PEDAGOGY: Second Grade
Assessment
- Develops and/or uses a variety of assessments (formal, informal, formative, and summative).
- Uses assessment data to plan (pre-assessment data should be evidenced in lesson plan or unit plan).
- Uses individual and group responses to pace learning, proceed with new work, or re-teach.
- Identifies students' learning styles and plans accordingly.
- Communicates assessment criteria, performance standards, and assessment results to students, parents, and colleagues.
- Uses assessment data to document impact on whole class and individual student learning, including progress on IEP goals and objectives where applicable. Pre-test and post-test data should be shared with cooperating teacher, university supervisor, and students (insuring that students' rights to confidentiality are maintained).
Description & Rationale
Consistent with the objectives of the Letter Writing Unit, I designed an assessment protocol that would measure student understanding and skill-mastery in several ways. First, I created a more traditional type of test that I used as both a Pre-Test and a Post-Test. This test measured knowledge about the parts of a letter, the parts and process of constructing a coherent and cohesive five-sentence paragraph, and the basic mechanics of writing regarding punctuation, capitalization, and indentation.
The test consisted of three pages.
The test consisted of three pages.
- The first page contained five sentences that required correcting for capitalization and punctuation with emphasis upon those writing conventions specified in the Unit Objectives and in accordance with the Alabama Courses of Study for English & Language Arts (ELA) Second Grade. Those include the following: ending punctuation; commas in a series; capitalization at the beginning of a sentence; capitalization of proper nouns; punctuation and capitalization when writing dates, cities, and states. These sentences where consistent with the type of sentences the students frequently corrected as a part of their daily morning work. There were a total of twenty-four (24) errors that required correcting. Each student was also granted two (2) points for writing his/her name and number at the top of the page. This page contained a total of twenty-six (26) points.
- The second page contained five (5) questions. Four of the questions were fill-in-the-blank questions that each required a one-word answer. The final question was a multiple choice question that required the students to circle the BEST answer. This page addressed content about constructing a basic five-sentence paragraph. Again, students were given two (2) points for writing their names and numbers on their test pages. This page contained a total of seven (7) points.
- The final page was a sample letter template that the students had to label. By writing a one-word answer in each circle, the students labeled the five (5) basic components of a friendly letter. Each student was also given two (2) points for putting his/her name and number at the top of the page. This page had a total of seven (7) points. Page three can be viewed below at Student Samples.
- Together, all three pages contained forty (40) points, including six (6) points for a name and number at the top of each test page.
- Below are pages one and two of the Pre-Test along with the Answer Key for those pages. For the Post-Test, I administered the same test; however, the sample letter to be labeled was different. The students still had to label the letter components by filling in the labeling blank with a one-word answer, but I used a sample letter that the students had reviewed throughout the Unit. See the student samples below.
Page One of Pre-Test/Post-Test & Answer Key
|
Page Two of Pre-Test/Post-Test & Answer Key
|
Administering, Grading, & Using the Test
Prior to the Pre-Test, I explained to the students that they were going to take a test on things they had not yet studied or learned. I told them that I would give them the same test in approximately eleven to fourteen days. When they took the test again, they would know more information. I told them not to become anxious if they did not know the answers. I would teach them the information by the time they took the test again. I went on to explain that the purpose of the Pre-test was not to grade them, but to inform me about what they already knew and what I needed to teach them. They all indicated they were fine with this arrangement. However, several began to panic when they did not know the answers. I told them to write DK for Don't Know if they did not know the answer. This seemed to alleviate some of the anxiety that permeated the room. The experience was somewhat frustrating for them.
During the Pre-Test and the Post-Test, I read the test to the students after thoroughly covering the directions for the test. During the grading process, I marked misspelled words as correct, as long as I could determine what the student meant. I encouraged all students to write carefully and neatly, especially with regard to distinguishing lower-case and upper-case letters. Between the Pre-Test and the Post-Test, we consistently reviewed the content and concepts of this test. During the Is It a Proper Noun or Not? game, I used some content from the test, such as Birmingham, Alabama and Disney World. While composing outlines and rough drafts for their letters, we habitually discussed topic sentences and supporting detail sentences. The BrainPop Jr. movies used the same terminology. Approximately four to five days before the students took the Post-test, I distributed a study guide that we reviewed as a class. The study guide was almost identical to the test in terms of content and format. We reviewed the study guide, again, the morning of the Post-Test. While the students did not perform well on the Pre-Test, their improved performance on the Post-Test was remarkable. Below are some student samples of the Pre-Test and the Post-Test.
During the Pre-Test and the Post-Test, I read the test to the students after thoroughly covering the directions for the test. During the grading process, I marked misspelled words as correct, as long as I could determine what the student meant. I encouraged all students to write carefully and neatly, especially with regard to distinguishing lower-case and upper-case letters. Between the Pre-Test and the Post-Test, we consistently reviewed the content and concepts of this test. During the Is It a Proper Noun or Not? game, I used some content from the test, such as Birmingham, Alabama and Disney World. While composing outlines and rough drafts for their letters, we habitually discussed topic sentences and supporting detail sentences. The BrainPop Jr. movies used the same terminology. Approximately four to five days before the students took the Post-test, I distributed a study guide that we reviewed as a class. The study guide was almost identical to the test in terms of content and format. We reviewed the study guide, again, the morning of the Post-Test. While the students did not perform well on the Pre-Test, their improved performance on the Post-Test was remarkable. Below are some student samples of the Pre-Test and the Post-Test.
The Pre-Test of Student #3
This student scored a 45 on the Pre-Test and 100 on the Post-Test.
The Post-Test of Student #3
The Pre-Test of Student #19
This student scored a 50 on the Pre-Test and 98 on the Post-Test.
The Post-Test of Student #19
Test Data Analysis
This section contains charts and graphs regarding the students' performances on the Pre-Test and the Post-Test. As you can see from the two graphics below, all of the students performed substantially better on the Post-Test than they did on the Pre-Test. These graphics can also be viewed in PDF form. These numbers confirm my personal, less data-driven experience in the classroom......every student learned something as a result of my teaching this unit and most of the students mastered the objectives I sought to teach.
To more thoroughly determine the effect of my teaching upon student learning, I used raw data to find the Dppd for each question on the test. (When opening the links listed below, right click and open the documents in a new tab.)
I would like to emphasize a couple of points based upon these graphs and charts. Bars 1-6 represent the six points the students could earn on the Pre-Test and Post-Test simply by writing their names and numbers at the top of the three pages of the test. This explains why these columns contain so much blue. Many of the students already knew that a period punctuates the end of a sentence and that the first letter of the first word in a sentence is always capitalized. Questions relating to this type of content contain bars with lots of blue. I am happy to see how much red is on this graph. Questions relating to the parts of a letter, the writing process, indentation, commas in a series, and the identification and capitalization of proper nouns are quite red. The green indicates the content that needs to be re-taught or clarified. I noticed one interesting result on this graph as it pertains to green. Bar 15 corresponds with the fourth fill-in-the-blank question on page 2 of the test. This question required the students to write the word comma in the blank. The content of the question was that one always puts a comma between the name of a city and the name of a state. Based upon the graph, the green indicates that a small number of students (two, to be exact) did not master that concept after I taught the Unit. Yet, Bar 33 reveals a much larger number of students who did not master that concept after I taught the Unit. The green on this bar represents nine (9) students. Bar 33 corresponds with the sentence on page one of the test that actually required the students to correct the sentence by placing a comma between the words Birmingham and Alabama. This is a clear sign to me that I would revisit the practice of placing a comma between a city and state.
- General raw data for each student on each question can be found by clicking here.
- Raw data for calculating Dppd can be found here.
- A graph of the results can be opened by clicking here.
I would like to emphasize a couple of points based upon these graphs and charts. Bars 1-6 represent the six points the students could earn on the Pre-Test and Post-Test simply by writing their names and numbers at the top of the three pages of the test. This explains why these columns contain so much blue. Many of the students already knew that a period punctuates the end of a sentence and that the first letter of the first word in a sentence is always capitalized. Questions relating to this type of content contain bars with lots of blue. I am happy to see how much red is on this graph. Questions relating to the parts of a letter, the writing process, indentation, commas in a series, and the identification and capitalization of proper nouns are quite red. The green indicates the content that needs to be re-taught or clarified. I noticed one interesting result on this graph as it pertains to green. Bar 15 corresponds with the fourth fill-in-the-blank question on page 2 of the test. This question required the students to write the word comma in the blank. The content of the question was that one always puts a comma between the name of a city and the name of a state. Based upon the graph, the green indicates that a small number of students (two, to be exact) did not master that concept after I taught the Unit. Yet, Bar 33 reveals a much larger number of students who did not master that concept after I taught the Unit. The green on this bar represents nine (9) students. Bar 33 corresponds with the sentence on page one of the test that actually required the students to correct the sentence by placing a comma between the words Birmingham and Alabama. This is a clear sign to me that I would revisit the practice of placing a comma between a city and state.
Reflection
Prior to this exercise, I understood the reasoning and purpose behind gathering and analyzing assessment data to inform teaching. However, the impact of these numbers, especially when displayed graphically, took me by surprise in more ways than I anticipated. It was gratifying to see the students learn in the classroom and to have that experience verified objectively by the data. When I plotted the first graph, I was overjoyed and astounded by the results. It boosted my confidence that I was, indeed, accomplishing something in the classroom. The Pre-Test effectively revealed what the students already knew, so I saved valuable teaching time by not focusing too heavily on those already-mastered concepts. Seeing the red in the second graph encourage me greatly, while the green informed me how I can better help my students. The data and graphs provided me a clear and specific indication of what the students knew, what they learned, and what I still need to teach. I will be using similar methods of assessment analysis once I become a professional teacher.