requires substantial language support but typically progresses quickly with the correct scaffolding. The family is supportive and the parents are taking classes to learn English. Current accommodations include tests read aloud, repeated and\/or simplified directions, extended time for tests and assignments, sentence frames for oral questions, additional wait time, and the use of a language learning program for 30 minutes daily.<\/p>\n
Lesson Plan: Problem and Solution <\/p>\n
General Information <\/p>\n
Lesson Title: Problem and Solution<\/p>\n
Subject(s): English Language Arts and Social Studies<\/p>\n
Grade\/Level\/Setting: Fifth-grade class<\/p>\n
Prerequisite Skills\/Prior Knowledge<\/p>\n
Students should know that authors use transition words and phrases (e.g., therefore, because, as a result) to signal relationships or interactions between pieces of informational text.<\/p>\n
Students should know that authors use various text structures when writing informational texts (e.g., time, sequence, problem and solution, cause and effect, steps).<\/p>\n
Students should be familiar with and be able to use three-column notes.<\/p>\n
Standards and Objectives <\/p>\n
State\/National Academic Standard(s): <\/p>\n
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.5.3: Explain the relationships or interactions between two or more individuals, events, ideas, or concepts in a historical, scientific, or technical text based on specific information in the text. <\/p>\n
Learning Objective(s): <\/p>\n
Given the historical text \u201cCreating a Nation,\u201d students will be able to analyze the text to identify the problems faced by the colonists, then determine and explain how they solved those problems with 70% or more accuracy on a quiz.<\/p>\n
Materials <\/p>\n
Technology<\/p>\n
August, D., Echevarria, J., Tinajero, J. (2017). Creating a Nation. In Wonders (pp. 94\u201397). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.<\/p>\n
August, D., Echevarria, J., Tinajero, J. (2017). Tier 2 intervention: Grades 3\u20136 comprehension, teacher\u2019s edition (pp. 92\u201397). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.<\/p>\n
Kelly, J. (2014). Introduction. In The Bill of Rights (p. 2). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.<\/p>\n
McGraw-Hill PreK\u201312. (2014, June 12). Learning about text structure [Video File]. Retrieved from https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?time_continue=103&v=P-PnCBQ60PA<\/p>\n
Chart paper<\/p>\n
Teacher-created digital quiz in Google Forms<\/p>\n
Sentence frames shown digitally – Substitution in SAMR: Digitally displaying the sentence frames is a direct substitution for other methods and provides no additional functional change.<\/p>\n
Google Docs – Augmentation in SAMR: This works as a direct tool substitution with functional improvement, and it allows viewing, commenting, and sharing work with others for feedback and collaboration.<\/p>\n
Kami – Augmentation in SAMR: This works as a direct tool substitution with functional improvement since students can now directly annotate on the text, which is not possible using the textbook. <\/p>\n
Quiz via Google Forms – Augmentation in SAMR: The quiz is a direct substitution for a paper-and-pencil test and provides no additional functional change.<\/p>\n
Language Demands<\/p>\n
Language Function(s):<\/p>\n
Analyze a text to identify the problems. <\/p>\n
Determine the solutions used in the text.<\/p>\n
Vocabulary:<\/p>\n
text structure problem solution key or signal words <\/p>\n
determine analyze colonists<\/p>\n
Discourse and\/or Syntax:<\/p>\n
Discourse: Analyze historical text.<\/p>\n
Syntax: Ordinal numbers to sequence events, transitional words and phrases, and key\/signal words.<\/p>\n
Planned Language Supports:<\/p>\n
Sentence frames digitally displayed during lesson: <\/p>\n
The problem is ____. <\/p>\n
One problem the colonists encountered was ____.<\/p>\n
I know one of the problems was ____ because ____.<\/p>\n
The solution(s) was\/were ____.<\/p>\n
The colonists solved the problem by ____.<\/p>\n
I know the solution was ____ because ____.<\/p>\n
A keyword\/signal word that helped me identify the problem\/solution was ____.<\/p>\n
Review keywords\/signal words and academic vocabulary.<\/p>\n
Instructional Strategies and Learning Tasks<\/p>\n
Anticipatory Set:<\/p>\n
Activity Description\/Teacher<\/p>\n
Student Actions<\/p>\n
Show short video on problem solution. <\/p>\n
Provide students with a list of vocabulary\/academic language.<\/p>\n
Listen to and watch video.<\/p>\n
Read list of vocabulary\/academic language.<\/p>\n
Presentation Procedures for New Information and\/or Modeling:<\/p>\n
Activity Description\/Teacher<\/p>\n
Student Actions<\/p>\n
Introduce sentence frames.<\/p>\n
Lead students through a close read of the section \u201cIndependence Declared,\u201d from \u201cCreating a Nation,\u201d to identify the problems and solutions.<\/p>\n
Use Kami to underline the problems, highlight the solutions, and circle the keywords. <\/p>\n
Discuss the relationship between the government and people of the United States by displaying and using sentence frames.<\/p>\n
Review content and language objectives.<\/p>\n
Echo read sentence frames.<\/p>\n
Listen to and read along with teacher close reading. <\/p>\n
Follow along visually as teacher uses Kami to annotate the selection and completes three-column notes in Google Docs.<\/p>\n
Listen to and participate in a discussion about the relationship of the government and people of the United States by using given sentence frames.<\/p>\n
Use three-column notes to document findings in a Google Doc, as seen below:<\/p>\n
Echo read content and language objectives.<\/p>\n
Guided Practice:<\/p>\n
Activity Description\/Teacher<\/p>\n
Student Actions<\/p>\n
Read the section \u201cTaxes and Protests\u201d in the text \u201cCreating a Nation.\u201d<\/p>\n
Provide students with a paper version of three-column notes graphic organizer.<\/p>\n
Assign partners to annotate and complete the three-column notes graphic organizer for this section.<\/p>\n
Work with a partner, using Kami, to underline the problems, highlight the solutions, and circle keywords, if any. <\/p>\n
Complete three-column notes graphic organizer on paper.<\/p>\n
Independent Student Practice:<\/p>\n
Activity Description\/Teacher<\/p>\n
Student Actions<\/p>\n
Assign independent close reading for the section \u201cRevolution Begins\u201d in the text \u201cCreating a Nation.\u201d<\/p>\n
Instruct students to use Kami to underline the problems, highlight the solutions, and circle the key\/signal words and record them in three-column notes.<\/p>\n
Monitor students\u2019 online work using a checklist to notate student proficiency levels.<\/p>\n
Based on the checklist, move students who need additional support with the standard to the back table, and complete the three-column notes together.<\/p>\n
Close read the assigned section independently.<\/p>\n
Use Kami to annotate, underline the problems, highlight the solutions, and circle keywords, if any. <\/p>\n
Record information in a three-column notes graphic organizer on Google Docs.<\/p>\n
Culminating or Closing Procedure\/Activity:<\/p>\n
Activity Description\/Teacher<\/p>\n
Student Actions<\/p>\n
Split students into groups of four and five, and have students use sentence frames to discuss their findings.<\/p>\n
Distribute chart paper to each group. Groups will combine their information to create three-column notes by \u201csharing the pen\u201d as they record.<\/p>\n
Discuss independent three-column notes with peers, using given sentence frames.<\/p>\n
Decide and record notes as a group by passing the marker and having students add agreed-upon information.<\/p>\n
Call the class back together and have students present their three-column notes.<\/p>\n
Review content and language objectives, and discuss what students have learned.<\/p>\n
Ask students to show thumbs up, down, or in the middle to indicate their perceived mastery of the objectives. Take note of neutral or negative student responses.<\/p>\n
Present and listen to groups\u2019 three-column notes.<\/p>\n
Choral read content and language objectives. <\/p>\n
Participate in discussion of learning.<\/p>\n
Show thumbs up, thumbs down, or thumbs in the middle to indicate perceived mastery of the objectives.<\/p>\n
Differentiated Instruction<\/p>\n
Gifted and Talented:<\/p>\n
Extended thinking and writing prompt – Think of a problem that citizens are encountering today with the government in the United States. What steps can we take to solve this problem? What challenges do you think you might encounter while solving the problem? How would you respond to these challenges? Information may be presented as a poster, presentation, writing, or other format so long as all portions are answered.<\/p>\n
English Learners: <\/p>\n
Make the problem solution video available to students online for reference so students can watch at their own pace and provide visuals for vocabulary.<\/p>\n
Students with Other Exceptionalities: <\/p>\n
Pull students into small groups and use Tier 2 Intervention Lessons 46, 47, and 48 from Wonders to support them. Allow students additional time when completing these tasks.<\/p>\n
Assessment<\/p>\n
Formative:<\/p>\n
Walk around to monitor students during guided practice and the culminating activity. Provide constructive oral feedback as needed. <\/p>\n
View student work from Kami and Google Docs during independent practice.<\/p>\n
Summative:<\/p>\n
Administer a teacher-created quiz, using Google Forms. Questions will vary between multiple choice, constructed response, and fill in the blank.<\/p>\n
Pre-Assessment: Student Results<\/p>\n
Prior to teaching the lesson to the class, the teacher created and administered a pre-assessment to students to evaluate students\u2019 proficiency in prerequisite skills (key\/signal words) and the problem skills and solution skills to be taught during the lesson. The following table shows the student results from this assessment:<\/p>\n
Student <\/p>\n
Key\/Signal Words<\/p>\n
Problem<\/p>\n
Solution<\/p>\n
Overall Score<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
CR<\/p>\n
FITB<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
CR<\/p>\n
FITB<\/p>\n
1<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
60%<\/p>\n
2 (EL)<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
3<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
70%<\/p>\n
4 (SD)<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
5<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
60%<\/p>\n
6<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
7<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
8 (EL)<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
9<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
60%<\/p>\n
10<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
10%<\/p>\n
11<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
70%<\/p>\n
12 (SD)<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
20%<\/p>\n
13 (SD)<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
14<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
15<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
16<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
17 (EL)<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
20%<\/p>\n
18<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
19<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
20<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
30%<\/p>\n
% Correct<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
60%<\/p>\n
35%<\/p>\n
25%<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
15%<\/p>\n
20%<\/p>\n
15%<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
Key<\/p>\n
= Question answered correctly<\/p>\n
= Question answered incorrectly <\/p>\n
MC = Multiple choice <\/p>\n
CR = Constructed response<\/p>\n
FITB = Fill in the blank<\/p>\n
Key<\/p>\n
= Question answered correctly<\/p>\n
= Question answered incorrectly <\/p>\n
MC = Multiple choice <\/p>\n
CR = Constructed response<\/p>\n
FITB = Fill in the blank<\/p>\n
\u201cOverall Score\u201d Proficiency Scale: 0\u201349% = Not Proficient <\/p>\n
50\u201369% = Approaching Proficiency <\/p>\n
70\u2013100% = Proficient<\/p>\n
Pre-Assessment: Student Proficiency<\/p>\n
After giving and grading the pre-assessment, the teacher analyzes the data by creating the following tables. The first table lists each skill (i.e., keywords, problem, and solution) and how many students were proficient in those skills based on item type. The second table the teacher created lists the students by subset (i.e., all students, English learners, and students with disabilities) and how many students were proficient in each skill. The final table created lists the student subsets and how many students from each subset were nonproficient, approaching proficiency, and proficient on the overall assessment.<\/p>\n
Pre-Assessment: Skill Proficiency by Item Type<\/p>\n
Item Type<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Proficient \u2013 <\/p>\n
Key\/Signal Words<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Proficient \u2013 <\/p>\n
Problem<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Proficient \u2013 <\/p>\n
Solution<\/p>\n
Multiple Choice<\/p>\n
15 (75%)<\/p>\n
7 (35%)<\/p>\n
6 (30%)<\/p>\n
Constructed Response<\/p>\n
N\/A<\/p>\n
7 (35%)<\/p>\n
3 (15%)<\/p>\n
Fill in the Blank<\/p>\n
N\/A<\/p>\n
5 (25%)<\/p>\n
4 (20%)<\/p>\n
Pre-assessment: Skill Proficiency by Student Subset<\/p>\n
Students<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Proficient \u2013 <\/p>\n
Key\/Signal Words<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Proficient \u2013 <\/p>\n
Problem<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Proficient \u2013 <\/p>\n
Solution<\/p>\n
All Students<\/p>\n
15 (75%)<\/p>\n
6 (30%)<\/p>\n
3 (15%)<\/p>\n
EL Only<\/p>\n
1 (33%)<\/p>\n
1 (33%)<\/p>\n
0 (0%)<\/p>\n
SD Only<\/p>\n
2 (67%)<\/p>\n
1 (33%)<\/p>\n
0 (0%)<\/p>\n
Pre-Assessment: Overall Proficiency by Student Subset<\/p>\n
Students<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Nonproficient<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Approaching<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Proficient<\/p>\n
All Students<\/p>\n
9 (45%)<\/p>\n
8 (40%)<\/p>\n
3 (15%)<\/p>\n
EL Only<\/p>\n
2 (67%)<\/p>\n
1 (33%)<\/p>\n
0 (0%)<\/p>\n
SD Only<\/p>\n
2 (67%)<\/p>\n
1 (33%)<\/p>\n
0 (0%)<\/p>\n
Informal Formative Assessment: Student Results<\/p>\n
During the independent student practice section of the lesson, students close read a new section of the text, annotated the text using Kami, and then recorded what they found from this new section into a three-column notes organizer in Google docs, as shown below: <\/p>\n
Three-Column Notes Organizer<\/p>\n
Keywords\/Signal Words<\/p>\n
Problem<\/p>\n
Solution<\/p>\n
As students worked, the teacher monitored their progress and recorded proficiency in the three skill areas: key or signal words, problems, and solutions. <\/p>\n
Student <\/p>\n
Key\/Signal Words<\/p>\n
Problem<\/p>\n
Solution<\/p>\n
1<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
2 (EL)<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
3<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
4 (SD)<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
5<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
6<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
7<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
8 (EL)<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
9<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
10<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
11<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
12 (SD)<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
13 (SD)<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
14<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
15<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
16<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
17 (EL)<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
18<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
19<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
20<\/p>\n
+<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
\uf02d<\/p>\n
Key<\/p>\n
+ = Proficient<\/p>\n
\uf02d = Not proficient<\/p>\n
Key<\/p>\n
+ = Proficient<\/p>\n
\uf02d = Not proficient<\/p>\n
Summative Assessment: Student Results<\/p>\n
Key<\/p>\n
= Question answered correctly<\/p>\n
= Question answered incorrectly <\/p>\n
MC = Multiple choice <\/p>\n
CR = Constructed response<\/p>\n
FITB = Fill in the blank<\/p>\n
Key<\/p>\n
= Question answered correctly<\/p>\n
= Question answered incorrectly <\/p>\n
MC = Multiple choice <\/p>\n
CR = Constructed response<\/p>\n
FITB = Fill in the blank<\/p>\n
After teaching the lesson, the teacher assigned a summative assessment that evaluated the three skills from the lesson: key\/signal words, problem, and solution. The following table shows the student results from this assessment:<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
Student<\/p>\n
Key\/Signal Words<\/p>\n
Problem<\/p>\n
Solution<\/p>\n
Overall Score<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
CR<\/p>\n
CR<\/p>\n
CR<\/p>\n
FITB<\/p>\n
FITB<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
CR<\/p>\n
CR<\/p>\n
CR<\/p>\n
FITB<\/p>\n
FITB<\/p>\n
1<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
95%<\/p>\n
2 (EL)<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
3<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
4 (SD)<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
5<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
6<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
7<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
8 (EL)<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
65%<\/p>\n
9<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
10<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
45%<\/p>\n
11<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
12 (SD)<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
45%<\/p>\n
13 (SD)<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
14<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
15<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
16<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
17 (EL)<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
18<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
19<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
20<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
70%<\/p>\n
% Correct<\/p>\n
95%<\/p>\n
95%<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
65%<\/p>\n
60%<\/p>\n
60%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
\u201cOverall Score\u201d Proficiency Scale: 0\u201349% = Not Proficient <\/p>\n
50\u201369% = Approaching Proficiency <\/p>\n
70\u2013100% = Proficient <\/p>\n
Summative Assessment: Student Proficiency<\/p>\n
After giving and grading the summative assessment, the teacher analyzes the data by creating the same tables as was done for the pre-assessment. The first table lists each skill (i.e., key\/signal words, problem, and solution) and how many students were proficient in those skills based on item type. The second table lists the students by subset (i.e., all students, English learners, and students with disabilities) and how many students were proficient in each skill. The final table created lists the student subsets and how many students from each subset were nonproficient, approaching proficiency, and proficient on the overall assessment.<\/p>\n
Summative Assessment: Skill Proficiency by Item Type<\/p>\n
Item Type<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Proficient \u2013 <\/p>\n
Key\/Signal Words<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Proficient \u2013 <\/p>\n
Problem<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Proficient \u2013 <\/p>\n
Solution<\/p>\n
Multiple Choice<\/p>\n
18 (90%)<\/p>\n
13 (65%)<\/p>\n
10 (50%)<\/p>\n
Constructed Response<\/p>\n
N\/A<\/p>\n
14 (70%)<\/p>\n
9 (45%)<\/p>\n
Fill in the Blank<\/p>\n
N\/A<\/p>\n
14 (70%)<\/p>\n
12 (60%)<\/p>\n
Summative Assessment: Skill Proficiency by Student Subset<\/p>\n
Students<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Proficient \u2013 <\/p>\n
Key\/Signal Words<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Proficient \u2013 <\/p>\n
Problem<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Proficient \u2013 <\/p>\n
Solution<\/p>\n
All Students<\/p>\n
18 (90%)<\/p>\n
14 (70%)<\/p>\n
9 (45%)<\/p>\n
EL Only<\/p>\n
2 (67%)<\/p>\n
3 (100%)<\/p>\n
0 (0%)<\/p>\n
SD Only<\/p>\n
3 (100%)<\/p>\n
1 (33%)<\/p>\n
1 (33%)<\/p>\n
Summative Assessment: Overall Proficiency by Student Subset<\/p>\n
Students<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Nonproficient<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Approaching<\/p>\n
# (%) Students Proficient<\/p>\n
All Students<\/p>\n
2 (10%)<\/p>\n
1 (5%)<\/p>\n
17 (85%)<\/p>\n
EL Only<\/p>\n
0 (0%)<\/p>\n
1 (33%)<\/p>\n
2 (67%)<\/p>\n
SD Only<\/p>\n
1 (33%)<\/p>\n
0 (0%)<\/p>\n
2 (67%)<\/p>\n
Comparing Student Results: Item Type by Pre-Assessment vs. Summative Assessment<\/p>\n
After grading the summative assessment, the teacher created the following table to compare the results of the pre-assessment to the results of the summative assessment. The first set of columns compares each student\u2019s score on the key\/signal words skill on both assessments. The second set of columns compares each student\u2019s score on the problem skill on both assessments and is divided by item type. The third set of columns compares each student\u2019s score on the solution skill on both assessments by item type. The final set of columns compares each student\u2019s overall scores on both assessments. <\/p>\n
Student<\/p>\n
Key\/Signal Words<\/p>\n
Problem<\/p>\n
Solution<\/p>\n
Overall Score<\/p>\n
Pre-<\/p>\n
Assessment<\/p>\n
Summative<\/p>\n
Pre-<\/p>\n
Assessment<\/p>\n
Summative<\/p>\n
Pre-<\/p>\n
Assessment<\/p>\n
Summative<\/p>\n
Pre-<\/p>\n
Assessment<\/p>\n
Summative<\/p>\n
Pre-<\/p>\n
Assessment<\/p>\n
Summative<\/p>\n
Pre-<\/p>\n
Assessment<\/p>\n
Summative<\/p>\n
Pre-<\/p>\n
Assessment<\/p>\n
Summative<\/p>\n
Pre-<\/p>\n
Assessment<\/p>\n
Summative<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
CR<\/p>\n
CR<\/p>\n
FITB<\/p>\n
FITB<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
MC<\/p>\n
CR<\/p>\n
CR<\/p>\n
FITB<\/p>\n
FITB<\/p>\n
1<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
60%<\/p>\n
95%<\/p>\n
2 (EL)<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
3<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
70%<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
4 (SD)<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
33%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
5<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
33%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
60%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
6<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
7<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
33%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
8 (EL)<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
65%<\/p>\n
9<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
33%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
60%<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
10<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
10%<\/p>\n
45%<\/p>\n
11<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
33%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
70%<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
12 (SD)<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
33%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
20%<\/p>\n
45%<\/p>\n
13 (SD)<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
33%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
14<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
33%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
15<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
16<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
17 (EL)<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
20%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
18<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
33%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
19<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
20<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
67%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
33%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
30%<\/p>\n
70%<\/p>\n
% Proficient<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
35%<\/p>\n
65%<\/p>\n
35%<\/p>\n
70%<\/p>\n
25%<\/p>\n
70%<\/p>\n
30%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
15%<\/p>\n
45%<\/p>\n
20 %<\/p>\n
60%<\/p>\n
15%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
\u201cOverall Score\u201d Proficiency Scale: 0\u201349% = Not Proficient 50\u201369% = Approaching Proficiency 70\u2013100% = Proficient<\/p>\n
Comparing Student Results: Skill Levels by Pre-Assessment vs. Summative Assessment<\/p>\n
To look deeper at the student data, the teacher created a table to compare aggregated skill-level data for each student on the pre-assessment versus the summative assessment. The first set of columns compares each student\u2019s scores on the key\/signal words skill for both the pre-assessment and the summative assessment. The second set of columns compares each student\u2019s scores on the problem skill. The third set compares each student\u2019s scores on the solution skill. The final set of columns compares each student\u2019s overall score for both assessments.<\/p>\n
Student<\/p>\n
Key\/Signal Words<\/p>\n
Problem<\/p>\n
Solution<\/p>\n
Overall Score<\/p>\n
Pre-<\/p>\n
Assessment<\/p>\n
Summative<\/p>\n
Pre-<\/p>\n
Assessment<\/p>\n
Summative<\/p>\n
Pre-<\/p>\n
Assessment<\/p>\n
Summative<\/p>\n
Pre-<\/p>\n
Assessment<\/p>\n
Summative<\/p>\n
1<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
88%<\/p>\n
60%<\/p>\n
95%<\/p>\n
2 (EL)<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
25%<\/p>\n
88%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
63%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
3<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
25%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
70%<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
4 (SD)<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
25%<\/p>\n
63%<\/p>\n
25%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
5<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
63%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
60%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
6<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
25%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
25%<\/p>\n
63%<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
7<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
63%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
8 (EL)<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
38%<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
65%<\/p>\n
9<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
60%<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
10<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
38%<\/p>\n
10%<\/p>\n
45%<\/p>\n
11<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
25%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
70%<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
12 (SD)<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
13%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
20%<\/p>\n
45%<\/p>\n
13 (SD)<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
14<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
15<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
25%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
25%<\/p>\n
63%<\/p>\n
40%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
16<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
17 (EL)<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
25%<\/p>\n
88%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
63%<\/p>\n
20%<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
18<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
25%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
63%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
19<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
50%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
80%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
20<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
100%<\/p>\n
25%<\/p>\n
63%<\/p>\n
0%<\/p>\n
63%<\/p>\n
30%<\/p>\n
70%<\/p>\n
% Proficient<\/p>\n
75%<\/p>\n
90%<\/p>\n
30%<\/p>\n
70%<\/p>\n
15%<\/p>\n
45%<\/p>\n
15%<\/p>\n
85%<\/p>\n
\u201cOverall Score\u201d Proficiency Scale: 0\u201349% = Not Proficient <\/p>\n
50\u201369% = Approaching Proficiency <\/p>\n
70\u2013100% = Proficient<\/p>\n
PAGE 12<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
KPM3, Task 2: Evaluating Learning and Instruction Assessing Student Learning Scenario Assessing Student Learning Scenario Class Description The instructional environment of this fifth-grade classroom consists of 20 students ranging from 10 to 11 years old, with 11 males and 9 females. There are three English learners (one emerging, one expanding, and one bridging) as well […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[10],"class_list":["post-105814","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-research-paper-writing","tag-writing"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/105814","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=105814"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/105814\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=105814"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=105814"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=105814"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}