Schmieding 1

Chelsea Schmieding EDUC 329 Field Experience TWS 6 Analysis of Student Learning- Showcase Lesson Whole Class: For my showcase lesson, I was able to use pre-assessment, during assessment, and postassessment to record student learning and progress. I used a rubric to analyze their assessments. The rubric scale was 0-3, with three being the highest and 0 being the lowest. There are 23 students on the roster. However, there were three students absent, one student in resource, providing only 19 assessments. I have provided a table to show the results of each students progress throughout my showcase lesson. The low, average, and high performing students have been identified. For my pre-assessment, I modeled a long division example with the students and then the students solved a similar one individually. While we solved the first example together, I made mental notes of who was participating and who was not. I also took note of who was following the steps in the algorithm the right way. As they were working, I used my class roster to take notes on their progress and how they were doing. During the lesson, I used the roster to take notes on student progress as well as any evidence of provided scaffolding. Any notes were recorded on their progress while working on the review sheet. The results of the post-assessment were represented by completing their review sheet of division word problems and other long division examples. I collected their pre-assessments and postassessments to analyze for data. These scores were received during my fourth lesson in the 329 clinical. The lesson was a review for long division. The learning objective was the students will be able to divide whole number quotients and remainders with up to four-digit dividends and one-digit divisors using the long division algorithm. My expectation for this lesson was that 90% of the students would reach accuracy. The following table is a representation of the fourth grade students pre and post assessments for my 329 clinical showcase lesson on long division. Student 1 2 3 4 (Average performer) 5 6 7 Pre 2 N/A 0 2 2 2 2 2 During 2 1 3 3 2 2 2 Post 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 Pre/Post Gain 0 2 1 1 0 0 0

Schmieding 2

8 9 (Low performer) 10 11 12 13 (High performer) 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Averages:

2 2 2 2 2 2 Absent Absent Absent 2 1 2 2 2 2 Resource 1.83

2 3 2 3 3 3 Absent Absent Absent 2 2 3 2 3 1 Resource 2.47

2 3 2 3 3 3 Absent Absent Absent 2 2 3 3 3 1 Resource 2.58

0 1 0 1 1 1 Absent Absent Absent 0 1 1 1 1 -1 Resource .579

Overall, the students performed very well. There were several early finishers in the class. I also had a majority of the students who did not finish the post-assessment review sheet. On the pre-assessment example, because there was only one example, very few errors were made. I gave those who got the problem correct a 2 because it was only one example and had there been more examples; I could have had more evidence of student knowledge of the material. I expected the students to perform at the average ability. None of the students got the problem wrong, however errors were minor. Their errors were mostly copying the problem down wrong or not writing their answer correctly. I was confident that they understood what was being assessed. Their understanding was adequate to understand the objective. I did not assist the students on the example to collect unbiased evidence. I reviewed with the students one long division example before having them complete their own. I collected the example they completed independently. During the review I also had them walk me through step by step how to solve the long division algorithm. By calling on different students, I could see that each child was progressing. The students had prior knowledge of division because had been working on it for a week prior to me teaching this lesson. This lesson was a review for their test. Of the 19 students present, only 18 students had a pre-assessment for me to analyze. Of these 18 students, 17 students received a 2 on the pre-assessment. This equals 94.4%. These students worked to the full accomplishment and had the correct answer. There was one student who received a 1, equaling 5.6%. This student solved the problem incorrectly. For the post assessment, there were 19 turned in for analysis. Nine students received a 3. Nine students received a 2. One student received a 1. These percentages equaled 47.4, 47.4, and 5.3.

Schmieding 3

Because I had each student participate in the review sheet, I could easily see their progress from the beginning of the lesson to the end. The students who received 3 in the postassessment used the proper strategy and execution to meet the content, process, and qualitative demands of the task. They could communicate their ideas and some errors were possible. The students who received a 2 could work to the full accomplishment with minimal feedback from the teacher. Errors were minor and I was confident that they understood what needed to be done to meet the objective. Those who received a 1 completed part of the task with a lack of evidence of understanding or evidence of not understanding and further teaching is required. Those who received a 0 attempted the task and some mathematical effort was made. There may be fragments of accomplishment but little or no successes. Further teaching is required to reach the objective. Because of time restraints, many of the students did not finish the review sheet. However, they were not punished for not finishing; only the completed examples were analyzed. Students who showed signs of the most growth completed most of the worksheet and the examples completed were done with little to no errors. These students showed their level of understanding of the content. The middle performing students had growth but there were some errors. These students did not have much difference in their pre and post assessments. This does not necessarily mean that this lesson was ineffective; however, the practice was beneficial. My low performing students showed signs of little to no gain in this lesson. Some students will need more assistance from the teacher on division. They could tell me the algorithm but connecting their number sense to the correct way was not successful. Many students met my accuracy level when looking at their assessments. 18 of the students made a 2 or 3 on both pre and post assessments. One student did not make any gains from their pre and post assessments. I was pleased with their growth in the content. By collecting this data, I could see their gains and was satisfied. Individual Data: Student 4 (average) 9 (low) 13 (high) Pre 2 2 2 During 3 3 3 Post 3 3 3

My high-performing student from this lesson showed significant signs of growth throughout my lesson. He was very engaged throughout the lesson and participated often. When he participated, his answers were correct. His work was very pleasing and surprising to me. He usually is a lower-achieving student but in this lesson, his gains were remarkable. This

Schmieding 4

student completed his review sheet with little to no errors and proved his understanding of the content. My average performing student has made the most gains in the year and because of her growth thus far, her gains from this lesson were about the same. She is very quiet but will participate in the lesson. She was correct and had no errors when she completed her review sheet and got all of the examples she completed correct. This student has made great gains and I believe that this lesson only helped her improve her confidence in participating in the lessons as well as gave her practice with long division. My low-performing student has behavioral issues and distractions. He is in GATAS and is a very bright child but because of his behaviors, he doesnt seem to pay attention or engaged in the lesson. His work was correct but he is very lazy when it comes to showing his work. His participation is very weak and is hard to come by. His distracting outbursts and unnecessary comments prevent him from completing his work to the best of his ability. He can do the work, the distractions just need to disappear. Each of these three students I believe gained something from this lesson. The varying amounts of knowledge obtained from this lesson are different but I believe they learned something. Their gains from the pre and post assessments were at least by one. They all reached a 3 on the assessment based off of their work, which is the highest you can go. I have included examples of each of these three students work. The first example is my high-performing student, the second is my average performing student, and the third is my low performing student.