Assessment Data & Analysis
Pre- and Post-Assessment Grading Criteria and Scoring |
|
Grades 6-11 (July 2015)
PARCC Scoring Rubric for Prose Constructed Response Items
PARCC Scoring Rubric for Prose Constructed Response Items
Pre-Assessment Data Results |
|
Post-Assessment 1 Data Results |
|
Post-Assessment 2 Data Results |
|
Pre- and Post-Assessment Data Results Analyzed |
|
The data analyzed was based on three separate English 9 classes. The pre-assessment demonstrated 47.8% Unsatisfactory, 36.2% Partially Proficient, and 15.9% Proficient performance. There was a total of 69 students who were assessed during the pre-assessment. I utilized and assessed two different post-assessments for the purpose of differentiating and considering a variety of student learning style preferences and abilities. The first post-assessment was implemented to target students who are more visual learners. It targeted character analysis and theme to demonstrate growth and understanding of the text, character development, and textual analysis. Post-assessment 1 is comprised of 73 students. Understanding and student achievement was greatly improved in the first post-assessment: 1.4% Unsatisfactory, 79.5% Partially Proficient, and 19.2% Proficient. Post-assessment 2 was focused more on structure and context with a five paragraph essay including a thesis statement, cohesive topic sentences for each body paragraph, and a conclusions that demonstrates the value of analysis and understanding of Shakespeare in our modern time. The essay was graded based on the PARCC rubric. The data analyzed for post-assessment 2 demonstrated an improvement of: 3% Unsatisfactory, 37.9% Partially Proficient, 57.6% Proficient, and 1.5% Advanced. There was a total of 66 students who completed the assessment and were analyzed based on post-assessment 2. Unfortunately, due to chronic absenteeism and a consistent lack of completed assignments, there is not a consistent sampling of students. Despite the inconsistency of samplings, there was obvious growth tracked in both post-assessments based on the initial authentic pre-assessment (also graded on the PARCC rubric).
Did Learning Occur? |
|
These assessments show that learning did occur during and throughout the unit/lessons. There was substantial growth among individual students; however, the information and data was not analyzed based on subgroups. On the other hand, it was clear which post-assessment was most desired based on the turn-in rate and participation of students between post-assessment 1 and 2. The pre- and post-assessments were both authentically assessed and the improvements shown by students reflected their growth in understanding of the material, priority standards, and content/language objectives. Due to the deficiencies of attendance and participation, students who did not turn in their pre- and post-assessments were not analyzed and were not considered in the occurrence of learning.
Instructional Assessment Evidence |
|
All of the instructional assessments supported the pre- and post-assessments outcome due to the fact that students steadily increased their understanding of central ideas, reoccurring themes, character interactions, and overall ability to analyze and evaluate text. Please see Assessment Tools for examples of various instructional assessments created and used during in lessons throughout this unit.